Science vs. Scientism: A Rebuttal

Dr. Christopher Kent, chiropractor and subluxation activist, recently wrote an interesting post about Science vs. Scientism. His basic thesis was that Scientism is the habit of accepting scientific evidence as the only way to understand the world, excluding philosophy, aesthetics, etc. I don't disagree with this premise, but his conclusion - that anyone who fails to accept subluxation or innate intelligence as a valid construct must be adhering to Scientism, not science - seems to be a misconstrual of the scientific process.

[W]e cannot measure innate intelligence. Does this mean that it is not “real” and that we should abandon the concept merely because we have no technology to detect or quantitate it? I think not.

Straw man. Or red herring, I can't remember which.

Scientists do not suggest that we should abandon concepts merely because we don't yet have the technology for it, but rather that we should not blindly accept these hypotheses until we have evidence to support them. Kent mentions previously unproven concepts such as DNA and viruses, suggesting that we never would have benefited from understanding these ideas if it weren't for an open mind accepting ideas outside of what science can quantify. That isn't how science works, as I understand it. We would not have DNA technology if it weren't for the scientific process which has since substantiated it, not because of an acceptance of unproven hypotheses. DNA was accepted as the container of the code of life since Miescher first identified it in the 1860s long before it's structure was discovered circa 1953. But, read Watson's account of him and Crick stumbling upon The Double Helix and you clearly see that the process was one full of struggle, push-back, and incredulity among colleagues. Slowly the scientific community came to agree upon the structure we now accept – but only once the evidence was sufficient.

The concepts of subluxation and innate intelligence have been around for well over 100 years. There has yet to be convincing evidence of its validity as a construct other than anecdotal evidence which may or may not be explained by other well understood mechanisms.

Kent's argument that "doctors must not lose sight of the fact that science may not be the only valid method of inquiry" is accurate but not complete, because science is still the best method of inquiry.

As Carl Sagan shared in Demon Haunted World:

The difference between physics and metaphysics […] is not that the practitioners of one are smarter than the practitioners of the other. The difference is that the metaphysicist has no laboratory.

And so it is with chiropractic. The study of subluxation cannot be conducted in a laboratory, so cannot be considered a science and therefore is not a valid comparison by which to call others out for scientism.

Mt. Hood 50

A quick video recap of my experience running the Mt. Hood 50 ultra-marathon in July 2014. I didn't bring a camera with me - which I regret because of the amazing views along the first half of the course - so this is all iPhone/GoPro footage from my family.

Going to Mars!

NASA is letting you send your name to Mars on the microchip of a space probe. Get your boarding pass too!

Why Carollo is a Master Teacher

I wrote the following article for The Axis, the student published newspaper at UWS.

"The notes go on to say… Are you with me? Now, I don't want to insult anybody."

I sometimes wonder if I'm the only student that occasionally thinks back on those phrases with a nostalgic longing. As strange as they seemed during those first weeks of Spinal Anatomy, it didn't take long for me to associate those key phrases with Jim Carollo's melodic methodology, calm demeanor, and sincere concern for each student. Certainly, Jim Carollo is not the easiest teacher at UWS. I'm still reeling from the slap in the face that was a hard-earned B in Neuroanatomy. Yet, in all my years of being a student, I have not found a professor who was able to motivate me to focus harder, study more, and prepare more diligently for a class than Jim.

I'm no educational expert. In fact, my official transcript shows I'm lacking a lot of skills in that arena. But, I have spent the past 6 years working in an educational support position, and have been privileged to be a fly on the wall during some intense and informative presentations by educational experts. I've also spent time researching the learning process to improve my study habits and get up to par with others in my class. Over those years, I've picked up on some particular things that master teachers do – habits or techniques they employ while teaching – and I see all of them in Jim Carollo, even if he isn't aware of them. I'd like to highlight just a few of them.

Explicit Instruction

The most effective teachers provide instruction that is systematic, direct, engaging, and success oriented. Anita Archer, Ph.D., at University of Oregon School of Education, teaches this technique as a set of specific patterns, phrases, and actions to educators around the country. Learners can acquire information in two ways. First, they can discover new things on their own, such as how a two year old learns how chocolate cake does not taste the same as the brown stuff in the backyard. Second, learners can be instructed by another person who has previously acquired the information. Dr. Archer explains, "Explicit instruction is helpful … when discovery may be inaccurate, inadequate, incomplete, or inefficient."

Repetition

Explicit instruction relies heavily on repetition. Not necessarily rote, monotonous repetition, but the type that offers multiple exposures to a piece of information using a variety of modalities. You've no doubt heard of The Seven Learning Styles (visual, auditory, verbal, kinesthetic, etc.). While there is no research to support the idea that a particular student learns best in one discrete way, plenty of studies show that information is retained better when multiple modes of learning are utilized. Hearing a description, writing a definition, and then drawing a diagram serve to strengthen neuronal connections and consolidate a memory.

(S)low-Tech

As much as I love the newest gadget, listening to podcasts, and having my eyes glued to my smart-phone throughout the day, I have to admit that I appreciate an old-school approach to teaching. Marian Diamond is a Ph.D. neuroscientist and professor of general anatomy at U.C. Berkeley. She still uses the chalkboard to teach her undergraduate pre-med students. At the beginning of each semester she takes a moment to explain why she does not use PowerPoint. "I've studied learning mechanisms long enough to know that it takes time to take in the primary information and associate it. If I just flash [things on the screen] you don't get it. If you write, you use your kinesthetic sense. It slows me down, it slows you down. I also repeat all the time. The first time through you have an ionic exchange. The second time through you have protein synthesis. So, we're using things that have been shown for learning rather than just keeping up with the technology."

Il Maestro

As you can see, Jim Carollo makes use of all of these teaching skills and more. He clearly and explicitly outlines the information to be covered in each lecture. He does not hesitate to repeat a word or definition multiple times. He ensures that the majority of the class is on task with a variety of rhetorical questions before advancing to the next 35mm slide or filling in the notes on the overhead projector. Like an experienced conductor at The Schnitzer Concert Hall, Carollo orchestrates each lecture and provides ample opportunity for all students to have a positive educational experience in basic sciences.