SCI-ART LAB

Science, Art, Litt, Science based Art & Science Communication

Q: What is 'collective denial'? Is the mindset collective denial even in the face of overwhelming evidence? How is it harming science and the societies we live in?

Krishna: When entire societies, including governments, and social groups move to ignore past atrocities, and minimize the resulting human suffering, this constitutes collective denial, and usually involves denial by those responsible for the atrocities.
From vaccines to climate change to genocide, a new age of denialism is upon us.

Denialism is an expansion, an intensification, of denial. At root, denial and denialism are simply a subset of the many ways humans have developed to use language to deceive others and themselves. Denial can be as simple as refusing to accept that someone else is speaking truthfully. Denial can be as unfathomable as the multiple ways we avoid acknowledging our weaknesses and secret desires.

Denialism is more than just another manifestation of the humdrum intricacies of our deceptions and self-deceptions. It represents the transformation of the everyday practice of denial into a whole new way of seeing the world and – most important – a collective accomplishment. Denial is furtive and routine; denialism is combative and extraordinary. Denial hides from the truth, denialism builds a new truth favourable to them. 

In some ways, denialism is  not a good term. No one calls themselves a “denialist”, and no one signs up to all forms of denialism. In fact, denialism is founded on the assertion that it is not denialism. Therefore, vested interests have turned it into public dogma and this lead to collective denialism when entire societies and groups follow it as their policy.

A few examples:  The arguemnt that Holocaust (and other genocides) never happened, that anthropogenic (human-caused) climate change is a myth, that Aids either does not exist or is unrelated to HIV, that evolution is a scientific impossibility, and that all manner of other scientific findings   must be rejected.

There is no doubt that denialism is dangerous. In some cases, we can point to concrete examples of denialism causing actual harm. In South Africa, President Thabo Mbeki, in office between 1999 and 2008, was influenced by Aids denialists such as Peter Duesberg, who deny the link between HIV and Aids (or even HIV’s existence) and cast doubt on the effectiveness of anti-retroviral drugs. Mbeki’s reluctance to implement national treatment programmes using anti-retrovirals has been estimated to have cost the lives of 330,000 people. On a smaller scale, in early 2017 the Somali-American community in Minnesota was struck by a childhood measles outbreak, as a direct result of proponents of the discredited theory that the MMR vaccine causes autism, persuading parents not to vaccinate their children.

Let me give a specific example: The whole of ex-US administration and the followers of the president Trump denying climate change.  
You provide the evidence but they think that is your opinion or alarmist propaganda to control them.
Trump called climate change "mythical", "nonexistent", or "an expensive hoax" (1). He took an approach on Twitter, with more than 120 posts questioning or making light of climate change.

In 2012, he famously said climate change was "created by and for the Chinese in order to make US manufacturing non-competitive" - something he later claimed was a joke. He regularly repeated claims that scientists had rebranded global warming as climate change because "the name global warming wasn't working".

And he also has dozens of tweets suggesting that cold weather disproves climate change - despite the World Meteorological Organization saying that the 20 warmest years on record have been in the past 22 years. His opponents say, Mr Trump's position is based on his need to appeal to "the part of the Republican establishment that rejects climate policy.

The problem is these people don't understand things scientific properly. Even if they understand them, they think they are just your opinions and not evidence based facts and refuse to accept the them as these things go against their interests or their vote bank policies.

Footnotes:

1. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51213003

Views: 45

Replies to This Discussion

22

RSS

© 2024   Created by Dr. Krishna Kumari Challa.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service