If we can trust percentages and probability curves, research studies always leave some people out. For example, this study shows this intervention is effective on 90% of the subjects.

What about the other 10%?

Maybe I am showing my ignorance, but I would think the test of the original research would be to take those 10% of people it didn’t work on and do the same exact study on those 10% and see if all of them fail again.

And then develop things from there.

Does any one do that?

Does anyone know why or why not ?

οΏΌFurther; most institutions and the practitioners of those institutions rely on “evidence based research”. What exactly are they relying upon, do we suspect?

Helping the most people.

Is that better than helping some people, or even any people ?

Does anyone ever ask why the most number is ‘best practice’?

Why is the most the best?

Why are our institutions based upon the most so far as what people trust for practice ?

Are we merely hoping that, say, I am one of the most ?

Author: landzek

My name is Lance Kair, a philosopher, a counselor and a musician who is being questioned.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s