The point is that I prove your point? HaHa, that's kind of funny. :D
I felt invited to tell you my view.
Precisely what do you mean? That my and your knowledge of the unpalatable principles of economics combined with medicine will save us from a majority of superstitious beliefs?
How much do you have to do in practice with people who have undergone the impressive medical-technical possibilities and were independent ever after?
The problem is that it is always those who have to have the medical inventions tried out on them who have no way of resisting: The old, children and the poor. It seems to me that it is not without reason that you attach importance to being educated and wealthy, because there is an inherent awareness that there is a nasty side to it. From that point of view, I don't see any naivety in it.
Countless prepare the way to maintain a theoretical admiration of human knowledge that likes to admire such. However, if you yourself believe that medicine is at an unimagined level of knowledge, then yes, it is not without a certain naivety.
The privilege of healthy people who have not yet undergone continuous medical treatment is to feel invincible and strong for as long as it takes them to be strong. However, those who begin to take precautionary measures to protect themselves against illness simply because the suggestion is promoted that prevention will save them from the fate of becoming ill, overestimate human understanding and knowledge because they ultimately believe they will find answers that reveal the key to life.
In fact, I don't believe that people believe that. But they feel that they are being forced to believe such things and that they basically seem to have no choice.
What is happening in the world at the moment reminds me of myths where a fearful king first tries the shaman's medicine on his subjects to see if they don't drop dead. And even if they don't exactly die, but the medicine weakens them and causes distressful discomfort, this king will be careful not to drink such potion. For he is not concerned with the health of his subjects, but with their numbers, their usefulness and their obedience. To this end, he makes use of the shaman, today's scientist, to impress the crowds who gaze in awe at the holy grail of his art.
I do not deny, however, that impressive medicine seems to exist, though I must say that I have never personally encountered it or that it has not always had its price. What I have experienced is that severe physical pain cannot be relieved by any pharmaceutical product, but requires a humanly devoted body and mind therapy to alleviate pain and eventually be pain-free. Exceptions prove the rule, as you won't find devotion anywhere in modern medicine, just devices, pills, diagnostics and so on. Where there is such a thing as devotion, you have a groundbreaking medical icon.
Coming back to your initial statement that "we have a much greater understanding of life than ever before" I like to throw in that this understanding - at least on the philosophical side - was already there thousands of years ago.
In terms of philosophy, you may be right. I am glad you shared your view. I feel edified for having read it.
Maybe related, maybe not...I injured my foot. I asked the doctor for advice. Before I did so, I did a search online to see where exactly the pain was based on where I felt it so that I could tell the doctor with near pinpoint accuracy where I felt pain. I got the treatment I expected...I say, "my foot hurts." The doctor says, "your foot is injured." I say, "I've taken ibuprofen to cut down the swelling so it can heal and I've elevated it, along with not using it too much." The doctor says, " taking the anti-inflammatory will help it reduce swelling so it can heal. If you do use it, use a brace to support it."
I wasn't surprised to hear the recommendations. I had done the research myself. The cool thing is...I was able to do the research. I know we give medical professionals more credit than I believe they deserve quite often. They've done the research and try to make logical conclusions. There's no magic in that. I also think it's funny when someone takes a personality test which then concludes what personality they have and the person taking the test is shocked at how well the test knows them...it's so dumb! Even then, I do feel our understanding of the medical side of life is advanced greatly. The philosophical...that will always be in debate :)
Thank you for the compliment. I appreciate it very much.
Thank you also for your example.
However, I'd like to add my two cents. The health system is corrupt to the core. A large proportion of doctors have a business and not a practice. The practice consists of the very things you just mentioned and doctors are increasingly forgetting to see the whole person, to examine without relying on a thousand technical diagnostic devices. I would say that the expectation of what medicine can do for you today has risen proportionally with films that always show the ideal case, not without a truly compassionate and infinitely devoted nursing staff. They like to show such images and the people at the screens then believe that this is how it would be.
I did public relations for medical devices and doctors and I can tell you that it was all about prestige, about recouping the investment costs for the expensive and modern devices and the excessive vanity of the doctors. I was appalled by this callous and condescending manner and learned a lot about doctors there.
In terms of their art, I can't see much of it and probably only those who pay them exceedingly well for it get to enjoy this care, which expresses itself mostly in time. The majority is simply a billing factor in daily business.
Skulls ten-thousands of years old have been found and examined in caves, and they found holes drilled in the bones of the skull that indicated medical surgery. I think long before the modern age, people had a lot of knowledge of how to remedy ailments and developed a high art of treating and administering medicine. Operations, for example, can be carried out entirely without anaesthesia by means of hypnosis. But nobody cares because a.) no anaesthetics are used and pharma objects b.) it would reduce costs and profits c.) it would reduce the status of the patient's dependence completely on the medical staff and d.) it would tarnish the god-like image of the surgeons.
I would therefore want to contradict your thesis in parts, because I don't think that we are dealing with a linear increase in knowledge, but that our ancestors already knew a lot and, according to their local and cultural circumstances, were probably even better positioned than we are today. In my view, it is rather something cyclical or characterised by small or even large feedback loops of knowledge and ignorance. Which can also extend over a period of several hundred years or even longer. The other part that agrees with you is that knowledge is more widely distributed and more ordinary people can get hold of information that makes deeper self-study possible.
P.S. say hello to your foot and wish it well :)