Thank you, Santosh, for accepting my clarifications and giving your own. Filomena --- Santosh Helekar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In a message dated 12/6/2003 11:52:17 PM Central > Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > >There is a danger of making small changes to > someone's post that may > >not reflect the intent of the author. I think that > this is a case > >where we cannot possibly see eye to eye. You take > the position that > >Ayurveda is a deception and a form of quackery that > has no proven > >treatments. > > > > Hi Filomena: > > Thanks for correcting my misunderstanding of your > position with > regard to validation of Ayurvedic treatments. I > apologize for having > to state your views in my own words because of the > length of our > posts. > > So now let me correct your misunderstanding of my > position. Yes, I do > contend that Ayurveda "has no proven treatments". > But, NO, I do > NOT "take the position that Ayurveda is a deception > and a form of > quackery". I know this would surprise you and > others. However, my > reason for holding this view is very simple. > Ayurveda is not a > deception or quackery for the same reason that > Aristotle is not a > crackpot or a conman. > > Ayurveda is one of mankind's first attempts to > understand and address > issues about human health and sickness. If it had > been allowed to > take its natural and rational course, it would have > evolved into > something that perfectly resembles modern medicine, > which might have > even advanced beyond our present state today. I am > certain that the > latter statement would make it clear to you why I > compared Ayurveda > with Aristotle. In short, both were pre-scientific, > and wrong in many > ways, but nonetheless, giant leaps in the realm of > human intellectual > achievement. > > The trouble is its use today is atavistic - a > throwback to an earlier > time - unless its treatments are validated using the > scientific > method. Using my earlier analogy, it is like using > Aristolean "pre- > physics" to build space rockets, ignoring all the > developments in > physics over the past 500 years. > > I also do NOT take the position that we ought to ban > or get rid of > Ayurveda entirely. I think there is some chance that > a few of its > treatments might actually help some people suffering > from chronic > diseases, psychosomatic diseases, hypochondriasis > and hysterical > illnesses, i. e. conditions in which psychological > factors play a > role. However, whether this is actually true or not > can only be found > out by testing these treatments with the scientific > method. > > Cheers, > > Santosh > > > > ########################################################################## > # Send submissions for Goanet to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > # > # PLEASE remember to stay on-topic (related to Goa), > and avoid top-posts # > # More details on Goanet at > http://joingoanet.shorturl.com/ # > # Please keep your discussion/tone polite, to > reflect respect to others # > ##########################################################################
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ########################################################################## # Send submissions for Goanet to [EMAIL PROTECTED] # # PLEASE remember to stay on-topic (related to Goa), and avoid top-posts # # More details on Goanet at http://joingoanet.shorturl.com/ # # Please keep your discussion/tone polite, to reflect respect to others # ##########################################################################
