Skip to main content

How Did Politics and Science Become Intertwined?

Politicized science and research did not begin in the United States. It began much earlier. For example, during the Black Plague of the 14th century, politicians together with doctors created a causation for the plague from 1347–1351. It was decided that the plague was caused by contagion and was attributed to public bathhouses, then very popular. Bathhouses everywhere were closed. The consequence was from that time on, for centuries, people were reluctant to take baths, except rarely.

The cause of disease even into the 19th century was said to be caused by “malaise” and this, supported by the government and physicians, implied little care could be given. At the time of the American Revolution, bloodletting was a prescription for fever. It worked by reducing the fever, but unhappily it killed many patients. This was supported by science and the government.

Without giving more examples, let’s fast forward to the 20th century with the development of the atomic bomb. This was co-produced project that involved famous people such as Albert Einstein, President Roosevelt, Robert Oppenheimer, and a cast of hundreds of scientists and military people.

There were conscientious objectors ( Einstein, and other scientists), and great supporters (e.g. Fermi, Bohr, et al.). But the politics swayed the development, together with massive money. Out of this came massive government funding for science projects. Thus, politics entered the door full time.

There have been mixtures of science and politics ever since. For example, the development of the Apollo project (land on the moon) began as a political goal and transferred to a massive enterprise to build it. In addition, huge funding to medicine created an entire infrastructure to cure various diseases. Which were funded was certainly politically influenced. Have you ever heard of an orphan disease? It is a disease that has little funding to cure. This was an intentional decision, partly influenced by politics. When funding agencies are awarded multiple billions to spend, politics is always involved in some way.

Now jump forward to current times, and we see a fusion of politicians and medicine, say with COVID. Here, plans were developed, complete with public announcements, about the new vaccine, including shutdowns, masks, unemployment, and much more. But we were never told the vaccines were not adequately tested.

You could combine this with climate change, promoted by the government and funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF). I know this is a matter of belief to most, because the details of climate change and predictive modeling are most challenging, even mathematically challenging*. The latest is that some say there’s a climate crisis but some say no crisis. Who’s to say what the final chapter of this project will be? I don’t. But politics and science will be joined at the hip through it all.

Big money brings big politics!

*Challenging, as climate change sweeps across multiple areas of science, including ocean temperature and heat containment, ocean eddies, atmospheric reflectivity, CO2, aerosols, historical data, and even cloud cover.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view