On Science and Healing (2)

On Science and Healing (2)(adapted from an article “The Science of Healing and the Healing of Science” published in Resource Magazine September 2005, Author: Barry Mapp)Most people would agree that science has rarely taken healing and healers seriously. Therefore science has never properly researched or investigated the phenomena that may be at work.Science therefore has [...]

Share

On Science and Healing (2)(adapted from an article “The Science of Healing and the Healing of Science” published in Resource Magazine September 2005, Author: Barry Mapp)Most people would agree that science has rarely taken healing and healers seriously. Therefore science has never properly researched or investigated the phenomena that may be at work.Science therefore has a major “blind-spot” in its knowledge base, possibly ignorant of a whole range of naturally occurring subtle phenomena that happen within and between living things. Coincidently, science appears “stuck” between two apparently conflicting paradigms.On the one hand the science writers tell us how Quantum Ideas have long replaced Newtonian Thinking. On the other hand, at the cultural and grass roots level of scientific research and practice (particularly the biological sciences), we see that this “old” paradigm is still predominant. Little has changed since the 1700’s when healers were often labelled as witches or charlatans. At the start of the 21st century we appear a little more accepting of healing though not because of scientific understanding or study, but rather through positive patient experiences and “word of mouth” testimonial.So today we can see healers at work in Hospice or Cancer Care Units, but rarely in medical and surgical wards, where the healers could potentially save the NHS millions, if not billions, of pounds a year.

share save 171 16 On Science and Healing (2)

Thinking in Different Ways

Thinking in Different Ways In the last Blog I looked at how our models, theories, beliefs and assumptions can be either helpful or harmful. Also I looked at how our assumptions influence our thinking and vice-versa. In this blog, I am going to focus on thinking. There are many different ways to look at thinking [...]

Share

Thinking in Different Ways

In the last Blog I looked at how our models, theories, beliefs and assumptions can be either helpful or harmful. Also I looked at how our assumptions influence our thinking and vice-versa.

In this blog, I am going to focus on thinking.

There are many different ways to look at thinking (because there are many different ways we can model thinking). The first model I am going to share in the next three blogs is one I put together just a few days ago (so one of my own creations – thought I accept there is little new under the sun). I am going to call this model the “Logical Levels” of thinking (not to be confused with NLP Logical Levels) and I use this term because I see the ways of thinking I am about to describe as being on a continuum from quite illogical (though sometimes understandable) through to very sensible, and very logical.

I have given these logical levels of thinking my own names but if anyone can come up with any ones please let me know. My logical levels of thinking are: (1) Crowing Cockerel (2) Flat World (3) Earth around the Sun (4) Out from my Existing World (5) Multiple Perspectives and (6) Meta-Thinking and I will briefly describe the first two here.

Crowing Cockerel Thinking

This is the level of thinking that is followed when people believe that the sun rises every morning because the cock crows. The proponents of this way of thinking will defend it as absolutely correct. There can be no argument with this way of thinking because the sun rises after the cock crows. In the 21st Century, you would think that we are far too clever to believe or to use this way of thinking, but you will regularly discover in this column (and the sister column – the Non-Political Party) that “Crowing Cockerel Theories” are all around us and they have the effect of protecting the status quo. This thinking stops us from looking at things in new ways, is superstitious, and it stops us from improving. Even intellectuals and academics are not immune from this type of thinking. Scientists also have their fair share of this thinking.

Why does such an illogical form of thinking persist?

One reason may be that we rarely give time to think about our thinking. So we do Crowing Cockerel Thinking thoughtlessly and without any constructive engagement with it.  Another reason is that we believe for every effect we see there is a cause. So we seek causes but often have no way of knowing (insufficient data?) what is a cause and what is a co-incident. Indeed in this specific example it is the sun that ’causes’ the cockerel to crow not the other way around (even this of course is far too simplistic).

And before you say that you never think in this way, I intends to have great fun showing otherwise. Maybe you do think-about-your-thinking and so you are partially immunised from this false idol. But I will bet that you probably (without realising it) take advice occasionally from an expert who (unknowingly) practises this form of thinking.

So let’s try to identify this perverse thinking mode whenever and wherever it appears in the media. And do please send me any examples you find.

Flat World Thinking

This form of thinking has some definite logic to it. It is represented by a theory that is true (useful) but only under very limited conditions. Imagine living thousands of years ago in the middle of a vast plain. This thinking was adequate. The theory says “my world is a flat place”. The model will always be true (useful) within certain confined limits. However to extrapolate from this (specific place) model into a general model of thinking would be dangerous (particularly if you were gambling with your life or your worldly possessions, or gambling with the lives of future generations on the assumption that the model was true). As I intend to show time and time again, Flat-World thinking is (unfortunately) alive and well. If you have your personal examples of this Flat-World Thinking please send them to me so I can add them to my collection.

Coming Next:

Earth around the Sun Thinking

share save 171 16 Thinking in Different Ways