5 ms·

The comment thread here, and the national attitude more generally, is the literal embodiment of cognitive dissonance. Science and facts are only useful insofar

The comment thread here, and the national attitude more generally, is the literal embodiment of cognitive dissonance. Science and facts are only useful insofar as they are convenient to our ends. I suppose, in light of the shortcomings of human nature, it would be a lot easier to make the point that needs to be made if we were dropping bombs on coronavirus victims and broadcasting the carnage instead of rolling them up into statistical output. Their crime, apparently, is dying in a way that isn't direct and emotionally resonant enough for other human beings to grasp the magnitude of it.

zarathustreal 6y ago
Painfully true, and very well put. I hope for the day that twitter realizes most of America is not actually on twitter and trending hashtags do not represent the common sentiment.
bagacrap 6y ago
I think you're right that "science" and "data" are only believed when they align with one's views. But people seem to care a lot more about coronavirus deaths than deaths from war, flu, air pollution, traffic accidents, cancer (since screenings are down since lockdown), etc, so I can't agree with you on the other point. Let's not forget that the data is far from all collected, and the science is not settled, wrt either the true impact of the virus or the effectiveness of various responses to it. I don't think it's wise to assume that science will bear out any one particular point of view, once there is better data, more perspective, and a scientific consensus.
- realtalk_sp 6y ago
  You're digressing from the core, indisputable truth: these protests, in the present environment, will result in a significant number of deaths. Sure we won't start to have a sense of just how many until a few more weeks have passed, but we can say with relative certainty it will be "significant". The reason people are dodging this is because it makes these protests morally indefensible, on balance. This is terribly inconvenient if you've entrenched yourself in a particular way of thinking and no longer wish to question it.
  - whymauri 6y ago
    Are all the state-wide openings in May, the opening of casinos, and the festivities of Memorial Day Weekend, of which we are already seeing COVID impacts, more or less morally indefensible than the BLM protests? When all these other non-protest gatherings of people were taking place, were you this outraged? If the answer is no: explain yourself.
    - realtalk_sp 6y ago
      Yes they are morally indefensible. Many of those decisions didn't make sense to me and yes I expressed outrage about it to friends. But your point is also a straw man. For the most part, there are still prohibitions on large gatherings of people. These protests have been blessed as an exception. Why? Because the government's hand was forced by political expediency. In essence, the government has failed to protect the people from themselves. And let me flip the question on you: why do we need to protest so urgently now, during a global pandemic? Why can't it be postponed until after we've resolved that problem and can permit it to go about safely? I'll answer that for you: BLM has found outsized effectiveness because of coronavirus. Because people have more time, and are feeling less economically secure, and are more emotionally vulnerable. They were better primed to respond to the movement and organizers are capitalizing on that at the direct expense of human lives, even if that isn't obvious to them. Worst of all, history suggests that these protests and the consequent loss of life will buy Black people next to nothing. Categorically the wrong solution to a very complex problem.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]

zarathustreal 6y ago

Painfully true, and very well put. I hope for the day that twitter realizes most of America is not actually on twitter and trending hashtags do not represent the common sentiment.

bagacrap 6y ago

I think you're right that "science" and "data" are only believed when they align with one's views. But people seem to care a lot more about coronavirus deaths than deaths from war, flu, air pollution, traffic accidents, cancer (since screenings are down since lockdown), etc, so I can't agree with you on the other point. Let's not forget that the data is far from all collected, and the science is not settled, wrt either the true impact of the virus or the effectiveness of various responses to it. I don't think it's wise to assume that science will bear out any one particular point of view, once there is better data, more perspective, and a scientific consensus.

realtalk_sp 6y ago
You're digressing from the core, indisputable truth: these protests, in the present environment, will result in a significant number of deaths. Sure we won't start to have a sense of just how many until a few more weeks have passed, but we can say with relative certainty it will be "significant". The reason people are dodging this is because it makes these protests morally indefensible, on balance. This is terribly inconvenient if you've entrenched yourself in a particular way of thinking and no longer wish to question it.
- whymauri 6y ago
  Are all the state-wide openings in May, the opening of casinos, and the festivities of Memorial Day Weekend, of which we are already seeing COVID impacts, more or less morally indefensible than the BLM protests? When all these other non-protest gatherings of people were taking place, were you this outraged? If the answer is no: explain yourself.
  - realtalk_sp 6y ago
    Yes they are morally indefensible. Many of those decisions didn't make sense to me and yes I expressed outrage about it to friends. But your point is also a straw man. For the most part, there are still prohibitions on large gatherings of people. These protests have been blessed as an exception. Why? Because the government's hand was forced by political expediency. In essence, the government has failed to protect the people from themselves. And let me flip the question on you: why do we need to protest so urgently now, during a global pandemic? Why can't it be postponed until after we've resolved that problem and can permit it to go about safely? I'll answer that for you: BLM has found outsized effectiveness because of coronavirus. Because people have more time, and are feeling less economically secure, and are more emotionally vulnerable. They were better primed to respond to the movement and organizers are capitalizing on that at the direct expense of human lives, even if that isn't obvious to them. Worst of all, history suggests that these protests and the consequent loss of life will buy Black people next to nothing. Categorically the wrong solution to a very complex problem.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]