Saturday, October 4, 2008

UBCNM / UB Naturopathy 2008: MisLabeled As Science:

so, I was out today and took a picture of a certain UB sign in my neighborhood that labels naturopathy "science" [see the jpg at 001.a., below; & 001.b.]. But, I advise that you look deeper if you wish to actually make an informed judgment about the scientific status of 'the essentially naturopathic'. This supposed science is 'based upon / obligated toward / defined by' premises that are HUGELY science-ejected:

001. the University of Bridgeport's labeling of naturopathy as "science":

001.a. this picture was taken from the City of Bridgeport's sidewalk [2008-10-04]. So, publicly, UB obviously labels naturopathy "science" [x2!] and engages in commerce under that epistemic designation:
.[click the jpg to enlarge it into a high resolution picture]

001.b. here it is again, in terms of UB's publicly available electronic documents: UB's 1998 homepage labeling naturopathy "science" (see

"health sciences [...include] naturopathy."

002. just what kind of science, precisely, is naturopathy?

002.a. foremost, naturopathy is obligated to vitalism and supernaturalism:

002.a1. naturopathy's obligatory vitalism, specifically at UB (see

002.a2. naturopathy's obligatory supernaturalism, specifically in UB's current catalog [p.070-071] (see

note: the 2008 UB catalog linked to above, on p.070, tells us that:

"naturopathic medicine is distinguished by the principles [e.g. vitalism, supernaturalism] upon which its practice is based. The principles are continually reexamined in the light of scientific advances." As if such principles survive scientific scrutiny!!!

003. in reality, what does science say about vitalism and supernaturalism?

003.a. vitalism is profoundly science-ejected (see

003.b. supernaturalism is profoundly science-ejected (see

004. therein, the kind of science this is is the nonscientific kind!!! Where is what's labeled essentially scientific not essentially scientific by a long shot...

UB naturopathy, a land of nonsense -- and a form of epistemic fraud.

Post a Comment