# The Intersection of Politics and Science in the COVID-19 Era
Written on
Chapter 1: The Challenge of Faith-Based Science
Recently, I passed a sign in my hometown proclaiming, “I believe in science.” As someone with three technical degrees, I share that sentiment. However, my belief does not extend to the concept of politically motivated science. This brand of science has no connection to divine beings or scriptures; rather, it hinges on individuals in lab coats and the acceptance of facts that align with one's political stance.
Scientific truths can be elusive and ever-changing—something that may sound controversial. For instance, our understanding of COVID-19 has significantly evolved since March 2020. Experts communicated their findings with gravity, urging us to follow guidelines. I complied by wearing a mask, staying home, and getting vaccinated as soon as possible.
Yet, some of the guidelines proved unnecessary, such as the belief that the virus could linger on surfaces for an extended period. We sanitized everything religiously; my sister, a nurse, even had a designated outdoor area for Amazon packages to "decontaminate" before bringing them inside. While I understand the precautions, I recognize that science is a continuously evolving field.
What’s my point? Science is not static; it changes. Many principles remain constant, but adjustments based on new information are essential. So, when someone declares their unwavering faith in science, I can relate—I, too, believe in the scientific method, which involves hypothesizing, testing, and refining based on what we learn.
However, we find ourselves in an environment where some individuals passionately assert their faith in "Science." It often appears that they are not genuinely championing the scientific method but rather a collection of selected facts that fit their political narratives. This phenomenon is concerning.
I grow weary of the phrase, “experts tell us.” Sometimes, I am the expert, and my knowledge is limited. Typically, I am confident only to a 95% threshold, leaving room for error that could have real consequences. Furthermore, my conclusions are based on models I created, which, by nature, are never entirely accurate. I empathize with those who model COVID-19, as I have experienced criticism for minor projection errors.
Section 1.1: Historical Context of Virus Understanding
It is perplexing how much we had previously established about viruses needed to be revalidated for the public to accept information regarding COVID-19. This is not a new phenomenon; it has occurred repeatedly throughout human history.
Consider gravity: what if I said that your understanding of gravity is likely flawed? It is a curvature in spacetime caused by mass. The Einstein field equations link the geometry of spacetime to the distribution of matter within it. I hold a Master's degree in Physics, and I can assure you that this topic is complex. Yet, my friend with the yard sign expresses belief without understanding the intricacies involved.
This belief system is grounded in reason and knowledge, albeit imperfect. When faith transforms into dogma, we encounter significant issues.
Subsection 1.1.1: The Dangers of Binary Thinking
I've witnessed a troubling trend of binary thinking across the political landscape. Issues are often viewed in a black-and-white manner, leaving no space for nuanced understanding. Many medical concepts, especially those related to public health, cannot be distilled into simplistic choices. I wore a mask, yet friends questioned, “If masks are effective, why is COVID-19 still spreading?” This line of questioning exemplifies binary thinking; masks do indeed reduce infection rates, but they are not a panacea.
The flu has not vanished; its prevalence has decreased thanks to social distancing and mask-wearing. Conversations often devolve into "whack-a-mole" debates, where each answer prompts another counter-question. For instance, when someone claimed that countries with strict mask mandates fared worse than those without, I jokingly replied, “Then masks must be causing COVID-19!” I stopped making this joke when I realized that some were taking it seriously.
Florida and Texas, which lifted restrictions, did not experience a resurgence of COVID-19 as predicted. An article in The Atlantic speculated that higher humidity and temperatures might inhibit the virus's spread. The same individuals who hastily condemned these states are now notably silent.
Chapter 2: The Role of Media and Data in Scientific Discourse
This first video, "How religion turned American politics against science," discusses the intersection of faith and scientific skepticism in political contexts.
The second video, "Sacred Politics: The Rise of Christian Nationalism," explores the implications of religious beliefs on political ideologies and scientific acceptance.
The Atlantic deserves recognition for its efforts to compile and normalize COVID-19 data from various states. They established a widely referenced database that provided invaluable insights and will serve as a resource for future research on epidemics.
True advocates for science would acknowledge their errors, investigate why assumptions were incorrect, and adapt their understandings accordingly. Science should encourage questioning and learning, yet often it devolves into political dogma.
I am proficient at elucidating complex ideas, but I find myself stepping back from binary thinkers lately.
The politicization of science frustrates me. Science should not be a tool for political agendas. Just as religion and government should maintain a respectful distance, so too should politics and science. Every political decision carries inherent biases, and while this is neither inherently good nor bad, it is crucial to recognize that politicians often make decisions based on political motives.
The rapid politicization of the pandemic stifled flexibility in policy adjustments. A one-size-fits-all approach has never been effective. When someone passionately asserts that “the experts say this,” I disengage; such statements do not foster discourse or understanding. Throughout this pandemic, I have relied on the best available knowledge derived from statistical analysis and empirical evidence. Our political leaders should strive to do the same.