Home › Forums › COVID-19 Pandemic: Bearing Witness, Telling our Story › A return to Faith in Serious Experts › Please review the thoughts of Tom Nichols and share your insights › Reply To: Please review the thoughts of Tom Nichols and share your insights
I am fascinated by your standpoint in the U.S. being a fundamentally “unserious” country in the recent years, in which I can agree with up to a certain point. Although, I am unsure whether I can truly don’t have to think about unemployment and skyrocketing interest rates which has been quite apparently significant after the pandemic began. As an independent thinker, I think it is ironic to watch that the best answer of the opposition party to having a “reality TV star” becoming a president is to bring in and elect the almost complete opposite: a senior, long serving senator of the U.S. Senate; emphasizing on the word “senior” as evidenced by signs of senility and major decrease in mental acuity. Various interviews and questionnaires in many studies concluded that most of Biden’s supporter has almost no clue as to why they support him other than to dethrone the “guy with mean tweets” for their own emotional satisfaction.
As to your second paragraph, I totally agree that expertise matters. However, there should be an adjustment in our definition of experts. A recent quote from Aaron Rodgers can resonate with those in the science community including all of us in this forum, although he’s nowhere close to being a science or medical professional. He stated that “Science that can’t be questioned is propaganda”. As we all learn through our undergraduate school as a nurse and now in graduate school, empirical study and evidence-based practice is very important. Scholars question and challenge each other’s ideas and common practice to give birth to new and better ideas that can eventually be proved as scientific and factual. However, the current practice where brave and independent doctors, nurses, researchers, and other medical professionals are being condemned, cancelled, de-platformed, and discredited despite of their expertise in the field but refused to follow the proposed agenda is not science, while the rest remain quiet and comply to protect their jobs and public image. It seems to me this article encourages people to have less control of their own decision, freedom, and practice and conform to socially acceptable (not necessarily scientifically correct) practices and ideas and allow more control from the “experts”, government, and bureaucracies. Just a two cents from a freedom-loving U.S. immigrant who has experienced a similar pattern.
- This reply was modified 4 months ago by HIERONIMUS E. SOLO.