The War On Science

The War on Science. Shawn Otto, 2016. 426 pages

There is a lot of interesting and useful information in this polemic, and the problems discussed are carefully and exhaustively researched. I enjoyed parts of it immensely. But it is also pedantic, humourless, preachy and needlessly long. Otto is a founding member of ScienceDebates.org an outfit dedicated to making public officials and politicians answer questions about their stances with respect to evidence-based scientific realities, a highly laudable project. The book was published in 2016 but before the 2016 U.S. presidential election, which election has obviously lead to the greater denigration of facts in political discourse.

The author goes through an extensive history of science and its relationship to authoritarianism and politics from Galileo to the present, and can seemingly find an explanation for every social movement within the context of the science vs anti-science controversies, some of them quite a stretch. The scientific development of the atomic bomb led to deep distrust of science in the general public, resulting the Cold War and the ‘military- industrial complex’ which lead to the flight to the suburbs and the extensive interstate highway system, etc. Much of this is based on some facts but other influences affecting these trends are largely ignored.

The postmodernism of Jacques Derrida and some philosopher’s doubts about the existence of any absolute truths is discussed in detail as it relates to the common erroneous belief that all opinions are equally valid. The Eric Hoffer comment that “All active mass movements… strive to interpose a fact-proof screen between the faithful and the realities of the world” seems very accurate in this context. Journalists’ insistence on balance harms the dissemination of verifiable truth, often aided by vested interests, religious dogma and veiled business interests inculcating doubt about such established facts as evolution, smoking’s link to lung cancer, climate change reality, and the efficacy and safety of modern vaccination. Otto describes the postmodern journalists need to find debate to sensationalize their stories as “journalistic porn.”

Nietzsche questioned the existence of objective truth and proposed perspectivism, which leads to the conclusion that everyone’s opinion is equally valid, even those that are contrary to verified universal observations. Cardinal Ratzinger defended the heresy conviction of Galileo on the basis of cultural relativism.

There are some great insights as Otto describes the common misconceptions about the basic antiauthoritarian essence of the scientific method. Newt Gingrich’s abolition of the Office of Technology assessment in 1994, is described as a Congressional lobotomy. The failure of scientists to explain their work to the public and the common attitude of scientists that it is beneath their dignity to do so resulted in the rejection of Carl Sagan’s application for membership in The National Academy of Sciences because he spent too much time explaining science to the general public.

But as Otto points out “Atmospheric CO2 is the same whether measured by a Somali woman or an Argentinian man.”

Some consequences of ignoring scientifically established observations would be laughable if the consequences were not so tragic. Sarah Palin’s daughter, Bristol, made roughly $1 million, by advocating for abstinence as the only acceptable means of birth control for singles, contrary to all scientific data about effective birth control, ironically after her first unplanned out-of-wedlock pregnancy, and before her second. North Carolina lawmakers have refused to allow sea level projections derived from climate scientists’ best guesses to be used for building and zoning laws.

There are some grammatical errors from lack of proof-reading e.g. “infections from bacteria-resistant bugs.”

I have a personal hang-up about the title and much of the text that puts the issues into military terms, jargon, and analogies. Any social issues that are described with military metaphors- the war on drugs, poverty, terror, battles over this or that, etc., sets the stage for an uncompromising insistence on total surrender by one or the other side. This is hardly the best means of making incremental progress. Far better would be to deploy the art of persuasion and kindly education with an attempt to understand the other side’s view rather than strident finger-pointing. Unfortunately, most scientists are not interested or capable of explaining what they are up to.

This is a timely fact-filled rebuttal to those who promote ‘alternative facts’ and fake news. Worth reading.