here, I quote some bizarre word-usage bending [as is typical of naturopathy's category blending] by MD Benda at the AANP's blog [see 001., below]:
001. MD Benda states in "Double Vision" (2010-05-24)[vsc 2010-05-24]:
"visionary [...] a word we’ve all heard countless times as we meander the naturopathic path [...but] visionaries who can discern reality are fewer in number [wow, quite a vote-of-competence for naturopaths in general...who see] the reality of our culture [...] and of our profession [hmmm, realism, how novel for naturopathy...and of] your fellow professionals [...naturopathy] is not always pretty, and definitely not as pretty as our conference and clinic brochures tend to proclaim [...] our organizations avoid dealing with whispered dissent from their membership [...] our internal dysfunctions [...] I believe your profession is at a crossroads [...naturopathy must make] a difficult and objective assessment at what is real in the present."
Note: profession, profession, profession!
I'm always amazed at how SCAM-type people take common usages and turn such on their head.
Now, AHD 4th characterizes "visionary" as: "[01.] characterized by vision or foresight [...02.] having the nature of fantasies or dreams; illusory [...] imaginary [...03.] characterized by or given to apparitions [...] daydreams [...04.] not practicable or realizable; Utopian [...] unrealistic [...] idealistic."
There's actually nothing in the word's usage that applies to here and now type realism / objectivity! Yet, Benda seeks to reverse the usage of the word. Perhaps that what he means by "double vision?" Doubling back on the definition? Wacko!
"Visionaries who can discern reality" is much like stating 'realists whose perceptions are inhibited by figmentations.' Therein, there is no delineation. And well, doesn't that go back to naturopathy's central talking point: "naturopathy blends". A long time ago by blogging standards, MD Barrett at Naturowatch characterized naturopaths as 'muddle-heads.' Perfect.
002. the AANP blog's sidebar states:
"[NDs are] 'Physicians Who Listen' [...this is] the blog of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians, the national professional society representing licensed or licensable naturopathic physicians who are graduates of four-year, residential graduate programs. Naturopathic medicine is based on the belief that the human body has an innate healing ability [coded vitalism]. Naturopathic doctors teach their patients to use diet, exercise, lifestyle changes and natural therapies to enhance their bodies' ability to ward off and combat disease [coded vitalism]."
Note: again, profession. Yes, naturopathy is based on "belief." But, as usual, AANP hasn't accurately contextualized that belief basis. Instead, their language is selected to sound naturalistic and science-compatible.
003. a call to realism and transparency [and sanity!] aka the dissolution of naturopathy:
might I suggest naturopathy actually 'objectively assess' naturopathy's essential premises, realize reality, and communicate naturopathy transparently!
What is wrong with naturopathic thinking? I've termed it "naturopathy's blending / usage-reversal irrationalism."
Wherein figmentations are falsely posed as scientifically-based; and professionalism is posed as the same as manipulation.