Absolutely Curtis – I say in all my classes that science is nothing to do with being right or wrong – moreover it is absolutely about being able to make the most responsible decisions according to current evidence and we will yield if evidence comes along to supersede that.

Thank you for taking the time to comment.

Best wishes, Adam.

I would only say that new evidence doesn’t “disprove” a theory or hypothesis. I think most people object to science because they think that science claims to have proof! Science merely says that the evidence seems to support a hypothesis with a certain confidence interval. Nothing is ever for certain in science and it has room to change and develop over time. That is why it’s the best tool we have!

That’s Carl Sagan quoted in an article (Wired 11.09.17). I imagine him dropping the mic after that one.

Thank you for taking the time to write and reply Duncan.

In response:

Re: “It took ‘science’ time to discover that the earth is not flat.”

Ok.

Re: “Science may not have the equipment to measure the subconscious. Does that necessarily mean that it does NOT exist?”

This is a fallacious argument. The burden of proof lies on the shoulders of those claiming that it does exist. Saying “you can’t prove it does NOT exist” does not mean that it does. That is illogical and inaccurate. I use Bertrand Russell’s teapot theory to illustrate that point in this video: https://aecollegeofhypnosis.uk/conscious-unconscious-time-hypnotherapists-stopped-explaining-mind-way/

Re: “Science is growing. Before the development of MRI scans did we know what the brain was like?”

I’m not sure what point you are making with this sentence.

Re: “Can you see thought? Can you measure thought? Does thought exist or is it a figment of our imagination?”

Today, with technological advances with PET scans, EEG, fMRI and neuroimaging, we are learning much more about thought and can see the kinds of brain activity that occur when we think certain thoughts, the field of neuroscience examines this in detail. Again though, I’m not really sure of the relevance of this to my video, perhaps you could be more specific?

Re: “Science has yet to discover the super conscious lol”

Then how can you be sure a thing exists?

Re: “Science does not have all the answers yet…”

It is a very common retort to offer the arguments you offer here. You are quite right – science does not have all the answers, but science is not suggesting it does have all the answers, and I have certainly not suggested as much here. The field of hypnotherapy and frontline hypnotherapists certainly would benefit from more scientific thinking and looking to offer credible lines of thought to further our field and our standing – in the absence of evidence to support common theories, why continue to perpetuate them? WHy not focus on and explain hypnosis and therapeutic approaches according to solid principles we do have? I have not claimed that science has all the answers, simply suggested that we need “more” scientific thinking to help in a number of ways.

Scientific thinking is not about being “right” necessarily – it is about being able to make the most accurate predications and most responsible decisions based upon the best available evidence. Science also yields without quibble when new findings supercede existing ones. That means moving on, making progress, and not just digging heels in to the same belief for eternity regardless – as so many in our field tend to do regarding a couple of themes you have mentioned here. That keeps us rooted in the fringes and unable to climb out of the darkness.

Best wishes, Adam.