Thread by @AstorAaron

One of the most frustrating political developments of this pandemic is the inability to accept that we - the royal "we", including "experts" - just don't know all the answers. So those issuing official recommendations might change or nuance and then be accused of "hypocrisy."

To be sure, there ARE genuine hypocrites out there who fail to follow their OWN advice. And there are those who hide and lie about their own records to portray themselves as more effective than they really were. I'm not talking about those folks, who deserve criticism.

I'm talking more about the general discourse in pure black-and-white terms, where reasonable advice on things like masks - they help somewhat but unless they are well-fit N95s they offer only partial protection to self and others - is treated as either "all wrong" or "all right".

There are precious few certainties in this pandemic. So far, at least, the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) appear to be an exception - 90%+ protection against serious illness, which is phenomenal. And, if the latest studies are confirmed, ~90% protection against infection.

So we may be able to get fully out of this immediate situation. But the epistemic problem of false certainty - followed by cheap accusations of "fake news" - will persist, especially as trust in established political, media or medical sources remains low.

And no, I don't expect that trust level to ever return based on "good performance." It is up to people to engage in critical thinking without descending into either pure cynicism on one hand or dogmatic adherence on the other.

Suggestions of permanent masking/mitigation are also unwarranted. This piece is problematic, mostly bc it says we don't know if vaccines prevent infections. In fact, we are getting lots of evidence that it does, even if CDC guidelines have not yet changed. nbcnewyork.com/news/coronavir…

So the message may be technically correct as of now - the new studies from Mayo and from Israel are not yet peer-reviewed - the message will tend toward hopelessness and could paradoxically encourage people not to bother getting vaccinated.

It's more accurate to say that a "growing body of evidence" of suggests that vaccines prevent infection (and transmission). So the reason to keep masking is bc most of the population is not yet vaccinated and it's important that everybody follow the guidelines for now.

But this is a nuanced point that is hard to convert into policy. All the more reason for the media to be careful about how they present this advice.

One final point here: This is what a quality liberal arts education is designed to teach. By studying, say, texts of ancient India or causes of World War One, one develops the critical thinking skills needed to approach complicated modern problems.

A liberal arts approach to the hard sciences is even more valuable as students consider the process through which scientists have long fashioned hypotheses to explain persistent scientific problems and learned to analyze data through properly designed studies.

The in-lab practice of science is great too of course, but the appreciation of the scientific method is really the key here. Look at how scientists improved upon the work of other scientists.