Arguably, the most dangerous pandemic ever to strike humanity is the plague of deliberate misinformation, mass delusion and unfounded belief which is engulfing 21st Century society.
"A simultaneous ecological, economic, psychological, ghedeistual and cultural collapse has never before been felt by humans on a global scale. There are massive contradictions that have global origins, tearing our societies apart, but they are being felt locally and regionally by people in multiple forms of trouble. It is no wonder that populism, with its slogans and the offer of simple solutions to incredibly complex problems, is the first port of call for those who are worried about the future but have no idea about what is building such pressure in the present. Many are ready to blame the victims of such forces, rather than address the complexity. On top of all that, there is the world of false facts (lies), false data (lies), and fake news (lies) that people have to contend with. Even those who are supposedly leading intellectuals and policy experts apparently find it very hard to discern fact from fiction." Glenn Albrecht, Earth Emotions (2019).
In ‘Dark Age America: Climate Change, Cultural Collapse and the Hard Future Ahead’ (2016), John Michael Greer argues for a return to neo-dark ages for other and even larger reasons than the absolutely critical ones discussed here.
A solid, sarcastic book. His ‘Decline and Fall’ is even better, esp. the amazing audiobook narration by Kristoffer Tabori - best I’ve ever head.
" the most dangerous pandemic ever to strike humanity is the plague of deliberate misinformation, mass delusion and unfounded belief "
Where have I heard that before? Oh, yes, religion. Nowt's changed much in this regard in the last 5000 years really. Probably began when writing began. Even the notion of farming presented as a permanent solution to ecological overshoot and overpopulation is/was a mass delusion.
Why? There are many reputable sources on the topic of disinformation and anti-science. Google Scholar finds 499,000 refs. No need to ignore all of them.
Because science is a process and reality is not determined by consensus or authority. During the pandemic you had "authorities" like (deceitful) Fauci and (misguided) Tyson demanding we follow the consensus with Fauci even telling us, in effect, that he was "the science". And Hotez is an even greater example of someone unable to change their opinion and guidance to the public in defiance of data. The idea of "anti-science" is just one of the tools used by people in authority to control a narrative (encouraging people to dismiss alternative ideas).
You still haven’t explained why, when you discount one commentator, you ignore all the rest. Science is often about finding the best explanation amid a thicket of expert opinion.
At the most fundamental level, there is no “misinformation” or “disinformation”. There is only information and it is up to each person to decide what degree of reliability (probability of reflection of reality) to attribute to each piece of it. If something has been described as misinformation or disinformation then, somewhere, there is a person who has made a decision to describe it that way. If you accept that description then you have surrendered your cognitive autonomy to that person. Often that other person is housed within an “institution” or an “authority”.
Because you (like any other individual) have limited cognitive abilities in many areas, you defer to others reputed to have a greater “understanding” of a particular topic and accept their views on it. But it has become apparent (particularly since the pandemic) that large areas of what society currently understands as “scientific truth” (i.e. labelled as true by a majority of scientists) actually do not reflect reality but these “truths” are tightly held in place by humans’ ability to convince themselves of what is convenient in defiance of conflicting data. This becomes reflected in scientific publication biases – the inability to publish certain ideas – and the scientific career structure. It is largely driven by financial incentives – the ability to hold down a job to feed a family requires acceptance by colleagues and then there is access to large amounts of money from industry to consider. Plus the human drive for societal status of course. One thing that currently greatly facilitates the ability of scientists to hold beliefs that conflict with reality is the pervasive use of computer modelling. The controversy over climate change is a good example of that.
Science is not a perfect system, but it is the best we have got, as its findings are checked independently bu other scientists. If you prefer to rely on blind faith for your medical advice, food choices, water safety, travel etc, feel free. But you'll end up in the C13th.
There is a clinging whiff of apocalypse. Might be the burning oil. Or the impending stillbirth of intellect. One of the two. Definitely more ammonia in the air, and that unnatural silence.
