I can understand not wanting to limit possibility to published data but there certainly is a reason why myself and so many others place different value on scientific verification and personal experience. Science controls for variables, has more stringent control over environment and more rigorous observation as well as peer-review of the results.
When it comes to experiences alone... you have one, untrained, speculative, fallible individual with subjective hopes and expectations amidst an endless margin of error and no checks and balances to determine the validity of the results.
Yet you believe both? That seems a little naive to me. Its all nice to trust people but I don't trust fallible observers. Skepticism leads people to truth... swallowing whatever someone gives you whole without checking first is not a good way to determine validity.
I think you misunderstand what i was saying. I wasnt saying i put equal value on both scientific studies and personal experience. I was simply pointing out that both can benefit you in defferent ways.
I, in no way, "believe" every personal experience I hear to be true. I simply listen to different peoples personal experiences over and over again, and i try to find similarities and patterns throughout the different stories
I by no means, take unproven, unstudied, personal experience reports as truth. I simply use them as a tool sometimes to help me gain another possible perspective.
I personally believe that valid scientific research/studies/and reports are much for valuable when trying to assess a situation or give advice. I was simply pointing out that some peopel automatically assume that everyones personal experience with drugs(or anything for that matter) is automatically worthless simply because that particular experience hasnt been studied scientifically yet.
I understand the difference in credibility between the two and I am always aware of that. maybe i posted my last post in a way where it made it a little hard for you to understand that. and i apologize. But i can guarantee you that I am NOT naeive simply for listening to peoples experiences. But just because I listen, and open my mind to possibilities that havent been studied yet, doesnt mean that I jump to conclusions and believe everything I hear. My point being, there are thousands of "experiences" that people have had that havent been researched using true scientific methods, but just because we havent researched them yet, doesnt mean that they automatically have no merit.
But i still only think of something as fact, when it has proven to be fact. otherwise it is simply speculation.....but i was trying to say that speculation isnt always wrong....it jsut needs to be proven.(allthough, many times, it is wrong of course)
Sry for the misunderstanding
*When i stated that i accept personal experience as well as scientific study as evidence, i didnt mean that i accept them both as fact. A piece of evidence is not fact, atleast in my opinion, it is something you can possibly use to your advantage to better understand a situation or gain a better perspective. I by no means, accept all "evidence" as fact. And I by no means..."swallow anything someone tells me whole" without checking facts first. I simply "use" what someone tells me (personal exoerience) to allow me to view a situation with a wider perspective. I am still speculative on what is true and what is not when someone tells me there experience, but I dont let that limit my horizon of possible outcomes. Because after all, no one can say that every single experience reported that hasnt been proven by scientific study is false and bares no value. Some people actually experience something that help you gain insight into a situation.....but of course, it is always best to seperate fact from personal experience when dealing with any situation.
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
