6 ms·
This conflates "official positions of authorities" with "science". It's like a modern religion, with three tenets: (1) science made everything around us (iPhon
by dilap 6y ago
This conflates "official positions of authorities" with "science".
It's like a modern religion, with three tenets: (1) science made everything around us (iPhones and airplanes!) (2) we speak for science (3) therefore you must believe our conclusions.
But in fact, that's the opposite of a proper scientific attitude, which always admits doubt, and believes experiment over authority.
As for why authorities are increasingly losing trust, I think it's because they've been rather unreliable recently.
To use just one glaring example, the official advice on masks went overnight from, "they're useless!" to "you're killing people if you don't use them!".
Both positions were condescendingly presented as "the science". A lot of people will start to lose trust when you so glaringly contradict yourself in such a rapid amount of time.
In general, the approach seems to be when crafting public advice to not worry about presenting an accurate picture of our current knowledge, but just pick a position, pretend we are certain it is true, and hand it down as the infallible words of Science. (See also: our ever changing dietary recommendations.)
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- StavrosK 6y agoThe mask thing was a Noble Lie to prevent PPE shortages: https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/yes-experts-will-lie-to-you-sometimes https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/yes-experts-will-lie-to-yo... I agree that that erodes trust, but it was for "a reason".
- dqpb 6y agoI’ve found it very hard to find the original news sources saying not to wear masks, despite remembering how prevalent that messaging was.
- acdha 6y agoHere’s reasonably old document repeating the N95 & exposure concerns. It definitely happened but I think there’s some selective memory feeding a lot of the criticism. https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/04/dont-panic-the-comprehensive-ars-technica-guide-to-the-coronavirus/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/04/dont-panic-the-compr...
- HonestOp001 6y agoThen look at astral codex for the matter, he called it out as a noble lie and had the documentation. The larger issue is how the “science” changed on the whim of the politically expedience of it all. Look at hydroflouriquine, the drug is perfectly safe, a politico said it was good and wham, just like that opposing political parties say that the doctors cannot use it. The trained medical professionals whose judgment in time of crises are now told by politicians at state levels to not prescribe something. We have lost our minds and the singularity cannot come fast enough.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- alea_iacta_est 6y ago> Noble Lie The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
- sleepysysadmin 6y agoLying is lying. Instead of lying they could have simply said, "Here's how to turn a tshirt into a mask. If anyone can mass produce masks, start now!" No lie needed. In fact the lying made things worse. Saying masks arent needed means people didnt work to produce masks early on.
- rkeene2 6y agoAt the time, it was pretty clear to me from the guidance given that: 1. The efficacy of masks for protecting against SARS-CoV-2 was unknown; 2. People in high risk professions will need to wear them as a precaution even if they might not be as effective as we would like, so the advise to the public was to not buy them for this reason
- eplanit 6y agoSame as the "now you should wear 2 masks" bullshit, right? Tell them to wear 2 because that means they'll at least wear 1, right? These "white lies" are why I'm done with it.
- bad_username 6y agoAn intentionally false statement from an authority on a current event of extreme importance, no matter how noble, is extremely counterproductive, even if we leave aside moral aspects. Indeed, it will cause further statements from the authority be perceived by the public as another potential lie. Since this seems very obvious to me, I can not believe it was a "white lie".
- bryanlarsen 6y agoIf it's real science, you would expect advice to change as more data comes in, so perhaps you should find a better example.
- al_chemist 6y agoCan you share an example of real science where advice changed as more data come in?
- joshspankit 6y agoThe answers to this are so numerous and the logic so obvious that we as citizens may be to close to even see them. Pretty much every bit of advice in the health sciences has been changing over multiple generations (lead and xrays are two easy examples from over 50 years ago)
- psychiatrist24 6y agoBut if you have witnessed that, wouldn't it be prudent to remain doubtful about any new advice coming from the field? After all, the probability of it being thrown out in the future seems to be almost 100%?
- orev 6y agoThis is the fundamental misunderstanding of science. Science is a process, not a library of knowledge. You do the best you can with the info you have right now. Every time science changes, it means it’s getting better. Anything else is religion — wanting to have a single unchanging answer forever. That’s the appeal of religion, and in the short term it might make you feel better, but in the long term it cannot adapt and eventually is out of sync with reality. Science always wins because it can change.
- psychiatrist24 6y agoBut you mentioned things that were flat out wrong or harmful. I think the fundamental misunderstanding is that scientism is science.
- MrBuddyCasino 6y agoAnd the WHO just doubled down on the zoogenesis hypothesis of covid. Yarvin put it best: Covid is science's Chernobyl https://graymirror.substack.com/p/covid-is-sciences-chernobyl https://graymirror.substack.com/p/covid-is-sciences-chernoby...
- rriepe 6y agoI call it "Science with a capital S." It seeks to find and destroy an outgroup, always, like a bad cult. It portrays non-believers as harmful. There's no exceptions. Outsiders are always portrayed as dangerous with many lives at stake. It's never about the science but about rooting out the people who disagree. It's purely a political movement and has almost nothing to do with science. As a religion, it's the worst religion ever. Science is a tool for attaining the truth, not a top-down ideology for defining it. People who adopt the ideology ultimately lose science as a tool.