Lobotomy's were viewed to have so much high potential back in the day that they won the Nobel prize.
In true scientific fashion both sides would ideally just stick with the facts.
In true scientific fashion both sides would ideally just stick with the facts.
Or were they backed by evidence?
And then stronger more compelling evidence came out later against?
Thats kind of how science works, its a process of discovery not a set in stone right/wrong.
Things arent as reductionist as you claim, it does people good when they open their world up to that fact.