Curently I am reading a book entitled Denialism by Michael Specter. The book discusses how irrational thinking has hindered the quest for scientific truth and progress. Three of the tactics employed by denialists to make an argument look legit are:
1.Conspiracy theories - Suggesting opponents have an ulterior motive for their position or are part of a conspiracy. (neuros, big pharmas, Friedman,etc.)
2.Cherry picking - Selecting an anomalous critical paper supporting their idea, or using outdated, flawed, and discredited papers in order to make their opponents look like they base their ideas on weak research.
3Moving the goalpost - Dismissing evidence presented in response to a specific claim by continually demanding some other (often greater) piece of evidence. In other words, after an attempt has been made to score a goal, the goalposts are moved to exclude the attempt. Thus denialists use the absence of complete and absolute knowledge to prevent the implementation of sound policies, or the acceptance of an idea or theory. (The Buffalo study)
Sound familar?
denialism and CCSVI
Re: denialism and CCSVI
Welcome to ccsvi fold, scorpion!!scorpion wrote:Curently I am reading a book entitled Denialism by Michael Specter. The book discusses how irrational thinking has hindered the quest for scientific truth and progress. Three of the tactics employed by denialists to make an argument look legit are:
1.Conspiracy theories - Suggesting opponents have an ulterior motive for their position or are part of a conspiracy. (neuros, big pharmas, Friedman,etc.)
2.Cherry picking - Selecting an anomalous critical paper supporting their idea, or using outdated, flawed, and discredited papers in order to make their opponents look like they base their ideas on weak research.
3Moving the goalpost - Dismissing evidence presented in response to a specific claim by continually demanding some other (often greater) piece of evidence. In other words, after an attempt has been made to score a goal, the goalposts are moved to exclude the attempt. Thus denialists use the absence of complete and absolute knowledge to prevent the implementation of sound policies, or the acceptance of an idea or theory. (The Buffalo study)
Sound familar?
I guess people need hope. It's not easy be confronted with the idea that there is NOTHING out there that can help you get better. My husband has MS and were kinda newly married, I struggle every day with my demons about him going downhill in terms of health.
If it gives people hope and research is still going on that can help us learn better about CCSVI then thats ok with me.
Denial is not the worst place to be sometimes, reality though...that can suck.
If it gives people hope and research is still going on that can help us learn better about CCSVI then thats ok with me.
Denial is not the worst place to be sometimes, reality though...that can suck.
I cannot begrudge you that outlook one bit.Daisy3 wrote: Denial is not the worst place to be sometimes, reality though...that can suck.
My wife's MS situation is pretty well at the moment which allows me the outlook that, even without the hopes for CCSVI the future is hopeful for people with MS.
Still, even the most optimistic have to admit that the whole MS scene sucks.
I don't have a crystal ball thus no inside information regarding whether CCSVI will or won't eventually prove out, but someone who tries to stay in the middle of the gauge can't help but wonder how all these people who have already allowed themselves to become convinced are going to cope if CCSVI proves to be another interesting bust?
Of course there is the option "A" which is that CCSVI will prove to be everything we hope it to be and at that point these nagging doubts will only show to have been something to keep us occupied in the meantime.
Question (and not a statement) begging an answer although no answer exists.
Is there a point in which unbridled and eventually recognized as unjustifiable hope tips the scale towards benefit or is it always just a matter of holding off the inevitable, eventually requiring full payment plus interest?
I told myself I should keep out of the pointless wrangles about the validity of CCSVI but this statement really moves me:
"Is there a point in which unbridled and eventually recognized as unjustifiable hope tips the scale towards benefit or is it always just a matter of holding off the inevitable, eventually requiring full payment plus interest?"
It reminds me of myself when I was a young man considering becoming a catholic (I am still a staunch atheist). Their is so much hope and anguish here and a stark but poetic expression. Are you really in such pain? Or are you just playing with us?
"Is there a point in which unbridled and eventually recognized as unjustifiable hope tips the scale towards benefit or is it always just a matter of holding off the inevitable, eventually requiring full payment plus interest?"
It reminds me of myself when I was a young man considering becoming a catholic (I am still a staunch atheist). Their is so much hope and anguish here and a stark but poetic expression. Are you really in such pain? Or are you just playing with us?
That statement has haunted me all night because it seems oddly ironic and almost "deja-vuish" that I made almost the same comment in this same spot regarding my wife about four years ago.Daisy3 wrote: Denial is not the worst place to be sometimes
I'm not especially religious but I'm convinced that my wife was blessed with mild MS which makes it hard to separate how much her completely ignoring MS has benefited her long term outcome. Then again maybe she's been doubly blessed by never having seen the full wrath of MS, which has left her able to ignore MS to begin with.
I guess my conviction that my wife's denial has been to her benefit should help convince me that hope, even if it eventually proves to have been false hope, does or at least can have benefit.
Point taken. But I have disagree on "messed up brain by friday" ... remember it was almost friday evening when i was posting. So maybe my brain was messed and I started imagining something impossiblescorpion wrote:I think u took my post the wrong way. :lol:It is not your fault sb487. By friday my neurons are ususally fried(lierally). I was refering to some of the CCSVI fanatics on this board as the denialists.
-sigh- Try being married for less than 3 months and then finding out that your hubby has MS. We had only known each other for a very short time before we agreed to marry.Lyon wrote:That statement has haunted me all night because it seems oddly ironic and almost "deja-vuish" that I made almost the same comment in this same spot regarding my wife about four years ago.Daisy3 wrote: Denial is not the worst place to be sometimes
I'm not especially religious but I'm convinced that my wife was blessed with mild MS which makes it hard to separate how much her completely ignoring MS has benefited her long term outcome. Then again maybe she's been doubly blessed by never having seen the full wrath of MS, which has left her able to ignore MS to begin with.
I guess my conviction that my wife's denial has been to her benefit should help convince me that hope, even if it eventually proves to have been false hope, does or at least can have benefit.
His MS is not terrible yet, and he really is doing the whole 'denial' thing. Right up until he trips, falls, or limps because he has been walking for longer than 20 minutes.
I can't be in denial. I tend to deal with problems head on. This MS thing though, it's killing me. I don't know how to deal with it, and I am aware that CCSVI might not work,but I am still going to part with cash in the hopes that it MIGHT work. Also looking at LDN and antibiotics as a possible treatment option.
If I was in denial myself I think I could risk being in a happier place then where I find myself at the moment.
Sadly,I am a realist. Or,some might say, a cynic.
Take your pick