Hey Science: Stop Gaslighting Us
It's time to break from the cult of Scientism.
Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash
August 8 2020
If you are someone who likes to do their own due diligence when it comes to important mainstream scientific issues, take in a broad range of opinions, before coming to your own conclusions: I have some bad news for you. You are soon to be on the wrong side of history. Maybe even a danger to public health. Stop it: now is not the time. It may never be again.
That is, according to this recent Forbes article commanding us not to do our own research when it comes to science, which if you are somewhat active on the socials, you must have surely seen shared at least once by now.
If you have shared this article, then I have no doubt your intentions are pure and come from a place of frustration with the state of open rebellion against mainstream science. But take it from someone who you are probably trying to bring around to your side by sharing an article like this: to misquote Obi-wan Kenobi, this is not the article you are looking for.
I’m not even sure where to start — the gross simplification of the complexity of the vaccine issue, with nigh a supporting reference to support its sweeping claims in sight, should be a red flag for anyone who has done even the smallest amount of independent research into this subject. A similar approach is taken for each of the main scientific issues raised: fluoride, climate change and the various interrelated aspects of the COVID-19 response are each treated with both arrogance and a seeming wilful naivety to the legitimate questioning or dissenting opinions that exist.
The sad and self-defeating reality of this approach is that it changes no-ones mind, and only acts to increase polarisation: those who have taken the author’s word and never investigated these issues for themselves will have their narrow world view confirmed, whilst those who have acquainted themselves with their inherent complexity will most likely be out the door before concluding remarks.
In total, this article is a classic act of paltering: taking a truth and hiding it within a broader insidious lie for the purposes of misdirection or outright deception. In this case, we have the undisputed and undoubted need to listen to experts in their fields, but shrouded in the intellectual and moral fallacy that we should unquestionably listen to and obey scientific authorities without even entertaining contrary opinions that exist on a topic.
I do wonder how many of the people who shared this article actually read it in its entirety and took the time to consider how incredibly problematic and untenable this argument is. Our capacity for critical thinking is a skill: it only becomes manifest when practiced. To simply accept truths unquestioned gives us no practice, it simply trains us to become mindless drones that can be conditioned to follow the dictates of those who benefit from our compliance and submission.
Look: of course there are quacks, grifters and snake oil sellers out there who feed on the distrust of established science for their own benefit. But there are many people who hold differing scientific opinions — a growing number of people — who are not: they too are experts in their field, who hold legitimate if unapproved views worth hearing, and have often taken great risk to their reputations and livelihoods to voice these contrary opinions. Do we really have to invoke the historical fact that a good proportion of the people who contributed most to our intellectual progression were initially shunned by the establishment?
So of course they deserve to be heard and taken seriously, if for no other reason that this is what democracy requires. But this article bears little trace of democratic ideals, and would be more at home in Communist China. It acts, through its chosen words and phrases, to silence these dissenters to Scientism, extinguish their voices and remove their credibility almost absolutely. It has barely disguised disdain for these people, along with any layperson who seeks to dares to form their own opinion on a scientific matter.
With this tone established in the first few paragraphs, followed by several thousand words laden with smugness and condescension, the author of course decides to finish with a command for us to show humility. One must only assume the irony is indeed completely lost.
But again, please do not let my lack of respect for this piece of opinion take away from the main point: I do understand the underlying sentiment. I want mainstream science to re-take its rightful place as the authority we can all confidently turn to to guide our decision making processes, and I evoke my long dormant Bachelor of Science to show I’m on your side. So I won’t direct this at you, or at the person who wrote this article, who is merely a puppet for this mainstream agenda of unquestioned compliance. I’ll direct it where I think the real problem is: at science.
Hey science. Stop it. Stop acting like you are deserving of our unquestioned trust, when you so clearly aren’t.
Don’t blame us for your problems. Don’t gaslight us into thinking that our right to ask questions and search for our own truth is the reason we are in this mess. That’s what the God of the Old Testament did. Actually, that’s what an abuser does. Stop acting like an abuser.
Don’t tell us to show humility by accepting your version of the world when you have so clearly failed this own test yourself. This acts to only cement the views of an increasingly large proportion of the public that we have made the right decision to break away from this toxic, abusive relationship. Take responsibility and realize that you are actually at fault here, through your corruption by money, politics and your own hubris.
Don’t put this global warming issue on us, when you created it in the first place. We aren’t the ones who have caused massive increases in greenhouse gas emissions — that was the act of corporations and governments hell bent on economic growth, enabled by your intellectually-driven advances that were allowed to reign untethered from social and environmental — even spiritual — considerations.
Don’t despicably minimize and sideline the issue of adverse vaccine reactions, something that has impacted millions of children and families around the world and which may well go down as one of our greatest scientific failings. Ever stopped to think that it is your own failings to produce safe vaccine schedules that has contributed to the rising tide of anti- and vaccine questioning individuals? Of course not, you victim blame like every good abuser: pointing the finger at mums with too much time on their hands.
That’s not to say that we aren’t at fault at all. Because we are, although ironically it is for the exact thing that we are being told to do in this article: the fact that we, including myself, have for too long unquestionably acquiesced to those above us who we assume know better and want the best for us.
It’s time to break away from the cult of Scientism: this modern, western and in many ways unmistakably white form of materialistic religion that has taken hold. It’s time to realize that science is actually the one who has failed us. It’s time to take responsibility for our own capacity to discern truth, to listen to contrary opinions, even to go as far as questioning scientific positions that have come to be held as gospel.
Want us to trust you again? Do something to earn that trust.
Give proper attention to adverse vaccine reactions rather than dismissing its significance and silencing the suffering it has entailed.
Give due credence to the effectiveness of natural medicines and alternative therapies that have long been used by cultures around the world, but that you still seem to believe you know better than.
And, for crying out loud, please get over your personal vendetta against Hydroxychloroquine, it is getting embarrassing and it is costing lives.
Maybe then we can talk. But until then, you better believe I’m gonna keep doing my own research, even more so now that I know it’s exactly what you fear the most.