here, I quote from the current NDNR which talks about naturopathy's contextual hub / central premise / requisite obligation [see 001., below]:
001. in "Early NDs Understood the Power of Mother Nature" (NDNR 2011-08, pp. 027-028), Czeranko, S. (ND CCNM 1994) [vsc 2011-08-12] states:
"Lust [the founder of naturopathy] states poignantly 'naturopathy is a philosophy founded upon the simple theorum that vital-force is in all living matter which gives expression in health and disease' (1923, p. 136) [...and we're also told this] 'nature cure [aka naturopathy...] is the art and science of supplying Nature [coded vitalism] with the conditions necessary to a cure and is constructive (1923, p. 186)'."
Note: so there you go, science claimed upon nonscience ['mother nature' aka 'vital force' aka 'nature' -- vitalism, in sum] -- naturopathy's MO to this day but seen even almost 100 years ago. In my view, NDNR stands for 'not a doctor, not rational'. Meanwhile, though based on the science-ejected vitalistic, this ND's alma mater falsely labels naturopathy with such claims as "a rigorous scientific foundation" and "science- based" (for my collection of such claims from this naturopathy school, click here). Yet, simultaneously, CCNM claims vitalism as the basis of naturopathy (click here). So, TO THIS DAY and throughout the last say 100 years, naturopathy has FALSELY claimed that the hugely vitalistic / science-ejected is indeed science while profoundly science-ejected. But don't worry, it's here to stay as they've written such irrationality / absurdity into .gov statutes such as in Oregon, the trunk of the naturopathy tree [which serves as a Rosetta Stone of sorts for interpretation of all other state's ND / NMD usually incomplete 'naturopathy principles' iterations].