"A simultaneous ecological, economic, psychological, ghedeistual and cultural collapse has never before been felt by humans on a global scale. There are massive contradictions that have global origins, tearing our societies apart, but they are being felt locally and regionally by people in multiple forms of trouble. It is no wonder that populism, with its slogans and the offer of simple solutions to incredibly complex problems, is the first port of call for those who are worried about the future but have no idea about what is building such pressure in the present. Many are ready to blame the victims of such forces, rather than address the complexity. On top of all that, there is the world of false facts (lies), false data (lies), and fake news (lies) that people have to contend with. Even those who are supposedly leading intellectuals and policy experts apparently find it very hard to discern fact from fiction." Glenn Albrecht, Earth Emotions (2019).
In ‘Dark Age America: Climate Change, Cultural Collapse and the Hard Future Ahead’ (2016), John Michael Greer argues for a return to neo-dark ages for other and even larger reasons than the absolutely critical ones discussed here.
A solid, sarcastic book. His ‘Decline and Fall’ is even better, esp. the amazing audiobook narration by Kristoffer Tabori - best I’ve ever head.
" the most dangerous pandemic ever to strike humanity is the plague of deliberate misinformation, mass delusion and unfounded belief "
Where have I heard that before? Oh, yes, religion. Nowt's changed much in this regard in the last 5000 years really. Probably began when writing began. Even the notion of farming presented as a permanent solution to ecological overshoot and overpopulation is/was a mass delusion.
Religion/s didn’t cause the collapse or extermination of human civilization. Failure to act on the megathreats will do.
Talking about "anti-science" is bad enough, but when you quoted Peter Hotez, I just stopped reading.
Why? There are many reputable sources on the topic of disinformation and anti-science. Google Scholar finds 499,000 refs. No need to ignore all of them.
Because science is a process and reality is not determined by consensus or authority. During the pandemic you had "authorities" like (deceitful) Fauci and (misguided) Tyson demanding we follow the consensus with Fauci even telling us, in effect, that he was "the science". And Hotez is an even greater example of someone unable to change their opinion and guidance to the public in defiance of data. The idea of "anti-science" is just one of the tools used by people in authority to control a narrative (encouraging people to dismiss alternative ideas).
You still haven’t explained why, when you discount one commentator, you ignore all the rest. Science is often about finding the best explanation amid a thicket of expert opinion.
At the most fundamental level, there is no “misinformation” or “disinformation”. There is only information and it is up to each person to decide what degree of reliability (probability of reflection of reality) to attribute to each piece of it. If something has been described as misinformation or disinformation then, somewhere, there is a person who has made a decision to describe it that way. If you accept that description then you have surrendered your cognitive autonomy to that person. Often that other person is housed within an “institution” or an “authority”.
Because you (like any other individual) have limited cognitive abilities in many areas, you defer to others reputed to have a greater “understanding” of a particular topic and accept their views on it. But it has become apparent (particularly since the pandemic) that large areas of what society currently understands as “scientific truth” (i.e. labelled as true by a majority of scientists) actually do not reflect reality but these “truths” are tightly held in place by humans’ ability to convince themselves of what is convenient in defiance of conflicting data. This becomes reflected in scientific publication biases – the inability to publish certain ideas – and the scientific career structure. It is largely driven by financial incentives – the ability to hold down a job to feed a family requires acceptance by colleagues and then there is access to large amounts of money from industry to consider. Plus the human drive for societal status of course. One thing that currently greatly facilitates the ability of scientists to hold beliefs that conflict with reality is the pervasive use of computer modelling. The controversy over climate change is a good example of that.
Science is not a perfect system, but it is the best we have got, as its findings are checked independently bu other scientists. If you prefer to rely on blind faith for your medical advice, food choices, water safety, travel etc, feel free. But you'll end up in the C13th.
LOL! What I described is the opposite of "blind faith" but if you are too deeply embedded in the current paradigm to see it, well ....
There is a clinging whiff of apocalypse. Might be the burning oil. Or the impending stillbirth of intellect. One of the two. Definitely more ammonia in the air, and that unnatural silence.
Foolsmoon and the Jester speaks tonight.