Real science does not care about your narrative

In the soviet union, early in the 20th century. a political narrative was born.  In it a pseudo-scientist, really, an activist, named Trofim Lysenko decided that it was politically incorrect to study or apply genetics.  He insisted that Lamarckism was the proper, politically correct theory.  And thus a narrative was born.

Unfortunately for real scientists studying real biology, their research could come at a very significant personal cost.  Their lives, if sent to a gulag.

All because a nonsense theory gained believers.  And a narrative was born.  Real science, and scientists, suffered at the hands of activists and political operatives of the USSR.

In Germany, around that time, another narrative was born.  Jewish Physics became a thing, and otherwise intelligent scientists followed suite.  Not everyone did, but enough did, in Germany, that this narrative had strength.

There seems to be a set of common features to this.

  1. An in-group, sometimes of scientists, but more often as political activists desiring to assert their dominance and control in a specific area, unafraid of using questionable techniques to achieve their aims. Their ideology overcomes any sense they may have had, and they give themselves over to their narrative.
  2. An out-group of scientists, and often the general population.
  3. A subject matter with sometimes potentially controversial results (as in, in opposition to the activists personal goals and beliefs).

Chances are you've seen/experienced this yourself.  Maybe not in science, maybe elsewhere.

That noted, one thing appears to be common to most of these situations.  Objective reality wins in the end.  A narrative dies when it loses its mass of support, or support becomes untenable.  Another narrative sometimes gains support, but in the end, reality will eventually emerge.

History will be unkind to those pushing these narratives, at the expense of objective reality.

Those supporters of the narratives and ideologies will often try to put others on the defensive.  By calling them deniers.  Or other worse words.  These words are meant to draw a reaction, to control the conversation.

Sadly, I had such an interaction today.  From an unexpected source.  One who should not have done such a thing, as it was thoroughly unprofessional in the context they did it.

When their admitted ideology is more important than the service interaction they are being paid for, the best approach is to discontinue their service.  Which I promptly did.

It is generally not a good idea to deny reality.  

Show Comments