The discovery of the vaccination technique was revealed by Edward Jenner in 1796, which represented the first scientific attempt to control an infectious disease by vaccines, followed by other important studies carried out by Pasteur and Koch, and Sabin, who developed the first technique to attenuate the virus. In recent decades, numerous scholars have begun to create dangerous theories against the effectiveness of vaccines through scientifically invalid or fraudulent studies. This critical review of the literature aims to analyze the main factors that have undermined the credibility of vaccines in the general population, disproved false information and emphasized the benefits of vaccines over the last 200 years. Unfortunately, several studies have been carried out without the proper scientific attention. The most impacting example is the study published by Andrew Wakefield in the Lancet journal who tried to correlate vaccines with the development of autism: this publication was withdrawn from the journal a few years after its publication, but the impact of incorrect scientific studies, fake news, and ambiguous healthcare policies have led to a general adverse opinion about the effectiveness of vaccines. The excess of uncontrolled information is a serious concern during the Coronavirus pandemic. Modern science must tackle this problem with a better willingness to communicate the clinical studies to those who cannot understand medical information. Nevertheless, a reliable science must also limit the distribution of studies that do not meet the basic criteria of methodological rigor and certainty of results in order not to incur confusion in the scientific community.

暂无摘要。

In addition to genocide, slavery, and the dispossession of indigenous people, colonialism, as a form of control, meant the suppression of traditional knowledge. The imposition of Christianity, the modern Western paradigm, and modern science that followed perpetrated this suppression. The universal role held by modern science is supported neither by epistemic nor social aspects. It is ineffective and complicit in the collapse of civilization, and it is worsened by comprehensive and unifying ideas to be reduced to an input-process of technological innovation for the benefit of social control industries such as the military, information technology, communication, or health. Furthermore, it suppresses ancestral knowledge related to health and medicine that may be beneficial and must be researched (stimulant medicines). Coupled with the health industry, it promotes the medicalization of life, spreading uncertainty, anxiety, and unease. Therefore, it is an instrument of neocolonialism that imposes its priorities, supplanting problems in subordinated countries, and extracts substantial resources, which is detrimental to social policies and programs. The biggest objection to the universality of modern science is derived from its empiricist and reductionist nature. Through the practically impossible idea of a unifying and explanatory knowledge, it impedes researchers the understanding of the complexity of the world and their historical moment and to act accordingly. It transforms great creative and liberating potential to submissiveness for the interests of capital and its representatives.
El colonialismo, como forma de dominación, significó, además de genocidio, esclavitud o despojo de pueblos originarios, la supresión de saberes tradicionales perpetrada por la imposición del cristianismo, del paradigma moderno occidental y de la ciencia moderna que le siguió. El carácter universal detentado por la ciencia moderna no se sostiene en lo epistémico ni en lo social; es inoperante con y cómplice del colapso civilizatorio; se empobrece de ideas comprensivas e integradoras para reducirse al insumo-proceso de la innovación tecnológica en provecho de las industrias del control social (militar, informática, de comunicación o de la salud); y suprime saberes ancestrales de la esfera de la salud que encierran beneficios y posibilidades que es preciso investigar (medicina estimulante). Aunada a la industria de la salud, impulsa la medicalización de la vida, preñándola de incertidumbre, angustia y desasosiego. Es instrumento del neocolonialismo al imponer sus prioridades, que suplantan las propias de los países subordinados y sustraen cuantiosos recursos en detrimento de políticas y programas sociales. La mayor objeción a la universalidad de la ciencia moderna deriva de su carácter empirista y reduccionista que, al condicionar la imposibilidad práctica de un conocimiento integrador y explicativo, aleja a los investigadores del entendimiento de la complejidad del mundo, de su momento histórico y de actuar en consecuencia, y transforma la gran potencialidad creativa y liberadora de este enorme contingente en docilidad a los designios de los intereses del capital y sus agentes.

This paper seeks to exhibit and explain, by way of comparison, two ideal kinds of knowledge: knowledge based on classifications according to genera and species, as in Aristotelianism and common sense, and scientific knowledge based on the application of laws of nature. I will proceed by attempting (1) to determine the role that presuppositions play in knowledge in general by means of the distinction between content and form; (2) to describe and explain the main features of both ideal forms of knowledge; and, finally, (3) to analyze the relation between these two forms of knowledge as it is presented in Eddington\'s celebrated discussion of the \"two tables\". I will be critical of the widespread view that modern science is the correct form of knowledge, and that common sense is merely an illusion.

Renaissance was a period full of religious and supernatural concepts and practices distant from the contemporary scientific world. Some erratic behaviors were considered demonic possessions and treated by exorcisms. It is supported by many sources. However, some important sources of the Renaissance point to a different picture. They show trends towards naturalistic explanations of many diseases, including epilepsy. This critical review discusses this approach, using texts by Mondino de\' Luzzi and Leonardo da Vinci. However, more than an historical study, this review considers the passage from religious and supernatural practices to modern science. Contemporary consequences of that passage are considered, considering this Special Issue of Epilepsy & Behavior.

The Conference was organized and supported by: Nei Dan School (European School of Internal Martial Arts), NIB (Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Stem Cell Bioengineering, National Institute of Biostructures and Biosystems, Institute of Cardiology, S.Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna), WACIMA (Worldwide Association Chinese Internal Martial Arts), Arti D\'Oriente(Magazine of Eastern culture and traditions), Nuovo Orizzonte (Taiji Quan School in Florence), Samurai (Journal on Martial Arts), and Pinus (First National Institute for the Unification of Medical Strategies). Nei Dan School (www.taichineidan.com, neidan@libero.it) was in charge of the organization. Future meetings of the Centro studi \'Tao and Science\' will take place in spring 2007 in Firenze and in October 2007 in Bologna. For information: E-mail: neidan@libero.it; web site: www.taichineidan.com, www.taoandscience.com.