AURELIS and Other Alternatives

August 10, 2021 AURELIS No Comments

AURELIS is sometimes seen as ‘alternative, therefore present in the same boat as all other alternatives.’ I find that disturbing.

As a comparison

That would be like throwing present-day regular medicine in the same boat as the worst alternatives to the leeches, venipunctures, and scarifications that were regular medicine two hundred years ago.

That would also be disturbing.

Compared to the rationality of present-day regular medicine, AURELIS stands at the other side from all the weird stuff that fills a sometimes poetic yet irrational void. Then what is ‘alternative’ and what is not?

It may look different if you only know a binary contrast between the inside and the outside of momentary regularity.

Then, where is the experimental science?

This is in the hand of the one who dares to finance it ― at present, nobody. That way, there is ‘only’ theoretical as well as circumstantial experimental science.

It happens that there is a lot of this, which throws the ball in the other camp of argumentation.

Meanwhile:

The AURELIS core is the best way to get rid of much irrationality in alternative healthcare.

This core is related to empathy and the opening up of placebo. Taking this seriously can readily flush a lot of alternative medicine down the drain ― as an additional gift to scientific progress.

A problem for present-day regular medicine would be that, in the same motion, much within this would follow suit ― direction ‘alternative.’

Of course, there is no concerted action consciously put in place to prevent this from happening. But there is indeed a general unwillingness within regular medicine to ‘soil the own nest’ with a fundamental openness to the depth of human mind. That way, anything that goes in that direction gets automatically filtered.

That makes regular medicine of today unfit to be called rational as far as the mind is concerned.

Only partially, not entirely. I would put fifty-fifty as the score and am prepared to defend my case very much in-depth if given the necessary resources. Even more, it appears too easy even to call it challenging.

There are huge gaps. [see: “Mind the Gap“] There is an immense amount of demonstrably symptomatic cure [see: “Most Drugs are Symptomatic“], as well as placebo [see: “How Active is Placebo?“] and nocebo [see: “Is Social Nocebo Real?“], as well as not-knowing filled with jargon.

In anything related to the psyche, we are in the Middle Ages of medicine ― with an upper layer looking shiny. More qualitative science is in order. [see: “Why We Need Serial Treatment Assumption Testing“]

As to the body, there’s a different story.

It’s true that also here, it’s not a finished story. Additional failures will be brought to daylight, but all in all, the story is one of increasing success.

Bravo, regular medicine!

But either keep your hands off the psyche – of which you know so little, although you pretend to while keeping your eyes wide shut – or take it seriously. As for now, the cause and therefore also possible relief of much human misery lies under your rug.

AURELIS

is my answer to all this.

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

AURELIS, Spoon-Fed?

No, this is not about AURELIS for babies. The question is: would it be interesting to bring AURELIS in the most palatable way? I’m thinking of something like a “now do this, then that and then again do that and hooray!” – way: No more headaches thanks to this step-by-step plan. Easily lose 8 kilograms Read the full article…

Why Humanism Needs AURELIS

I admit: this title is quite highbrow. I need to do some explaining. [see also: “Humanism with a Vengeance”] Humanism = taking human being into account as-is. Not as some organization portrays it if this runs counter to obvious reality, of which science and rationality are pretty good critics, even if not necessarily the only Read the full article…

Enlightenment, Kant, AURELIS, Growth

It’s time to bring things together. This is according to me the only way forward. ‘Western Enlightenment’ points to a historical period from +/- 1650 onwards, till +/- first part of 19th century. It was multifaceted, to say the least, and came in several waves from ‘moderate’ to ‘radical’… to even ‘totalitarian’ (à la Robespierre). Read the full article…

Translate »