Is evil rational?

[Francisco Ferrer]

After al-Qaeda was very quickly and efficiently defeated in 2011, they continued to be defeated in 2012-2014. Current Pentagon plans call for their defeat to be extended into the foreseeable future.

[Jules Troy]

Yeah rebuilding the state was stupid and a waste of time andddd further lives as they continued to kill us with ied's..

[william.scherk]

I don't think testimonials are particularly useful in medicine, except perhaps for marketing Miracle Cures. The site you linked to is an advocacy site. The guy who runs it has zero medical training or credentials ... and is in the business of selling.

I merely put up the first site on my search that appeared to explain chelation to

Brant because he indicated that he did not know much about it.

I do not vouch for that site.

I apologize if I seemed to jump down your throat unnecessarily. I did not know you quoted from a link returned by Google. I thought that this was your go-to site, and that it was meant to be the support for your earlier assertion.

A site I link to now and again is Quackwatch, run by obsessive skeptic and retired psychiatrist Stephen Barrett. His tone is sometimes too harsh for me, but his documentation is usually solid, transparent and revealing. If anyone is interested in that (disputed) boundary territory where quackery and responsible medicine meet and frolic -- on the topic of Chelation Therapies --here's Barrett's article on regulatory action taken against chelators/medical claims, and another page that gives a panoptic table of contents leading to other research and findings.

I will vouch for Barrett's relentless attention to reason.

There are ways and means to rationally approach medical claims, and to best apply reason in areas of contestation. I want to point out where evidence is mushy and quackery abounds, not necessarily come down on an OLer's head. I must sound like a rather sour Sam sometimes, banging the alarm and pointing out what I think are shoddy intellectual goods. Oh well.

I do vouch for what I observed over several years and probably over 150 people

as random as you could get, racially, culturally and nationality were significantly

helped.

So you say, Adam, but how could any of us attempt to assess or analyze your 'observations'? You wrote that you "would speak with the other patients of Dr. Corsello ... To the person they swore by the therapies." As evidence, it is unexaminable.

The case of Dr Serafina Corsello is quite an interesting one. As you noted, her license to practice medicine was revoked in the state of New York. What you did not note, perhaps because you did not follow the case, is that Corsello did not contest the allegations against her practice. She did not contest sixty-nine allegations of professional misconduct.**

In any case, getting the marginal/quackish chelation products is not a problem in the USA. The prescriptions are to drugs whose contraindications are well-known. There is perhaps a 'safe' level (even if no diagnosed condition besides heavy-metal poisoning is in play) within some parameters, thus responsible practitioners are vigilant for side-effects, and adequately assess the ability of the patient to tolerate the 'chemotherapy.' So a prudent quasi-medical practitioner can safely bleed and top up his or her marks, without killing the lot off.

The good doctor died in 2009. Here she is in a short video off her website. In it she explores the connection between age spots and the death of brain cells.

___________________

** what she did not contest, apparently, were charges of gross negligence, gross incompetence, negligence on more than one occasion, fraudulent practice, unwarranted tests or treatment, false report, improper delegation of professional responsibilities, failure to exercise appropriate supervision, abetting the unlicenced practice of medicine, abandoning a patient, moral unfitness, failure to maintain records.

[Gary Fisher]

Yeah rebuilding the state was stupid and a waste of time andddd further lives as they continued to kill us with ied's..

Yeah, let's just let turn into another Somalia. What could possibly go wrong?

[moralist]

Says who?

He did not escape what he became as the result of what he did... and neither do you... nor I... nor anyone else on this Earth.

Greg

Stalin died of a stroke March 5, 1953, at the age of 74.

That's says absolutely nothing about how he died.

What does "He did not escape what he became as the result of what he did" mean?

Where is the evidence for all this?

The evidence is you cannot escape what you become as the result of what you do... and neither can I... and neither can anyone else.

...and like all double edged truths, this cuts both ways.

Greg

[moralist]

Yeah rebuilding the state was stupid and a waste of time andddd further lives as they continued to kill us with ied's..

If the US military presence had not been withdrawn by Obama in defeat from Iraq... there would be no ISIS today.

Do you realize that he promised the enemy that US soldiers would leave and never return?

So all they needed to do was wait...

Greg

[Jules Troy]

Yeah rebuilding the state was stupid and a waste of time andddd further lives as they continued to kill us with ied's..

