Science and Sausage -- an attempt at a fan letter.

This is my second fan letter.  The first one I wrote when I was about 13 or 14-years old to science fiction writer Robert Heinlein, whose “juveniles” especially, were considered “hard science” fiction.  That was about 1963.

I think I was moved to write this letter because of the confluence of two pieces, the first from the Boston Herald (one of Boston’s two major daily newspapers), an opinion piece by Rich Lowry, the editor of the National Review, entitled “Science can’t tell us how to respond to the coronavirus”.  And the second, your link “Hats off to the father of Brandon Truett, who took out a billboard to congratulate his son on achieving a PhD.” 

I see the latter as a true celebration of the pursuit of knowledge and the former about the pursuit of political power.  The term “science” is used in many different ways, to refer to many different things and activities; as a noun and a verb and an adjective.  All these meanings and usages have been collapsed into this one word in a way that pretty much makes the word meaningless.  When we communicate using meaningless words we only get confusion -- garbage in, garbage out.

The enterprise of science is a messy, complicated thing, something like the metaphorical making of a sausage.  The point being that people don't want to experience the process, they only want to savor the outcome.  Unfortunately for the image of science in this time of coronavirus, the  public is getting to watch the sausage being made, and is finding the experience upsetting.  

For me, during the time that I have been a reader, your newsletter has put this process into the context of the people working to solve this problem:  It's still messy, but it is much clearer why the mess is necessary, and that ultimately it is the way that human beings solve big problems.  

On a less abstract note, my favorite features are "Where I Work" and the quotes with their references. 

I believe that using a word in a vague way, without a clear definitions or out of context or in the wrong context is more a tactic of political or social manipulation than it is a way of reaching a sound, disinterested conclusion.  This former usage, to me, seems to constitute almost all of public discourse today. 

Perhaps vague terms designed to inflame the emotions have always been the stuff of public discourse, but to enfold “science” into part of that discourse is to do damage to the enterprise of science, and to subvert humanity’s attempt to improve itself. 

In our current public discourse,