This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please
enable JavaScript
in your browser.
Live
PTR
Beta
Classic
Biofeedback - Replacing Medicine?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
This
looks like a nice summary. I only skimmed it though.
Post by
Squishalot
After all, you said that you can't relate something to real life when you don't know what real life is. I don't understand how you can discount something as well, when you don't know what reality is.
Correction. I challenged your friend's understanding of what reality is.
My personal view appears to sit somewhere between naive realism and scientific realism. If I can't perceive it, nor can science demonstrate it to be perceivable, then it has no meaning to my reality. Hence why HSR and I agree to disagree on a number of topics pertaining to a non-material soul.
Post by
Mousysqueak
After all, you said that you can't relate something to real life when you don't know what real life is. I don't understand how you can discount something as well, when you don't know what reality is.
Correction. I challenged your friend's understanding of what reality is.
My personal view appears to sit somewhere between naive realism and scientific realism. If I can't perceive it, nor can science demonstrate it to be perceivable, then it has no meaning to my reality. Hence why HSR and I agree to disagree on a number of topics pertaining to a non-material soul.
*Excited.*
There's an article somewhere in the black-hole-that-is-my-desk about quantom relativism and the idea that matter is in a state of flux when not being directly observed. I'm going to add it to my list to find it - my list is insane right now, so maybe expect it in a few weeks? I'd be really interested in what you think about it.
Post by
Squishalot
I think quantum relativism (and randomness, mind you) is a load of crap. Just getting it out there.
Post by
Mousysqueak
I think quantum relativism (and randomness, mind you) is a load of crap. Just getting it out there.
I'm going to bump it a few spots down the list, in that case - it's rather circumstantial and has almost no evidence to support it.
Post by
seebs
Restatement of the Original Post, since by some miracle, I managed to misdirect you both with some form of troll-bait or something:
The point of this topic is to consider the possibility that we don't need certain drugs as a whole - that we can use Biofeedback control of our bodies to replace certain medicines .
Thoughts?
There are probably a very small number where this is the case.
Interestingly, there's actually proper research showing that placebos can treat mild depression effectively.
Post by
Mousysqueak
/Would be legitimately interested in reading said research.
Post by
seebs
/Would be legitimately interested in reading said research.
I forget where I saw the reference, but the actual research was done in 1967, I think. The interesting thing is that you can
tell
people you're giving them a placebo, explain what it is, and it can still measurably treat depression in some cases.
Post by
Squishalot
It's not that unheard of. It's well known that positive people have better recovery than unhappy people. As a result, as long as there's something positive to cling to, you'll get a better result than no treatment at all.
Noone here is saying that placebos don't work. They do work... it's just that any drug that treats the underlying cause of the illness will do it better. Staying positive, for example, might result in more physical activity, which may in turn have X, Y and Z effects on the physiology of a person, which may help fight off cancer. But if there's no physical activity that can destroy cancer, by extension, a placebo or positive thought effect will not be able to rid the body of cancer.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.
© 2021 Fanbyte