If the US military presence had not been withdrawn by Obama in defeat from Iraq... there would be no ISIS today.

Do you realize that he promised the enemy that US soldiers would leave and never return?

So all they needed to do was wait...

Greg

[Jules Troy]

Do you realize that if the US had left Saddam in power there ALSO would have been no IS today.

[Selene]

I do vouch for what I observed over several years and probably over 150 people

as random as you could get, racially, culturally and nationality were significantly

helped.

So you say, Adam, but how could any of us attempt to assess or analyze your 'observations'? You wrote that you "would speak with the other patients of Dr. Corsello ... To the person they swore by the therapies." As evidence, it is unexaminable.

The case of Dr Serafina Corsello is quite an interesting one. As you noted, her license to practice medicine was revoked in the state of New York. What you did not note, perhaps because you did not follow the case, is that Corsello did not contest the allegations against her practice. She did not contest sixty-nine allegations of professional misconduct.**

** what she did not contest, apparently, were charges of gross negligence, gross incompetence, negligence on more than one occasion, fraudulent practice, unwarranted tests or treatment, false report, improper delegation of professional responsibilities, failure to exercise appropriate supervision, abetting the unlicenced practice of medicine, abandoning a patient, moral unfitness, failure to maintain records.

William:

That was beautifully done.

She asked me to be involved in the case and I read the complaint, conducted my

analysis and presented how she should respond and that she should counterclaim.

I also wanted to remove the case to Federal District Court.

The attorneys thought that would just infuriate the State of New York and the State

Licensing Board.

Sadly, she packed up and went back to her homeland.

Quite a hit job.

Also a very dedicated and sensual lady.

A...

[Brant Gaede]

Like barbers doctors should not be licensed.

--Brant

etc.

[moralist]

Do you realize that if the US had left Saddam in power there ALSO would have been no IS today.

Do you realize that the result of continued US military presence in Iraq was a government (however imperfect) which was freely elected by the Iraqis themselves? Or don't you regard a government elected by the people as being better than a dictator?

That upward growth process ceased when Obama declared defeat and withdrew our troops...

...and now you have a death spiral.

Greg

[Francisco Ferrer]

The evidence is you cannot escape what you become as the result of what you do... and neither can I... and neither can anyone else.

...and like all double edged truths, this cuts both ways.

Greg

If this was true of Stalin, produce some evidence to back it up. I want to know exactly how Stalin "became" as the result of what he did. In the absence of evidence the claim is bogus.

[Brant Gaede]

The evidence is you cannot escape what you become as the result of what you do... and neither can I... and neither can anyone else.

...and like all double edged truths, this cuts both ways.

Greg

If this was true of Stalin, produce some evidence to back it up. I want to know exactly how Stalin "became" as the result of what he did. In the absence of evidence the claim is bogus.

My feeling about bad, evil, stupid tending and non-cognitive people is that many of them can function by compartmentalizing many things and rationalizing away self-revealing understandings that would stop them in their tracks. Even normal people--considered "normal"-- can do this with their religious beliefs. They divide the world into God and man and do in the world what man should do if "man" was an atheist. The religious nut puts it all into a blender and what comes out you don't want to drink. I don't think Rand understood this, even unto the politics, so she thought Cuba would "collapse" if left to its own, unsanctioned devices or Stalin and Hitler ended up all screwed up inside for their psychological deportments. For Hitler, the only reason he went bonkers--to the extent he did--was his options went from many to none (except) suicide (quite "rational" for him, BTW) as his power and Germany's power collapsed as enemy forces closed in. What's notable about Hiter is how much he did that was outright stupid, including sacrificing whole armies, invading Russia and declaring war on the United States. Nazism was not about Hitler so much as Germans putting up with him and it. There is Rand's "sanction of the victim" kicking in in all its bloody glory.

--Brant

[BaalChatzaf]

Up until the shooting war in Poland the German people did more than "put up with Hitler". They cheered him and adored him. He got back "German honor" without firing a shot. Then the real war started and with three years the Germans learned what that meant for them.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[moralist]

The evidence is you cannot escape what you become as the result of what you do... and neither can I... and neither can anyone else.

...and like all double edged truths, this cuts both ways.

Greg

If this was true of Stalin, produce some evidence to back it up.

The evidence is your own life, Frank... and you can't produce any evidence that Stalin was not subject to exactly the same moral causality that you are!

