Hello again,
I hope that each and every one of you had a good Thanksgiving and are looking forward to the upcoming Hanukkah and Christmas holidays, and the topper, Isaac Newton’s Birthday on the 4th of January.
When I went to verify the dates for Hanukkah (it does moves around a lot,) I used a link which described it as, “the Jewish festival of rededication”. Maybe it was the font, or maybe it’s the times we are living through, but at a quick glance, what I read was:
Hanukkah, the Jewish festival of reeducation.
Needless to say, I was momentarily alarmed! “Wow! That’s blatant,” I thought, but after a, “No, that can’t be right,” re-read, I was relieved.
The Maoist concept of re-education scares the bejesus out of me but re-dedication is something we can all use, especially during hard times. Re-dedication to those who are the most important to us, re-dedication to those passions which often end up on the back burner as time passes and problems mount.
And re-dedication to those ideas and ideals which aid us in living our most superlative of lives. I remind my Son of this all the time, “It’s not about finishing first, it’s about finishing best. If having the most requires corner cutting or plunder, what have you actually gained?”
This week’s episode of The Rational Apprentice Podcast is massive; my longest thus far. But that also means that it took an exorbitant amount of time to prepare—two weeks.
But I think it’s worth it, especially since, unlike the others, it’s an episode that can be listened to out of order. I hope you agree.
Here’s a portion of the introduction to get started:
I have spoken with a slew of people over the past few years who have insinuated or outright said that they no longer have faith in science. They see basic and systemic errors in the methodologies used in what many now call “The Science” and they have serious disagreements with the almost universally accepted conclusions. Yet, if they question “The Science” they are shunned, mocked, physically assaulted, ostracized, de-platformed, fired, de-funded, de-certified, or censored in some way.
Yep. But what is “The Science?”
Well, it all begins with use of the article “the”. Placing the word “the” in front of the noun “Science” in this context, results in the word “the” functioning as an adjective describing “science.”
So, when we put “the” in front of a noun, we are making a statement. Elvis is not a king, Elvis is THE king. That movie isn’t a blockbuster this summer, it’s THE blockbuster this summer. Beats aren’t just expensive headphones that famous people use, they are THE expensive headphones that famous people use.
And the information we are giving you about how to interact with people, where to go, what to buy, what to wear, who to listen to, who to talk to, that’s not just based on scientific research, that’s based on “THE Science!”
The term, “The Science” was deliberately created to manipulate us to accept there is one and only one way to “flatten the curve”—and that is to listen to what Fauci called “The Science.”
So, “The Science” is an arbitrary term for which no deviation is allowed—no deviation from its conclusions, its dictates, its recommendations. The use of the article “the” is a marketing tactic—that’s what it is, a marketing tactic. By using “the” they are placing this information at the top. THIS is the pinnacle information and anything else is lesser.
And it works. The New York Times bestseller sounds very different from a New York Times bestseller.
So, I want to talk about science. Not “The Science” but actual science using the Scientific Method because, obviously, what value will it be for me to discuss how to scientifically determine what is absolute reality when it comes to human action and moral interaction if you believe that science, in and of itself, is flawed?
The important point to illuminate is the fact that questioning “The Science” in the first place—the act of questioning the consensus, another word for dogma—is, by definition, being scientific. If there is no doubt, there is no science, if there is no question, there is no science.
So, bravo to you for questioning “The Science,” that is, by definition, being scientific.
But before moving on, some may consider this episode to be political. That is absolutely not true. I am discussing science. If you, after listening to the episode in full, consider the topic to be political and perhaps even something I should refrain from discussing, I can only point out that, by having that opinion, you are proving the point that I intend to make.