Untimely thoughts on science and knowledge
- highbrandon202
- May 18, 2020
- 1 min read
Updated: Feb 16, 2021
A constant refrain of politicians during the contemporary crisis has been that they have been that they have been 'following the science'. However, there is no one science to follow. 'Science' comprises many disciplines, all of them with different perspectives. This applies to medical science, and to the perspectives of medicine on the current crisis. Science, or any other branch of knowledge, is not a textbook to which one can turn for ready answers. It is a method, not a corpus of eternal truth. Although the rather belated rediscovery of expertise is welcome, experts in medicine or any other discipline are not shields behind which politicians can hide. Politics is of necessity the constant negotiation of uncertainty, and the navigation of risks. Science cannot offer any element of certainty ; it only offers different perspectives on uncertainty. To the extent that politicians pretend otherwise, they are being extremely disingenuous not only about science (and the nature of knowledge itself) but also about politics. If politicians had decided to consult the history of infectious disease (say, the influenza pandemic of 1918) and had said that they would 'follow the history', that would be self-evidently absurd, because there is no one historical narrative about anything. Why do politicians not think that it is self-evidently ridiculous to assert that they are 'following the science' ?
I was very alarmed by politicians using the phrase 'follow the science' back in March 2020 when number of SARS-CoV-2 patients was in the dozens, not thousands, but for slightly different reasons than management of uncertainty.
The phrase betrays a complete misunderstanding of what science is. The word 'science', after all, just means knowledge. The products of researchers in biology or physics are published papers that are fastidiously free of any ethical judgement or decision (certainly researchers' values are in play when deciding what to study and how, but that is separate from their objective findings). And indeed such products should at least be scrupulous in detailing uncertainties (usually by means of statistical confidence intervals), evidence base, limitations and ideally…
very refreshing and readable, agree with general ideas.
But. Maybe they are using science in it’s wider sense to include human behaviour and when it’s likely people will follow government advice. Getting less likely by the hour. Interesting article in yesterday’s Guardian about how Japanese cultural behaviour (bowing rather than handshaking or hugging, high standard of hygiene, taking shoes off indoors etc) may have aided them in containing CV-19. A much lower death rate. They certainly have the cleanest public toilets and lots of them.
It is nice to read a short blog which is 100% original. Countries are following different policies as they come out of lock down, so they cannot be following the same science. I am looking forward to your next blog.
I totally agree with you. The current government appears to be hiding behind 'the science' - and the scientists who flank them at the absurd daily 'briefing'. How have we come to a place like this in which our elected leaders so easily abrogate their responsibilities - and do so in plain sight and with the support of a large number of people/voters. Never embarrassed about inconsistencies, untruths and occasional nonsense (I can give examples of each of these if necessary) these people have no shame. It is hard to believe, for example, that the Education Secretary is sincere in citing the interests of underprivileged children as his key argument for opening schools to far larger numbers of pupils.
So…