Research conducted in the 80s upon left ventricular function demonstrated the inability of contractile curves published in the medical literature to perform clinical diagnoses. Because of this, an error was suspected in the basic idea of ventricular contraction, and we questioned the accuracy of the volume/pressure diagram posited by Frank and Starling in the early 1900s. In fact, the heart accelerates a mass of blood which is more accurately described by the laws of kinematics, rather than static forces. The observation that such an error should survive so persistently despite the availability of logical and mathematical controls, suggests an interesting question: what is happening for topics that cannot be scrutinized by objective means such as religion and philosophy?