Science provides the most important set of tools for the evaluation of complementary and alternative medicine. Nonetheless, there are important limits in science that constrain its ability to evaluate CAM effectively. Some are the limits encountered by science in conventional medical research. Others are peculiar to this controversial topic. The most important limits are not those inherent within the basic methods of science, but rather within the culture of science — the particular ways that scientific knowledge, theory, and method are (...) configured and arrayed rhetorically, and in the social context in which science operates. It is the limitations of scientists as a group of human beings more than science as a set of methods that hamper scientific evaluation of CAM. (shrink)

My presentation was set as a counterpoint to the presentation by Lawrence Schneiderman, M.D., “Alternative Medicine or Alternatives to Medicine.”’ In this talk, Dr. Schneiderman vigorously critiqued CAM on the basis of evidence-based science as opposed to what he called “the collective romantic fantasy” of CAM. will challenge this science-versus-CAM view on the basis of several limits to science. My thesis here is: (1) the basic methods of science are as appropriate to the study of CAM as they are to (...) the study of conventional medicine (that is, there are some limits in both cases, but they are not special exemptions for CAM); however, (2) the human actors who practice science are cultural and emotional beings and the enterprise of science is therefore limited by human capacities. This is not a controversial claim, because human limitations in science are well-recognized. (shrink)

Religious beliefs in miraculous healing through prayer remain prevalent in modern society. Most such beliefs do not conflict with medical advice but some do. Conventional views have considered these beliefs incompatible with rational modern thought, predicting their demise and explaining their persistence in terms of non-rational thinking, "special logics" and psychological compartmentalization. However, attention to the actual beliefs of individuals often reveals them to be rationally ordered and empirically founded. Further, they do not usually involve disbelief of medical knowledge. Their (...) differences from each other and from orthodox medical ideas arise from differing assumptions, the crediting of subjective experience, and the particular experiences of believers. Keywords: belief, epistemology, healing, miracle, prayer, religion CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this? (shrink)