I just can’t not write this diary, although I wish it didn’t have to be written. We all know how the adherents of reactionary politics get branded “anti-science” – deservedly so. Problem is, an anti-science trend among the left also exists. It’s less pervasive, but when one suddenly encounters it, it’s both quite dumbfounding (surprise factor) and damaging to discourse, credibility, and any underlying progressive cause involved. One recent example made me write this diary, and it wasn’t even particularly glaring.
More below.
The modern right-wingers don’t like science in general, because on some level it requires thinking. It didn’t use to be that way, various reactionary causes did try to court or co-opt science. Noophobia seems to be a growing trend world-wide though, from Boko Haram in Nigeria to the Tea Party in the US. On the left, at least generally, reality and science are embraced, however, there are several topics that just unleash toxic waves of superstition and voodoo thinking.
The worst is perhaps the subject of vaccination, as in “vaccines are a cause of [insert something nasty]”. Superstition in this case is probably the most damaging, because children are involved, and if their parents listen to some crackpot and do something stupid, the kids may get sick, or even die.
The anti-genetic-modification subject is less clear-cut, because I don’t see any damage in somebody in the first world by choice eating non-GMO-labeled food. Moreover, Monsanto and other agribusiness giants promoting GMO crops are mean and nasty, and there are legitimate arguments for more crop diversity, sustainable farming practices, etc. Opponents of GMO conveniently overlook the fact that there is no proof that GMO food actually killed or sickened anybody, but well… if it’s a superstition, it’s not an immediately harmful one. One could argue that if GMO foods are successfully banned, people in the third world will starve, but I don’t see such a ban. Then, noophobia is a global trend, so what do I know?
The third subject is nuclear energy, and again, the matter is not black-and-white, and some shades of gray also glow in the dark. Fission power is not clean. It should be used, if at all, only with great responsibility, as its misuse has caused nasty accidents, directly killed dozens of people, and probably shortened the lifespans of thousands more. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands killed deliberately by atomic bombs. But what drives me completely up the wall is people saying stuff like “Fukushima reactors will bring global apocalyse” on progressive blogs – and getting uprates for that. Now, mind you, one of the same chaps who said this also said that the Deepwater Horizon leak into the Gulf would destroy life on Earth, or something. It particularly saddens me that in the case of the Japan tsunami, a made-up apocalypse that did not (and will not) happen overshadows a real tragedy and a heroic response of the country that faced it.
In all three cases, people who are affected also cannot distinguish science from crackpottery and voodoo science (hat tip to James Randi). And these are nice, well-meaning people usually. I tried arguing with these affected people or trying to educate them, but in the blogosphere, it just doesn’t work! Detailed arguments, they don’t understand and shrug off, generalized arguments they dismiss and shrug off, and in both cases, they wouldn’t be able to distinguish between, say, the validity of the opinions of Mohamed El-Baradey and Arnie Gundersen on the same subject. Now, I must concede, I try to be patient, but sometimes I even lose patience with my own PhD students (nothing that a five-minute break and an espresso won’t fix). No amount of patience can fix the problem strictly within the blogosphere though.
So, how do we fix it? I wish I could offer a quick fix, but there just isn’t one. Slowly, patiently, through better education. It’s a generational issue, because we have had about two generations’ worth of attack on education here in the US, and the results show.
And what do you think?
1 comment