scholarly-squid

[scholarly-squid]

Being involved in science right now is... weird.

First post on this blog! And this one sure is going to be a doozy. Long post ahead.  I mean long.

In this time of COVID-19, being on social media has been what can only be described as an absolute nightmare.  I’ve been studying a STEM field at my university and I’ve had involvement in laboratories for years now.  Let me tell you something - this whole experience has been painful to watch.  I’m used to people, on both left and right ends of the political spectrum, passing judgement on what scientists do and how they do it.  Science is so wonderful because it is so cutting edge, but that does lead to controversial topics coming up fairly frequently.  Ethical debates, be it about testing methods or AI or what have you, are always swirling around on the internet. Thankfully, there are teams dedicated to determining ethical guidelines for this sort of debate. 

The problem with what I’ve seen on the internet lately is that there is very little scholarly debate about what actions to take, many experts are in agreement, and when scientists make an educated decision, people blatantly disregard it using a number of opinionated, jargon-heavy excuses.  Examples abound:

 I shouldn’t have to wear a mask because they said at one point that masks aren’t necessary and now they say they are. Scientists are untrustworthy.

Scientists only want to lie to you about COVID-19 so they can make more money off of you.

Well if scientists are so smart, what about this one time when a scientist did something bad?

Scientists are all elitists, trained by universities to use and abuse the common man. 

There are plenty of ways I would absolutely love to poke holes in these arguments I’ve seen later, but that’s besides the point.  The issue with these statements popping up everywhere is that there is no way for scientists to refute them logically.  Not because the arguments are right, but because they are completely illogical and based in fallacious reasoning. 

Fallacies are really easy to fall for, and a distrust of science only makes their roots dig deeper into our society. I understand though why they are so popular.  It gives people a reason to think they are different, or somehow defying the status quo, in a society where individualism is held to the highest regard (for me the US).  They also provide an easy solution where there isn’t one.  In scary times like the ones we are in, it feels good to rely on something you know, something comforting, as opposed to something you don’t know.  Science is by nature experimental, new, and groundbreaking, and that’s pretty scary.  People in the general public tend to lack a strong basis in understanding fallacious reasoning, because its really, really tricky to grasp, and isn’t frequently taught in classrooms.  I don’t want to sound like some preachy kid from the debate team or something, because believe me the last thing you should be doing to help people on the internet understand what they’re reading is yell “ThAt’S a FaLlAcY” because it will only make them feel bad, and in response, angry and defensive.  But understanding when you hear a fallacy yourself is one of the most important things I’ve ever been taught in my life. If you are unfamiliar with fallacies and want a list to keep handy, here’s a good start.  This can help you and perhaps others understand whether what they’re reading is a good source, or if the arguments are flawed.  

But why this desire to distrust science in the first place? For one thing, science has been made into the one thing it shouldn’t be: Political.  The call from the Right is typically that progress as a whole is bad unless it has been privatized, because academic scientists are untrustworthy, government agents who have been trained to look down on the rural middle and working classes of America. The call from the Left has honestly been somewhat similar, though perhaps less vocal: that major scientific progress is the work of private, rich medical companies, who don’t care about their impact on people or the earth, and that holistic methods (think essential oils, anti-vax movements, etc) should in part or entirely replace peer reviewed medicine.  Both of these views may be extremes.  But when your sweet Republican Great Aunt Mary, who has never been educated in collegiate level, or much high school level, STEM or logic courses, sees her friend Susan from the Community Republican Facebook page, post her piece about scientific elites trying to squash middle America, Mary has no way to refute it logically and it is associated with the group she is already involved in, and Mary sympathizes with Susan because she knows and trusts her.  And when Mary sees a Democrat refute it, it causes her to dig her heels in even more and double down on her support, because of how partisan politics in America has become.  If you’re not right, you must be wrong.  The same goes for the Left, of course.    

Another reason for distrust: as scientists we don’t do well communicating our findings to the public in a non-biased, yet easy to digest way.  Our knowledge comes from and is displayed in peer-reviewed, dense as hell articles that involve confusing acronyms, long Latin or Greek names and phrases that one would need a high-level physiology course to understand, and figures that screw with the head to look at without deep knowledge of statistics.  I’ve read and written scientific articles, and let me tell you, they’re absolutely awful and intimidating to look at and I hate how they are written (and I’m writing this, which is also dense and awful and intimidating.  I’m trying my best to consolidate I promise). Its no surprise that people who are unfamiliar with these topics would have a difficult time understanding them, and that could cause some to get bruised pride.  

