No announcement yet.

Science Sunday II

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Science Sunday II

    One of the primary things that marks a theory as scientific is its ability to predict something in the future.

    This is problematic. When a magician predicts things, nothing is left to predict. This is why performance is so powerful. I've written endlessly of this.

    Scientists, on the other hand, are expected to demonstrate why their ideas have been shown to be the case as far as what is currently known to be the case.

    I'm watching Genius, the story of Einstein on National Geographic channel just now. He was able to predict the effects of gravitation upon the planet Mercury by a colleague observing this during a total eclipse of the sun some years after he published the theory of general relativity.

    I knew about this, but only because I read and listen a lot. This is important however.

    More soon.
    Barrett L. Dorko

  • #2
    Does "evidence-based" therapy predict? What does "work" mean?

    I understand I risk "parsing" or "word-smithing" some phrase, but hey, phrases and words are powerful.

    Aren't they?
    Last edited by Barrett Dorko; 25-06-2017, 06:04 PM.
    Barrett L. Dorko


    • #3
      Gambling and predicting have a lot in common. I don't gamble, as far as I know. I don't predict either. If I do predict, I'm usually surprised.

      I read and I'm impressed by some things. I offer premises because I think they'll defend what I do and invite discussion.

      Do you?
      Barrett L. Dorko


      • #4
        I have said that the power of a finding is something that should be discussed. That has gone nowhere.

        Still, when I read Kandel's book (I wrote a Sunday series about it) I was struck by how reducing things down to their basic elements might teach us about how they actually exist.

        Science does that, pretty much.

        There's a YouTube video about how to reduce things. It's just 61/2 minutes long. I wonder if anyone will watch it.

        I won't predict it.
        Last edited by Barrett Dorko; 26-06-2017, 02:05 AM.
        Barrett L. Dorko


        • #5
          I sent this to a friend of mine who said it would be great video to watch while smoking weed.... oh well.

          Pretty good stuff overall. Looks like he has a more expensive model of the Panasonic Lumix, which I use for Hi-Def slo motion analysis of my runners.


          • #6
            Thanks Ken.

            There's another website about the use of science.

            It's several years old. Maybe that says something.
            Barrett L. Dorko


            • #7
              As usual, and as I suspected (depending upon my confirmation bias) "evidence-based" practice has been adopted by the therapy community without the problems with evidence alone to justify care. This has been well-documented. Evidence without any underlying science to back it up; without any reductionism to demonstrate the reality of what is assumed to be the case isn't enough.

              I hadn't anticipated that scientific scrutiny would be absent via many (if not most) therapists simply not being taught that science had brought us where we are. By itself, it wasn't powerful enough.

              To use a sports analogy, it's as if a spectacularly talented member of your team (science) is completely neutralized by members (advertising, "results," money and luck) of the other team. I think the case could be made that it has already happened.

              More soon.
              Barrett L. Dorko


              • #8
                Do you think it has happened?

                Ask around: Have you ever heard of science-based practice? or better yet What is the difference between evidence and science based practice?

                Ask nicely.
                Barrett L. Dorko


                • #9
                  Isaac Asimov died in '92. Many should look him up. I know I've quoted him here.

                  He's spoken of how many of science-fiction writers carry on about a dystopian future. After all, they predict. Asimov wrote many things, but his science-fiction made him most famous. He connected his writing in this genre to fairy tales, and they were not pretty.

                  He says that his stories had "a happy ending" and any utopia does. Of course, that doesn't make a utopia, but a good story. Asimov understood drama and great literature.

                  He was a genius after all.
                  Last edited by Barrett Dorko; 27-06-2017, 03:30 AM.
                  Barrett L. Dorko


                  • #10
                    I've always felt science has to precede evidence.
                    Science needs to prove plausibility and efficacy first!!!!
                    Then, let the RCTs show us how to apply the science based medicine most efficiently and effectively.

                    Right now, we see "studies" performed on bogus techniques, by dumb luck a correlation is found. Then we hear this new intervention "works" and it's up to scientists to figure out why/how. This is so backwards and has screwed our professional and the"evidence"

                    An analogy I gave my student the other day: Study designed to examine the effect of exercise on rotator cuff tendinopathy and pain. When the numbers were crunched, they found that pts with summer birthdays had more pain relief with exercise. Scientist now are trying to figure out why those born in the summer respond better to the meantime, those treating pts with shoulder pain should take their birthdays in to account when choosing interventions.

                    This just in.....scientist believe babies born in the summer see mom and dad engage in activities outside the home early in their lives, this translates into a positive association with exercise, which leads to better response to exercise for pain as adults! More studies needed!


                    • #11

                      More studies needed. Very funny.

                      Science has shown itself to be very powerful - therefore it must be gotten rid of. It's as if a member of Tony Soprano's "family" said:

                      It'd be a real shame...
                      Barrett L. Dorko