Re[2]: New Steve Wing Study

[Ruth Weiner <rfweine@sandia.gov>]

     Re: postmodernism:
     
     A recent NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS had an article about a physicist who 
     wrote a sendup of postmodern scientific thinking and sent it in to a 
     postmodernist journal, where it was taken quite seriously and printed. 
     He is quoted (in the NYRB article) as citing some of his sentences 
     which, he points out, are meaningless.  He also cites some pretty 
     meaningless "real" postmodern stuff.  I may be old-fashioned (yes, in 
     fact I AM old-fashioned) but postmodernism strikes me as largely 
     hogwash and a poor excuse for sloppy logic and reasoning.  Rational 
     thought and reasoning are not ancient or modern or postmodern; they 
     just are.  Moreover, in life people either act rationally or suffer 
     the adverse consequences.
     
     Re: epidemiological studies -- just a thought:
     Good studies seem to be the ones that set out to find correlations, 
     rather than trying to prove (or disprove) a correlaton postulated a 
     priori.  Some excellent examples of good epidemiology are cited in 
     Randy Shilts's book AND THE BAND PLAYED ON: these are the studies that 
     elucidated the AIDS vectors and led ultimately to discovery of the 
     causative virus.  In other words, the epidemiologists who first 
     studied AIDS looked for connections and correlations without knowing 
     which ones might exist.  Wing and the Rocketdyne investigators, on the 
     other hand, seem to want to prove the correlation that they have 
     already postulated.
     
     Clearly only my own opinion.
     
     Ruth F. Weiner, Ph. D.
     Transportation Systems Department
     Sandia National Laboratories
     Mail Stop 0718
     P. O. Box 5800
     Albuquerque, NM 87185-0718
     505-844-4791
     505-844-0244 (fax)
     rfweine@sandia.gov
     


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: New Steve Wing Study
Author:  scherer@uiuc.edu at hubsmtp
Date:    2/4/98 2:05 PM


Jerry Fallo pointed to a couple of good points about why bad science can 
flourish in studies of radiation health effects: good science is more 
complicated and we don't have a wining spokesman, like Carl Sagan or 
Stephen Gould.  I agree with him that Otto Raabe may be taking up this 
mantle, though (and quite capably).  I would like to point to another 
factor that I have not seen discussed relative to public communication: the 
shift to a postmodern worldview.
     
To discribe what I mean by postmodern, it might be easist to start with 
what the so-called modern world view.  This is the view most HPs hold. 
Through reasoned analysis, especially using the empirical, scientific 
method, society is able to learn more and more and eventually answer all 
the important questions.  This replaced the ancient worldview, that 
knowledge is handed down from authoritative sources (e.g., Aristotle, the 
church, etc.).  The postmodern worldview basically says that we are so 
contaminated by our own presuppositions that we can never arrive at the
truth.  Even if you try to be objective, you cannot overcome your own biases.
     
Basically, postmeodernism says what's true for you is fine for you, but I 
have no obligation to accept your truth.  Truth is a multiple-choice 
proposition.  All views are equally valid.  Pluralism reigns in science and 
health as much as in culture and public policy.  Note the rise in 
alternative medicine, even though these techniques might lack the 
scientific rigors of traditional, Western medicine.
     
In roder to reach such a culture it is important to address the unstated and 
often unconscious worldview at work.  I am not optimistic that this can be 
done in the short run.  But in the long run, there is more reason for hope.  
Cultural paradigms are not permanent, although they are powerful when they 
are in vogue.  In a generation or two, the culture will have adopted another 
approach to life and it might have a more favorable outlook on technology.
     
Regards,
Dave Scherer
scherer@uiuc.edu