Seth Godin
Reality and rational thought
have paid more dividends in the last century than ever before.
Science-based medicine has
dramatically increased the lifespan and health of people around the world.
Vaccines have prevented millions of children from lifelong suffering
and even death. Evidence-based trials have transformed the output of
farms, the way organizations function and yes, even the yield of websites.
It's possible to imagine a
world of 6 billion people without the advances we've enjoyed, but you wouldn't
want to live there.
It's not just the obvious
outcomes of engineering and scientific success. It's also the science of
decision making and the reliance on a civil society, both of which require the
patience to see the long term.
For someone willing to engage
in a discussion based on data, there is no doubt that this approach is working.
It works so well, it’s easy to take it for granted, to assume that miracles
will keep coming, that the systems will keep working, that the bridges and the
water systems won’t fail and the missiles won't be launched. It's easy to lose
interest in spreading these benefits to those that don't have them yet.
At the very same time that
engineering put us on the moon, post-reality thinking invented a conspiracy
that it didn’t happen. When we get close to eradicating an illness, we hesitate
and focus on rumor and innuendo instead.
While reality-based medicine
has ameliorated some of the worst diseases humans have ever experienced, quack
medicines have been on the upswing for the ones that remain.
The most famous doctor in the
country, Mehmet Oz, is primarily known for blurring the lines. His gifted
medical talents have saved lives in the operating room, but he’s just as likely
to talk about a quack diet based on coffee beans. There's been huge
forward progress in the science of medicine, but all the money and attention on
placebos hasn't improved their outcome much.
When Hillary Clinton lies, her
standing decreases. But when Donald Trump lies, it actually helpshis
standing among his followers. That’s because he’s not selling reality, he’s
selling something else. It’s confusing to outsiders, because he’s not working
on the same axis as traditional candidates.
The hallmark of post-reality
thinking is that it watches the speech with the sound turned off. The words
don't matter nearly as much as the intent, the emotion, the subtext. When we
engage in this more primeval, emotional encounter, we are more concerned with
how it looks and feels than we are in whether or not the words actually make
sense.
The irony, then, is that
people who have been cut off from clean water, from things that actually work,
from the fruits of a reality-based system that changed everything—these people
are hungering for it, want it for their children. But for those that have taken
it for granted, who have the luxury of using it without understanding it, the
pendulum swings in the other direction, seeking an emotional response to
economic and technical disconnects.
The more that reality-based thinking
has created a comfortable existence, the more tempting it is to ignore it and
embrace a nonsensical, skeptical viewpoint instead.
We used to be able to talk
about science and belief, about what’s real and what
we dream of. The and was the key part of the sentence, it
wasn’t one against the other.
If they are seen as or,
though, if it’s belief (anger or fear) against/vs./or the reality of what’s
here and what’s working, we do ourselves, and our children, a tragic
disservice.
"Don't confuse me with facts"
is no way to move forward. It's a risky scheme.
Joni Mitchell famously warned, "you don't know what've
got till it's gone." I'd rather not find out.
[PS a lot of wisdom in many
ways, some direct and some metaphorical, in Albert Adler'sprinciples. And somewhat related, this post on victims, critics and
mistakes.]
No comments:
Post a Comment