Science Isn’t Going Down Without a Fight
What makes Trump so good at his game is that, like a master magician, he knows how to keep the audience focused precisely where they’ll be unable to see what’s really going on. Look what’s happened in the past few weeks. Environmentalists were up in arms about tapping Rex Tillerson to lead the State Department, then the approval of the pipelines, followed by the destruction of the EPA, then the appointment of Neil Gorsuch, and now the prospects of World War III. Even the most dedicated supporter of climate change mitigation has to prioritize dealing with a problem that could cause catastrophic effects to our civilization in the next few days over those that will unfurl over several decades.
Trump’s prowess as a master of deception combines this misdirection with an infinite capacity to tell bald-faced lies, which works very well with an audience who doesn’t distinguish too well between truth and fiction, even on a good day. Many of his supporters are too ignorant to know the difference, and, of course, others don’t really care.
Fortunately, many of our scientists are fed up with Trump’s war on facts, as described in this excellent piece: Why scientists are fighting back. We’ve had enough of Trump’s war on facts. It may be tough to imagine a mild-mannered university professor angrily demanding that our society get itself back on track before it’s too late, but that’s precisely what’s happening.
Our education system is partly to blame. I was fortunate, through grade 10 which I completed in 1954, to be educated in the public school system in Manitowoc, Wisconsin. Some of our classes included material which, I am sure, was intended to teach us to think rationally and clearly and not to be deceived by propaganda.
We studied syllogisms and learned how when the major and minor premises were totally abstract people had no difficulty reaching the correct conclusion. However, when the major and / or minor premise contained emotionally laden material, people often failed to reach the correct conclusion. We learned that when pictures of women were rated for beauty the names attached to the pictures greatly influenced the ratings. We also studied propaganda and learned how it could be used to deceive people.
Missing were how to use statistics and the importance of double blind studies. However, at that time, the science of statistics was less advanced and double blind studies were not yet commonly used.
It seems to me that if schools thoroughly taught the above and taught students how to think rationally and clearly that we’d be better off. Not that doing so guarantees that all students would always think rationally and clearly, but surely it would help.
Craig,
Wow, that’s quite a rant ! But for someone demanding factual accuracy, you seem to practice a curious disregard for factual accuracy.
Let’s cut through all the hysterical rhetoric and examine some of your more strident assertions:
1) President Trump is a “as a master of deception” your evidence is his support for pipelines once in office ! What the ….? Trump loudly proclaimed his support for pipelines through out his campaign, and to his credit, acted promptly to keep his campaign pledge. Hardly “deceptive” !
2) “Trump caused the destruction of the EPA”.
The EPA still exists, it’s just a less secretive organization, less easily influenced by the Executive and more accountable to Congress. None it’s power has been removed, although the growth of a “politically activist” EPA has been curbed. (Bringing the EPA back to conform with federal law).
3)[ Trump ] is about to provoke World War 3 ! Now that’s really serious !
Well it would be, if it wasn’t a complete fantasy !
The only likely belligerent is a small backward nation with no allies and a very powerful enemy (South Korea). In comparison to previous US Presidents, President Trump’s responses have been restrained, incisive, and effective.
Sooner or later,the North Korean regime must be deterred from developing long range nuclear weapons. No one disagrees that the policy of “talking”, sanctions etc, hasn’t worked. Even the PRC, North Korea’s neighbour and main benefactor, has grown weary of North Korea’s duplicity and wouldn’t intervene in an armed conflict.
World War 111 ? It’s not really a World War when it’s just a war in one little rogue state, is it eh ?
Given the irrational tone of your rhetoric, long on abuse and wild unsupportable accusations, but short on factual accuracy, you appear to be in the position of “Mutare nomen, et describe tibi ” ( “change the name and you describe yourself “)