Quote:
Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower
|
I find the state of discussion about "science" these days to be very disheartening. It's become tribal, which is the opposite of the point. I think some people feel like it's their duty to "follow the science" when there really is no such thing, and others feel like they have to push back because "the science" can be wrong.
I think it's helpful to consider that weather forecasts are probably a good example of how science works in regard to really complex systems (like virus spread). Meteorologists are reasonably good at giving us an idea of what we think will happen, but just because a weather forecast says it's likely going to rain doesn't mean that it absolutely will.
If rain is in the forecast, it's probably prudent to take an umbrella, and people who do so are likely going to be better off more often than not. However, it's not completely insane to say you're not going to take an umbrella because you don't trust the forecast or that you will just suffer the consequences.
I've said many times that the downfall of debate in the modern age is the lack of nuance, and this is just another example of it. "Science" is a great tool that can generally point us in the right direction, but it's not infallible. I kind of wish more recommendations had probabilities or confidence levels as caveats, but I'm sure that that would just confuse everyone. C'est la vie.