It’s Evidence Jim, But Not As We Know It!

I’ve wanted to critique Kate Chatfield’s philosophical diatribe for some time. It can be found on the Society of Homeopath’s (SoH) website.


The main reasons for my interest were that when I first came across this piece I was immediately struck by it’s misrepresentation of clinical evidence and the philosophy of science.


I claim no special skill in philosophy, but a second-year undergraduate course sparked an interest which has stayed with me. I may not be an expert, but I’ve read Popper and Lakatos. I also have a passing acquaintance with the works of Kuhn. So I think I know when someone is not telling it how it is.


Having engaged my attention, the commentary on this piece has ended up being rather long, so I’ve provided an index.

Link