Read on Twitter
1
Brief thread on disease:
There are, unfortunately, many spiritual people dedicated to saying germs & viruses don’t cause disease.
While I agree that the Western medical model is reductive, I also think it is a useful framework in many ways and that dismissing it is not helpful.
Brief thread on disease:
There are, unfortunately, many spiritual people dedicated to saying germs & viruses don’t cause disease.
While I agree that the Western medical model is reductive, I also think it is a useful framework in many ways and that dismissing it is not helpful.
2
As someone who studied biology in grad school, a huge takeaway from my science education was that the public we need tools to critique science.
But that includes the “fringe” scientists, who many spiritual people turn to with open arms.
As someone who studied biology in grad school, a huge takeaway from my science education was that the public we need tools to critique science.
But that includes the “fringe” scientists, who many spiritual people turn to with open arms.
3
The consequence of none of us having those tools?
We all become wrong and oppositional.
The general population had no way to sort through the noise of science “journalism” or claims by experts who are often wrong.
And spiritually-minded people merely embrace contrarians.
The consequence of none of us having those tools?
We all become wrong and oppositional.
The general population had no way to sort through the noise of science “journalism” or claims by experts who are often wrong.
And spiritually-minded people merely embrace contrarians.
4
The consequence for people in spiritual communities is that they may have worthwhile suspicions of mainstream science & medicine narratives, but no way to find thoughtful counter narratives.
They embrace whatever is oppositional and are then (rightly) denounced for foolishness.
The consequence for people in spiritual communities is that they may have worthwhile suspicions of mainstream science & medicine narratives, but no way to find thoughtful counter narratives.
They embrace whatever is oppositional and are then (rightly) denounced for foolishness.
5
In the meantime, the general populace has a de rigueur attitude of submission to expertise. How would they evaluate anything, anyway? And they feel compelled to condemn anyone who steps out of lone.
This isn’t good. We need not just science education but real science literacy.
In the meantime, the general populace has a de rigueur attitude of submission to expertise. How would they evaluate anything, anyway? And they feel compelled to condemn anyone who steps out of lone.
This isn’t good. We need not just science education but real science literacy.
6
Anyway this all springs to mind as I read a nuanced, thoughtful article by one of my teachers - a scientist & spiritual thinker - dissecting the work of Thomas Cowan & Sally Fallon whose previous work I respect but who have become a false contrarian heroes in the pandemic.
Anyway this all springs to mind as I read a nuanced, thoughtful article by one of my teachers - a scientist & spiritual thinker - dissecting the work of Thomas Cowan & Sally Fallon whose previous work I respect but who have become a false contrarian heroes in the pandemic.
7
I’ll link to the article in the last tweet, but I want to say first that the most that Cowan and the authors of this article share the same spiritual tradition, but Holdrege & Talbott are much better at sorting through the science.
I’ll link to the article in the last tweet, but I want to say first that the most that Cowan and the authors of this article share the same spiritual tradition, but Holdrege & Talbott are much better at sorting through the science.
8
Spiritual depth is not an excuse to not know science.
Anti-spiritual sentiment is not an excuse to dismiss thoughtful scientific work.
We also need spiritual literacy.
Spiritual depth is not an excuse to not know science.
Anti-spiritual sentiment is not an excuse to dismiss thoughtful scientific work.
We also need spiritual literacy.