The issue then lies in people attempting to become more scientifically literate through sources that aren’t straight from scientists.  News media, Facebook pages, Clickbait, all of that loves to make money off of clicks.  Its amazing how quickly “a chemical found in small traces in blueberries found to reduce some plaques in xyz brain region in mouse study” becomes “Could the Cure for Alzheimer’s be BERRIES?!” That sounds a whole lot more final and wrapped up and spectacular than a small minor change.  Then comes the issue of scientists in the media saying they know end all be all.  Elon Musk yelling about needing to reopen the economy, or Neil DeGrasse Tyson giving a talk on areas of science in which he is not an expert (despite training in astrophysics), is a whole lot more interesting to people than Normal Nancy giving an hour long talk on a specific subset of a specific subset of a specific subset of virus with zero intonation or emotion.  Sensationalized science is science that sells, even if it isn’t right, and people start to think of these individuals in the media of what a scientist is supposed to look like.  As a community, I respect scientists with all my heart.  Overall though, we do need to come up with a better way to reach people who aren’t open to us.  Have scientist approved websites, pages, and magazines that are specifically for the lay public. We should avoid making sweeping statements or overextending our knowledge if we somehow do gain fame.By continuing the way we have, we further alienate ourselves.  I of course don’t mean sacrificing research quality, or dumbing down scientific publication. Just finding ways to talk to people in a more relaxed way.

I suppose what I’m trying to say here is people don’t hate science without reason, even if the reasons are flawed.  And distrust of science doesn’t mean people are inherently bad people.  Perhaps they are just ignorant, ignorant and stubborn.  But people who do profit off of not listening to scientists are truly putting people at risk for selfish gain.  The problem lies in that not listening to scientists is extremely dangerous, not just right now, but all. the. time. 

Why is it a danger that people don’t have the means listen to scientists? Obviously it currently is putting people’s lives at risk. Not wearing masks to public places, being so angry at policies one doesn’t understand that they spit and cough on people in retaliation, or march in massive groups to protest.  People who do these things are a danger to themselves and others.  But we have been building up to this point.  I saw an interesting op-ed recently about the death of the expert that made a few interesting points.  The advent of the internet has brought us so much access to wonderful information.  But without education on finding scholarly sources early on and with full intent to promote gaining wisdom from those with experience, it becomes a breeding ground for dangerous mistaking of opinion (or simply wrong fact) for fact.   Anyone online can say they are an expert.  Once a person’s mind is filled with ideas that align with their own belief system, especially from someone who claims to be an expert, no researcher, academic, or other scholarly source can convince them otherwise.  If “my PhD in biochemistry” isn’t enough to answer the question “Well what makes you qualified to speak on biochemistry?”, then we’ve run into a serious problem.  People who have the true information individuals are seeking have been neglected for sources that fit with people’s personal values.  Its a natural thing to have happen of course, but when everything is online, and there isn’t much one can do to stop misinformation through regulation, these beliefs spread like wildfire, and this creates demand for pseudoscientific and untrue actions medically, politically, or socially.  These aren’t just ideas, they manifest into actions which can actively harm people.  

Its a weird time to be a scientist because not thirty years ago, your word was taken as law by many in the public, and if it wasn’t, it wasn’t out there to see all over the internet.  Now we are hit with a serious health crisis and everything is online, and the truth rears its ugly head: that no one who really, really needs to wants to listen to your life’s work. No one is respecting researchers who work tirelessly to come up with vaccinations and tests.  While you spend day in and day out working late hours trying to come up with a means to save lives, people come back and spit in your face.  Science, especially in academia, has always been a somewhat thankless job, (save for the pay if you get really lucky), and many times people won’t understand you. They know you’re smart, but they don’t really know what about, and it can be difficult to convey.  But that simply comes with the territory.  What pains me most is the severe retaliation during a time of crisis, instead of a renewed understanding of the need for science.  I don’t consider myself a scientist yet, considering I’m still learning in college. But I can’t help but feel that if we don’t find a way to educate people, and quickly, my field will be useless.  Because it’s not science that makes a difference, it’s people adopting science to inform their decisions.

If you know a scientists right now, especially someone working in virology, epidemiology, specifically COVID-19, or really any other field of life science, please thank them.  Hell, all STEM fields, for that matter.  They are truly trying their best during a time when it feels like all rationality has flown out the window.  And if they have any advice for you, listen to them.  By listening to scientists, you set a precedent for those around you to listen as well, which could get us all out of this mess quicker and healthier.

If you have any questions or comments, pop by my ask box.  Or reply too, doesn’t matter to me. My blog is all about conversations about science, science culture, and science literacy, and this may be my first post but it won’t be the last. Also this was super long, confusing, and ranty, so if you want clarification please ask! And if I don’t have answers I will try my best to direct you to someone who does. 

All y’all stay safe, and be smart.