Truth, proof and evidence

The study and practice of medicine, in its most personal and intimate functions, its most sophisticated scientific and technological manifestations, and its philosophical and ethical ramifications, are central to our understanding of the human condition. Homeopathic medicine: its insights, the questions that it begs, and the scientific and philosophical challenges it presents, has a significant contribution to make to this process.

To be actively and seriously engaged with homeopathy is an adventurous undertaking. It is to be engaged in exploring both human nature and the nature of the world we inhabit. And in that process we are also engaged in the pursuit of truth and the exploration of reality.

This paper deals first with the layout of the playing field on which homeopathy has to compete to be taken seriously. It then discusses three concepts: reality, truth and knowledge, which are objectives for which we strive and principles that guide us in that striving. In the third part it introduces the concept of ‘personal knowledge’ as an essential ingredient of scientific discovery and the pursuit of truth. And finally it proposes that the homeopathic community in general, and the Faculty of Homeopathy in particular, must expand its vision with a definition of a new paradigm, the new model of healthcare and medical science to which the vision aspires.

Keywords

Truth - Proof - Evidence - Paradigm - Personal knowledge - Homeopathy

• References

• 1 Skrabanek P. Demarcation of the absurd. Lancet 1986; 1: 960-961.
• 2 Miller, J. After Dark. Channel 4, 3rd September 1988.
• 3 Baum M. Quoted in Homeopathy is worse than witchcraft. Daily Mail 2007 1st May.
• 4 Polyani M. Personal knowledge. London: Routledge; 1962.
• 5 Leckridge R. Simile (editorial). Faculty of Homeopathy; 2007. 1st May.
• 6 Kuhn T. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1962.
• 7 Popper K. The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson; 1980.
• 8 Campbell A.C.H. Is homeopathy scientific? A reassessment in the light of Karl Popper's theory of scientific knowledge. Br Hom J 1978; 67: 77-85.
• 9 Fisher P. Is homeopathy scientific? A reply to Anthony Campbell. Br Hom J 1981; 70: 152-159.
• 10 Thompson T.D.B. Homeopathy: exploring the popularity paradox. A multi-method study of the players, process and outcome of homeopathic care by UK medical doctors. University of Bristol; 2005.
• 11 Fuller S. Kuhn vs. Popper. The struggle for the soul of science. Cambridge: Icon; 2006.
• 12 Whitmarsh T. The nature of evidence in complementary and alternative medicine: ideas from trials of homeopathy in chronic headache. In: Callahan Dan. (ed). The Role of Complementary and Alternative Medicine: Accommodating Pluralism. 2002. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 148-162.
• 13 Polkinghorne J. Exploring reality. London: SPCK; 2005.
• 14 Ward K. In defence of the soul. Oxford: Oneworld; 1998.
• 15 Swayne J. Homeopathy, wholeness and healing. Homeopathy 2005; 94: 37-43.
• 16 Harris C.M. Seeing sunflowers. JRCGP 1989; 39: 313-319.
• 17 Elliot T.S. Choruses from ‘The Rock’. In: Collected Poems 1909–1962 . 1963. London: Faber and Faber.;
• 18 Polkinghorne J. Personal communication.
• 19 Swayne J. The starting point: pathography. Homeopathy 2002; 91: 22-25.
• 20 Souter K. Heuristics and bias in homeopathy. Homeopathy 2006; 95: 237-244.