Why do we give up to the scientific community the role of being the arbiter of what is ‘right’ and what isn’t? Scientific thinking evolves and what was a scientific ‘fact’ ten years ago becomes a footnote in history today. If we measure science and the areas of therapy that scientists deem acceptable by their own standards, they often fail! As just one example, scientists preach objectivity and the value of ‘pure’ research; yet how many studies are at least part, if not fully, funded by the companies behind whatever is being tested, companies who at the same time are making ‘donations’ to the establishments carrying out the tests?

If science is the yardstick by which everything gets approval, could a scientist please explain consciousness to me? Or measure love? Or define the location of the mind? Or give me a read out of the strength of a belief? Science is concerned with the material world and is treading on dangerous ground when it tries to extend its reach.

Scientists love to insist that things can’t be true until they can be verified under controlled conditions in a laboratory. Presumably, when they meet a potential life partner and the relationship is going well, they make decisions about marriage etc based upon their respective gene pools and how likely they are to produce healthy offspring.

Ok, that was tongue in cheek but we don’t need scientists to tell us that something works if it clearly does, or is true if it clearly is. As an example, scientists deride what they call energy medicine. Yet, thousands of people have had pain eased and other conditions helped by complementary health practitioners; which is the more appropriate measurement of effectiveness – the experience of thousands of people, or scepticism of scientists who, under laboratory conditions, have not been able to reproduce those results? As I write this, scientists have just announced that they have identified how the placebo effect works!

Life would be a lot better if, instead of scientists, when faced with something that has worked for a lot of people, concentrated on trying to establish why it works.

Principle d) means that if something works, great; you don’t have to spend time trying to work out how or why, if you don’t want to. It is also an exhortation that if something doesn’t work, try a different approach!