You deny the moral principle that what you are is the result of what you do operates in your own life exactly the same as it does in the lives of others. And that denial of moral causality in your own life can only be done with an abysmal lack of self reflection.

Greg

[Selene]

This is in response to Brant's Post # 150 supra...

I believe that, as an individual, I can make the choice of who I choose to deal with.

If an individual wants to be licensed, or, certified, that would be the individual's choice.

One could advertise their services as "licensed," or, hang out a "shingle" that says unlicensed.

A...

[william.scherk]

Like barbers doctors should not be licensed.

I think doctors should be licensed, insofar as a college of physicians or other professional body determines the criteria for membership. For me, it's a marker of professional standards. It substitutes for a personal assurance of medical ethics, medical training, medical specialization, continuing education, and flags the licencee as having the minimum basic competence as service provider.

In the eventuality of a complete laissez-faire economy, however that might occur, professional bodies would probably be free to continue their associations and, I expect, free to maintain all aspects of a modern guild -- control of membership, arbitration of disputes, internal discipline.

Like Brant, I can offer a fuller explanation on demand.

As for barbering, this is also a relatively ancient guild. A barber's licence is another certificate of minimum competence. I always choose a barber over a hairdresser, for in British Columbia, barbers must learn old and out of style haircuts, the pedestrian and the arcane. When I see the rotating cylinder that is the professional trademark, I know with relative certainty that the person under the pole knows his business.

(In the advent of a Randian utopia, in a distant tomorrow, barbers and doctors and their guilds might lose privileges and powers incrementally, during the massive work of de-regulation and de-legislating of insanely large bodies of law that curb and crimp human activities.

I can sort of imagine the steps that would clear the thickets in the health and wellness fields, but while imagining, I think revoking guild powers will be a hard-fought and lengthy process. I expect that the last hold-outs of laissez faire de-legislation will be in areas of 'public health.' I expect the last government agencies to disband (not merely privatize) -- and the last laws to be done away with -- will be those that purport to protect public health. This would likely include 'pure food and drug' laws, and continued enforcement of regulations on selling 'cures,' 'supplements,' medical devices/services. Charlatans, dangerous quacks, medical frauds and otherwise predatory actors -- I hope there will be some remnant remedies in the utopian regime, under some remnant common-law. Like a court specialized in dealing with those who misrepresent their credentials and knowledge and 'cure rate.'

On another angle, of the same span of years or centuries as we transition to Objectivish utopia, I can also imagine resistance from another guild -- the lawyers. How will their mighty profession be brought out from its governance by 'law societies'? How might its privileges be withdrawn, and how might the edifice of common-law be reduced to its properly utopian size?)

[Selene]

I am fine with that William.

However, a person should be able to clearly state that the individual is not

certified/licensed _______ by the guild and choses to practice that way.

[Jules Troy]

Do you realize that if the US had left Saddam in power there ALSO would have been no IS today.

Do you realize that the result of continued US military presence in Iraq was a government (however imperfect) which was freely elected by the Iraqis themselves? Or don't you regard a government elected by the people as being better than a dictator?

That upward growth process ceased when Obama declared defeat and withdrew our troops...

...and now you have a death spiral.

Greg

[Jules Troy]

You get the government you deserve. It is not the west's responsibility. It is that countries responsibility. Clearly it's own people are not yet deserving of the responsibility of a Republic or the citizenry would rise up no matter the cost and destroy IS on its own. The fact that many of its own citizenry allow or have sympathies to IS is a clear indication that no matter what the west does to destroy IS the intended Iraqi/Syrian people who it is intended to benefit will not appreciate it and just hate the west more for interfering. What will happen? IS will just morph into yet another terrorist uprising. Today's moderate rebels are tommorrows extremists. Round and round it goes. Either get off the pot and nuke the shit out of all of them or just pull the fuck out and let them kill one another. No aid no arms no medical no food, just tell them "hey we fucked up by trying to help you but your hopeless so we are done with the ME forever" seeya, just leave us alone or else.

[Brant Gaede]

"All of them" Jules is 1.6 billion Muslims--or did you mean a smaller category? As bad as you might imagine things to be, you don't need to default into this fulmination.

--Brant

[Wolf DeVoon]

... just pull the fuck out and let them kill one another. No aid no arms no medical no food ... seeya, just leave us alone or else.

