3 ms·

You can have tradeoffs but then you're no longer answering scientific questions but either a political question or a question of personal belief (ie, "which you

• ghaff 6y ago
  Of course. Science can help you e.g. estimate risk. But balancing that risk against other factors has to be a political and/or personal tradeoff. There's no way it could be otherwise. Science, even if it could provide perfect information, doesn't have the tools to make policy decisions. Whether schools should be wide-open, hybrid, or remote only is not a scientific decision although, of course, whatever scientific data is known or thought to be known should of course factor into any decision.
  • zaarn 6y ago
    That is exactly the point but also somewhat auxiliary; when people say things like "science can't answer these questions" the issue is either that the question is already politically loaded or requires a tradeoff between two opposing goals, where this balance is policy not science. Science can't solve all our problems but at the same time, it doesn't mean we should discount science when trying to solve them. When I ask people to listen to science, that doesn't mean "have science solve the problem entirely" but "all viable solution maxima are scientifically solvable, the tradeoff is ethical". If someone suggests a solution that is not scientifically solvable, then it ought to be disregarded or considered for what is it is; pure politics, something you have to think about morally and ethically.