Losing faith in science: the rhetoric of denialism in
the autism/vaccines debate
Conclusion
A parent's love for their
children can make them do many things. It can make them jump in a
pool to try and save their child from drowning, it can make them work
harder than they've ever worked before to earn enough money to provide
for their children, and it can even make them reject years of proven
scientific efficacy because they're scared to death that their child
might one day become autistic. Such devotion should be seen as
admirable proof of that familial bond, but the reality is that too many
parents, buying into the fear-inducing rhetoric of the anti-vaccine
community, will buy into their claims so completely as to ignore the
greater risk: not ensuring their child's inoculation against a very
large number of very scary diseases.
The level of rhetoric used by
anti-vaccine groups encourages more than just denialism; it promotes
ignorance and distrust of science itself. A belief in the
objectivity and validity of scientific endeavors has long been a
cornerstone of Western civilization. Vaccinations in particular
have successfully proved their effectiveness over multiple centuries,
so for a sizable social movement to arise in the modern era challenging
the worth of vaccinations, especially after the eradication of
smallpox, the near-complete eradication of polio, and the
drastically-reduced number of measles infections, suggests that perhaps
a larger post-fact movement might be the reason. Such a
possibility is too large an issue to examine in a study such as this,
but to borrow from Stephen Colbert, it seems as if society is beginning
to value truthiness over actual truth.
There is little pro-vaccine,
pro-science, pro-truth individuals and organizations can do to
encourage a more reasoned approach to this situation while
simultaneously allowing the (always needed) possibility that somehow,
someday, their previously-held scientific facts could be proven
wrong. Public debate of controversial issues has long been an
important component of American society, but when the other side
remains so... extreme, productive argument often proves impossible.
In short, denialism as a
philosophy among otherwise well-educated individuals is growing.
They believe what they do because part of them feels as if no
corporation with the power to manufacture so many vaccines could do so
without having some ulterior motive, or because they care so deeply for
their children, or because they believe that there is no other way ASDs
could have increased so rapidly in the last twenty years. And
it's not a problem with the science. Denialism now encompasses
global warming, evolution, the possibility that the recent Gulf of
Mexico oil disaster could have been sabotage... it has nothing to do
with the specific scientific facts of any given situation. Why
this is remains unclear, but, to be sure, denialist rhetoric will
continue and thrive for years to come.
|
"Measles campaign 17", by hdptcar
|
