Premium
HOMEOPATHY AND EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS – A RESPONSE TO SMITH'S UTILITARIAN ARGUMENT
Author(s) -
SEBASTIAN IRENE
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
bioethics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.494
H-Index - 55
eISSN - 1467-8519
pISSN - 0269-9702
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2012.01950.x
Subject(s) - homeopathy , argument (complex analysis) , nomothetic and idiographic , holism , epistemology , value (mathematics) , nomothetic , philosophy of science , philosophy , alternative medicine , utilitarianism , psychology , medicine , mathematics , statistics , pathology
Kevin Smith's utilitarian argument against homeopathy 1 is flawed because he did not review and refute the relevant basic science literature on ultra‐high dilutions. He also failed to appreciate that allopathic medicine is based on a deductive‐nomothetic method and that homeopathic medicine is based on an inductive‐idiographic method, and thus that the implications for clinical research are very different. His misunderstanding of provings and of the holism of homeopathic medicine also demonstrated his failure to understand the history, philosophy and method of homeopathy. Finally, I questioned the value of introducing ethical judgment into an ongoing scientific debate.