Get access

HOMEOPATHY AND EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS – A RESPONSE TO SMITH'S UTILITARIAN ARGUMENT

Authors

  • IRENE SEBASTIAN

    Corresponding author
    1. American Institute of Homeopathy
      Dr. Irene Sebastian, 401 Veterans Blvd, #203 Metairie LA, USA. E-mail: sebastian.irene@gmail.com
    Search for more papers by this author

  • Conflict of interest statement: No conflicts declared

Dr. Irene Sebastian, 401 Veterans Blvd, #203 Metairie LA, USA. E-mail: sebastian.irene@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

Kevin Smith's utilitarian argument against homeopathy1 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.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary