Well, I definitely privilege scientific ways of knowing more than any other way of knowing [†]. So I don't disagree with what you *say*. But it seems to me that *you* don't privilege scientific knowledge in these discussions. You talk a LOT about philosophy and metaphysics, but not much about scientific results. The recent 'round and 'round about "sledgehammers", Peirce's metaphysics, or whatnot, largely ignoring any attempts to discuss psychedelic research and medicine, seems to imply that you do not privilege science.
So, maybe if I pull out the old saw again? If results published in peer-reviewed literature and clinical trial data will NOT convince you that psychedelics can be used as medicine, then what WOULD convince you? If nothing will ever convince you, then you certainly do NOT privilege science. [†] It ain't perfect; and it ain't the only kind of knowledge. But it's the best we have. On 3/10/20 11:03 AM, [email protected] wrote: > No, I am not sure that Dave and Glen would disagree with any of this. -- ☣ uǝlƃ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
