03 Oct Tal Bachman – Observations on the Worship of ‘Science’ and Experts
Tal Bachman is a serious thinker; his latest post here is actually part XXII of a series exploring transgenderism. (We posted a few of the early parts of the series, here, here and here, but several parts of the series went too deep into the weeds for our tastes. But his latest includes astute and necessary questioning of just what is or ought to be considered science–and who ought to considered a trustworthy ‘expert’–in this era.)
From the article…regarding ‘climate science‘ (helpful links):
Not even Lewis Carroll trapped in an opium-fueled fever dream could imagine the amount of corruption, racketeering, profiteering, cynical emotional extortion, and fraud which has saturated the “science of climate change” industry for decades.
Regarding ‘covid science‘:
From Anthony Fauci on down, public health authorities around the Anglosphere have lied—or at least, been starkly wrong about—almost everything to do with this virus. That includes everything from how the virus originated, to how its home lab was funded, to the public health benefits of restricting travel from Wuhan, the lethality of the virus, the efficacy of masks, the efficacy of the vaccines, whether children and adolescents need vaccines, the efficacy of various non-vaccine treatment and therapy options (see also here), the efficacy of lockdowns, the human costs of lockdowns (see also here), the accuracy of the Covid hospitalization and death numbers, the possibilities of vaccine passports and mandates, the risks of the vaccines, and pretty much everything else you can think of.
Science is ultimately about discovering truth and proving it…which in turn requires freedom to speak, debate, challenge and question. Take away freedom, and the quality of ‘science’ in every field, and people’s willingness to trust it, will decline and decline and decline, until it ceases to be a force for good. And Big Tech censorship in the name of science actually undercuts people’s faith in science and scientists.
Bachman’s conclusion:
The problem is that (establishment) science seems, at best, far less a reliable source of knowledge and virtue than any of us would like to believe, and for that reason, its superiority as a guide to human life over the guides it has displaced—venerated tradition, religious teaching, common sense, scripture, and even “the best evidence available”—now seems genuinely doubtful. This feels especially true given that science doesn’t seem to have any kind of reliable internal safeguard against its own hive mind acquiescence, indifference to truth, inhumane excess, saleability, or misuse of science to impose ideology.
…I’ve come to wonder about Enlightenment optimism regarding knowledge, human rationality, science, and moral progress. I wonder about the Enlightenment elevation of scientists to the status of ultimate epistemic and moral authorities. And I wonder if having scientists serve as our culture’s high caste of epistemic and moral authority, rather than some other type of person, is really optimal. They seem very co-optable. That’s a danger when imperial Wokeness is on the march.
Trust the experts? Which ones? Why?