here, an update on the entry or leader language from The Naturocrit Podcast for this 2025. The '33-years' has a start year of 1992 when I began aiming my undergraduate studies as a response to inducements from ND programs at the time in terms of how they described themselves [not belief system, modern science]:
001. the introduction goes this way these days [from naturocrit.podbean.com or archive.org]:
“Welcome to, as that robot voice says, The Naturocrit Podcast, and thank you for boldly listening. What are we even talking about? Well, this podcast series is my take on naturopathic medicine, an area I've been studying for about thirty-three years, including my time in so-called 'scientific nonsectarian naturopathic medical school'. My approach is a pairing of scientific skepticism and a deep knowledge of naturopathy's intimate details. In previous episodes of this series, I established that naturopathy is, essentially, a kind of knowledge blending, misrepresentation, and irrationality. I have termed naturopathy both 'an epistemic conflation falsely posing itself as an epistemic delineation' and 'the naturopathillogical': the science-exterior is mixed with what is scientific, then that whole muddle is absurdly claimed to be science as an entire category, while particular sectarian science-ejected oath-obligations and -requirements are coded or camouflaged, therein effectively disguising naturopathy's system of beliefs in public view. Naturopathy's ultimate achievement is a profound erosion of scientific integrity and freedom of belief packaged in the marketing veneers ‘natural, holistic, integrative and alternative’ and improperly embedded in the academic category ‘science’.”
002. musings:
On the leader music: From an improv recorded years ago. I particularly like the amp hum through the lead guitar’s hardware, rather analog and real-life-messy.
On a robot voice: That’s of course my voice through some DAW’s VSTi effect. Of course one needs a robot voice in the mix.
On the term naturocrit: I created this as inspired from the medical laboratory term hematocrit. So, blood analysis into naturopathy analysis.
On boldly listening: Of course, you are bold.
On the question asked: I was inspired by Fanon’s “Oh, my body, make of me always a man who questions.” Nowadays, too, I connect the body-in-the-world urgency with Tim Snyder’s concept of leib in On Freedom. Therein, an aspect of freedom is sovereignty and that necessitates a leib as opposed to merely a korper.
On 33 years: Where does the time go?
On my time in ND school: What a grift.
On scientific skepticism: A necessary condition of science is not to fool oneself, to paraphrase Feynman.
On knowledge blending, misrepresentation, and irrationality: There’s no better three-word description of naturopathy.
On the naturopathillogical: It is important to expand vocabulary. One needs terms that epitomize certain contexts. These days I regard such wordsmithing as in-itself an act of freedom. This necessity was recently bolstered from a John Green CrashCourse summary and analysis of Orwell’s 1984, wherein the totalitarian regime’s ultimate triumph is its restriction and ambiguation of language and therefore similarly of thought itself.
On the integrity of scientific knowledge: I’ll refer again to Tim Snyder, and the required component of factuality in order to realize positive freedom, aka “the big truths of science. […and] engagement with the world.”
On the sanctity of belief: Recognizing the difference between a subjective preference or proposition and in-the-world objective phenomena — roughly, articles of faith and scientific knowledge — protects both kinds. The distinction is necessary in order to realize and protect what we can know and what we can internally create.
003. perplexity AI 2025's renderings of this 2025 Naturocrit Podcast's introductory language:
No comments:
Post a Comment