To me it's a question of jurisdiction. It ends at Cape Cod and Key West. I can't even explain why we have a base in Cuba.

Besides, we have much bigger strategic problems:

"Russia is already more isolated than at any time since the Cold War" - President Barack Obama, August 2014

"China will never support or join recently imposed sanctions against Russia" - China President Xi Jinping, September 2014

[william.scherk]

I am fine with that William.

However, a person should be able to clearly state that the individual is not

certified/licensed _______ by the guild and choses to practice that way.

That's the whole issue right there, for me: who can justly represent themselves as a "Doctor of Medicine."

This is quite important, because MDs are among a very select group who are able to prescribe drugs. In Canada this includes -- with certain restrictions -- nurse practicioners, dentists, podiatrists, midwives and veterinarians (though the last cannot prescribe for humans).

The ability to prescribe scheduled drugs and prescribe medical tests and treatments up to and including surgery -- these are all restricted to members of the officialized guild/s. (I understand in some jurisdictions in America that psychologists have some prescribing authority).

Now, what happens presently if you do not have an MD (or other prescribing authority) -- you do not enjoy the privileges of that certification.

In America as in Canada, a desire to be a primary/tertiary practitioner does not mean that only MDs can practice, or 'put out a shingle.' You can become a doctor of chiropractic, a naturopath (ND), or an osteopath (DO), and so on. Some of these certifications follow a similar rigorous path of education and specialized training, some do not. Some are replete with crank institutions, bogus degree mills and so on.

I personally do not want any unlicensed person to be free to offer any medical services whatsoever.

-- in the case of the good doctor Corsello, the power to revoke medical credentials is not held by guilds but by statutory authority (in Canada, it is the guilds who often have this role). Where should that authority rest, in the Randian universe -- with the guilds, or in independent tribunals, or via quasi-judicial authorities such as the New York State Board for Professional Medical Conduct? How should professional misconduct, incompetence and fraud be 'managed' in an ideal Objectivish society?

Adam, earlier you wrote about your involvement with Corsello's case before the SBPMC. Do I understand you correctly to mean that your advice was counter to her lawyers? You advised her to answer the charges in writing as required, whereas the lawyers (or Corsello herself) chose not to answer, chose to offer no evidence, witnesses, documentation in her defense?

(of course you don't have to volunteer information to me, but I am left wondering if you were still counselling her before her appearance at the 'penalty phase' of proceedings. Additionally, I don't understand how the case could make its way to Federal courts -- Corsello chose not to lodge an administrative appeal of her de-licensing, as far as I can tell.)

Edited September 24, 2014 by william.scherk

[Francisco Ferrer]

The evidence is you cannot escape what you become as the result of what you do... and neither can I... and neither can anyone else.

...and like all double edged truths, this cuts both ways.

Greg

If this was true of Stalin, produce some evidence to back it up.

The evidence is your own life, Frank... and you can't produce any evidence that Stalin was not subject to exactly the same moral causality that you are!

You deny the moral principle that what you are is the result of what you do operates in your own life exactly the same as it does in the lives of others. And that denial of moral causality in your own life can only be done with an abysmal lack of self reflection.

Greg

My life is not Stalin's life. Even if you proved that I suffered ill consequences from performing some evil act (which you have not), it does not follow that the leader of a foreign country, 5,000 miles away, 60 years ago suffered repercussions for the crimes he committed.

You claim that my self-reflection is abysmal because I see no "moral causality," i.e. automatic consequence for crimes.

Now all you have to do is prove that that your own self-reflection gives you perfect knowledge of the mental state of every member of the human species after they have committed a transgression.

Show this and you will have made your case.

[Brant Gaede]

The problem is not proving a case but having something to work with in your own life. In spite of criticisms he deserves for his truncated methodology, Greg has something one can work with at least personally. That's the only way you can approach a pure empirical proof. You won't get there, of course, so you switch on the deduction for additional working confirmation. You end up in a state of tentative, not proved, knowledge. You cannot prove anything like this either way, but we can't use your way at all. "Proof" is a logical deductive construct not found in science. Science is anti-thetical to "proof," "proved" and "proven."--not philosophy nor the philosophy of science. Note the later is not working science, only logical axiomatic verbalizations. That is, science and its philosophy are two different but non-contradictory things stacked up with science on top of its necessary foundation.

--Brant