We are hearing a lot about evidence-based medicine as the new standard for clinical practice and information reporting. In the field of orthodox medicine, which is using pharmaceutical products, this has shown, in some cases, the shortcomings of the drugs. By collecting large amounts of data, the adverse events become evident. Many of the scandalous behaviours of the drug manufacturers and their relations with corrupt government overseers eventually get revealed. But do they really? Perhaps if we compare the statistics about acetaminophen (Tylenol) with those of piper methysticum (Kava) logic would have us ban the former and reverse the ban on the latter. The list goes on and on leaving us bewildered. Who is looking and at what evidence?
In the middle of the 19th century, a naturalist, John Muir, was hiking in what is now named Yosemite National Park and he came upon a vista. Standing upon a promontory, he gazed at the mountains and valleys and had an epiphany. He said he could “see” through vast ages of time and realized that the formations around him were created over many long periods by the slow recession of glaciers. Although he was not the originator of this concept of geology, he is the one who brought it to the scientific community tipping the scales towards this new paradigm of glaciation. Geologists working with astronomers have created a time scale for events on the Earth by measuring the various strata of rock and noting the elements in each. A comet crash on Earth in the Yucatan blasted soil into the air and created a demarcation that is now a reference point for a geological time line. Various volcanic eruptions have also made clear historic event lines. Geologists are not known for stirring up controversies but they have vexed many historians. When Napoleon Bonaparte came to Egypt, the Sphinx was buried in the sand revealing only its head. After excavation, it was learned that the Sphinx was carved out of the rock bed on which it sat. Historians dated it and Egyptologists published PhD papers on all aspects of it. Along comes one of those annoying geologists, who notes, that there are two kinds of erosion on the structure. One was made by water and one was made by wind and sand. The water erosion was just like all the other rocks of the region that came from the ancient inland lake. Geological forensics dates the Sphinx to about 12,000 BC. This is many thousand years older than believed. Do we throw out all geological science or do we re-write the history books? Historians with their degrees to defend are loath to re-write the books and geologists would lose their entire paradigm. So we ignore the evidence.
Science is not just knowledge but also a way to acquiring it. Gnosis also means knowledge and we come by this kind another way. Science studies phenomena and requires precise epistemology including mathematics to communicate truth or facts. Sometimes a principle may be postulated and statistically tested before being accepted and known a posteriori. Gnosis studies noumena and uses metaphors, parables and art to communicate its truths. Noumena, as defined by Plato in the Republic, are those universal principles and laws that are self-executive and are known a priori. This is the inner world including though and feeling. Science and its tools can only extend our senses and their horizons as it studies objects. It ignores subjectivity. Gnosis and its tools apprehend our very being and through this subjectivity gives meaning to objects and our relationship to them. Science needs to be tempered with gnosis because science is being practiced by living human beings with thoughts and feelings and desires. Science and its knowledge are infected with a disease it cannot perceive or conceive.
The word “ignorant “ can carry quite a sting when it is applied to a person or a way of life, particularly when we take it personally. What does ignorance imply or really mean? To ignore means to willfully turn away from knowing. It is not plain not knowing. To be ignorant of something means to be willfully not learning and not seeing. Scientists, doctors, and clinicians are always observing some facts and ignoring others to facilitate their process and maintain their viewpoints and paradigms. By not reflecting on the very principles by which their knowledge is gained and validated people have allowed their very thinking to become corrupted and therefore full of incoherencies and cognitive dissonance. What is truly scary is that the people who have no gnosis, no knowledge of their thoughts and feelings , can mislead others and cause tremendous damage as they ignore their conscience by practicing science in isolation.
The true disease, that is plaguing modern humanity, is ignorance. There is much evidence to prove this if anyone cares enough to look. It is truly ironic that scientific knowledge perpetuates ignorance. Science requires conscience. Science requires gnosis.
Did anyone read or hear about “global warming”? It is not scientifically proven yet, but it looks like there may be something to this theory. Perhaps we should do a study. What kind of evidence do we need to prove this to the ignorant corporations and their political trough buddies?