[lbo-talk] putting quackery to the test

[Alex]

--- joanna <123hop at comcast.net> wrote:
> As for the disarticulation, that's not a research objective it is THE 
> method of western science. That's why ecology was such a revolution. 
> But, to give one minor side example with significant consequences: it 
> was argued that women should not breastfeed because "formula" had all 
> the ingredients of mother's milk. Wrong.

Even if formula was identical to breast milk, why would that mean women
shouldn't breastfeed their infants?

The world is far too complicated to understand all at once.  Trying to take
things apart to understand the pieces seems like a sensible route to knowledge,
and I don't see how that fact that things are often missed invalidates the
method.  An understanding of the parts is a starting point for understanding
the connections.  How does that bad advice about breastfeeding illustrate a
problem with this approach?

-Alex

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com