Dissecting Truth Honestly – Science?

There is a separation between actual scientific truth and peer reviews answers to theoretical hypothesises. Both go under the same monicker: Science

There is no doubt in the observable, repeatable world of the scientific method. Mastering physics has made travel faster and safer. Life expectancy has risen mainly down to the application of the scientific model in relation to understanding the physical body. This all works fine when there is a constant in relation to the scientific method. Organs of the body respond uniformly, like the friction of rubber at varying tyre pressures. This has brought along advancements to humanity we should be proud of, humanity has extended its life to the limits of oxygenation allows. Science name is at times used when it only peer reviewed rather than observable.

What is not truth?

Not truth is an asserted and verified truth with can actualises falsity. The scientific method has its limitations, anything beyond those limitations should not be called science. Assertions from educated minds are welcomed but the label of science in the coming years needs to be brought back to holding its power found in natural sciences. There are branches of science that are effective and also faux science. The power of psychology is based on research of the human experience, whilst it can condition minds to follow routines and train acceptable or profitable behaviour, it is not a science. The subject can be approached from a number of angles and reproduce different elements on psychological analysis. Assertions from psychological examination should be flagged as subjective interpretations.

What the DSM world gained is an ability to group together humans, in a fluid society these people would rarely meet ad would be accepted for their individuality, the modern world doesn’t promote free-thinking and alternatives to the current hegemony. People have become captive bred and raised to follow the guidance on ever increasingly higher definition screens. People haven’t reduced in mental acuity, they have just been trained to not ask certain questions or question certain authorities. To create this world everything requires an explanation, so when it comes to mental health there always has to be a diagnosis. If we could accept that there are no answers or explanations for everything, this would broaden the horizons of humanity. Where currently the next big push is to become ecologically friendly. So rather than being a cancerous growth on nearly every continent on earth, we are going to increase the variety and realise sustainability is the only way forwards. To achieve this certain toxic elements in society need to be highlighted and slowly acted upon.

Societies approach to mental health is flawed currently as each person has individual requirements and when using current psychological tools to interpret the lived experience of another fails. When going to see a doctor the process a human being goes through is similar to the processes used in MK Ultra. There is a projection of authority on the subject surrounding the problem and the course of action to rebuild the experience of the attendee, with additional perspective on the actions needed to be taken to protect life. In MK Ultra they would be programmed with triggers leading to additional actions or return into accepted authority. Stepping away from the current methods employed to help people with their mental health should be slow and still maintained, as they do provide adequate service to catch people with affliction. Although over time rather than person centred the approach has to be individualised with people affectively being their own doctors.

The human experience is too varied to allow another person to interject or rule over another persons independence, society needs to change its structure to begin to facilitate this change. There are many other changes to society, thinking in the right direction is the first step.