Don't Put A Cold In Your Pocket

                                                                                   

Why do we do what we do? What do we believe? Can we make intelligent decisions or do we lack the information? Do we give any thought to our beliefs? Do we care? Laymen follow (at least they think they do) common sense, or whatever it says on Google. But do we really know what we think we know? And is it true?

To a very significant degree this is a follow-up on the essays of the last two weeks. In this case, however, there's no science fictionⁱ in it. Rather it's an expansion on the issue of education. And it's a sad commentary on the state of what we learn. In the previous messages I suggested that education is, by and large, tailored to the desires of the audience. That's neither an original thought nor an unusual practice. But perhaps a little more exposition would be helpful in understanding my concerns in this area.

We usually associate education with schools. It certainly goes on there, although the results are often spotty, and the information given students is often contrary to what parents think or want. Indeed, sometimes the “facts” are wrong.ⁱⁱ But right and wrong are not significant criteria when it comes to what is learned. More important considerations are the student's age and interests, the frequency of repetition of the lesson, the ability of the teacher and the quality and attractions of the teaching materials, and the rewards and threats – implied and explicit – that accompany learning and not learning a particular lesson.

Childhood is best time for learning: baseball stats, movie star data, and the content of ads are good examples of what they're likely to learn. Kids don't always relate to school lessons but they remember other material that interests them. They learn best what they want to believe or want to know. And from those in whom they have confidence. Very young children trust adults and believe whatever an adult says, both for facts and philosophy. But as they get older, and primarily because of a need for independence, kids begin to rebel – to reject the teachings of their parentsⁱⁱⁱ and, to a degree, those of other adults – especially those not well skilled in getting their attention or who transmit messages in which they're not interested. They trust their peers, however, to be reliable sources of information – especially regarding subjects like sex, which the adults are loath to discuss.^iv Or popular music about which the adults know nothing.^v Actually, those we consider our peers, whether adults or children, are among the most important influences on our learning, even when their lessons are false. (It is they, our peers, who convince us, for example, that “natural” and “organic” are best for us, even if they don't know what the terms mean.^vi They heard it – or something on the subject – from someone else, or they read it in the paper.)

But the best teachers are those in the advertising business. It's not the tenured professor who will keep his job no matter what his students learn,^vii but the advertiser or copywriter who has to sell a product every day in order to stay employed, who is the best educator. It's up to him to convince us there's a problem that only his product can solve. Whether his “solution” has any value is irrelevant, as long as the goods sell. Ideally his product does what is claimed for it, but that's not invariably the case,^viii nor is it necessary. Claims usually precede knowledge, especially if the buyer is primed to accept the presumed value of the product or practice. That's certainly the case with panaceas, snake oil, and beauty products – usually accompanied by some promise of eternal youth.^ix It's also true of other health related wares. “Don't put a cold in your pocket” may be convincing advertising copy, but you can't catch your own cold, so if you use a handkerchief you're not really risking reinfection next time. And if you use tissues and there's no garbage can, you have a choice between littering, and putting the used tissue in your pocket.

Other important teachers are those who advise you to sneeze into your antecubital fossa,^x and that chicken soup is the best cure for a cold.^xi They may not be old wives, but they've learned from them. And they will try to convince you that vitamins are good for you.^xii But, no matter what they say, there's no proof that most of those nostrums they've been using for years have any effect. Don't waste your time offering contrary evidence. There's no changing the mind of someone already convinced. (As Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "The mind of the bigot^xiii is like the pupil of the eye: the more light you shine on it, the more it will contract."^xiv) Too often what we think is true is more important than what is true. Even if what we think is true was drummed into us by someone with an ax to grind.

It's nice to believe that all we've been taught is true. It's nice to believe that all of those who would provide us with the truth know what they're talking about. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. Too much of what we “know” has been programmed into us either by people who know less than we, but who had custody of our minds before we understood that we could question them, or those who have a vested interest in our accepting what they have to say, whether it relates to politics, advertising, propaganda, or something else.

In short, the time will come when scientists (presumably working on behalf of the government) will be able to load us with the desired “software” to be good servants of the State. We'll be properly educated to believe and to know everything our leaders want us to know. But even before that, our educational system, and a host of other interested parties, will teach us their truths – their catechism. And everyone will learn – whether it is their intention or not to do so. All, especially the young, are very open to whatever they are told. They are open-minded, and they fault their elders for not accepting new ideas. But as James Randi said, “There is a distinct difference between having an open mind and having a hole in your head from which your brain leaks out.” And for too many the exposed brain can be washed and the permitted knowledge inserted. That's what will happen if we let it.

But Winston Smith^xv showed us that this doesn't have to be the case. For at least part of his life he was not obedient, even though he had been taught that following the rules made life easier, and disobedience would lead to punishment, he didn't submit to the party and accept the “facts” he was told. He questioned them. And that is what the rest of us can do. If something that we are taught doesn't seem right, it may not be right. And if something we have always accepted seems wrong, it may be wrong.^xvi We can still fight political and societal “truths,” however, if we choose to do so – if we question them and determine their veracity.

But the questioning and the evaluation of new (and old) information is up to us. The learning of the facts that govern us and on which we base our thoughts is certainly a function of education. ^xvii But another function of education is to teach us to question what we are told. When we stop questioning – when we lose the ability and interest in questioning – we will have lost any chance to form correct and meaningful thoughts.^xviii “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” But if the “truths” are false, they shall enslave you. Soon enough, the authorities you don't question will be able to determine your thoughts and make them correspond to what is desired. And what is desired will be determined by the the bureaucrats, regulators, and civil servants and whoever controls them. They will monitor what you think, and they will control what you do. Доверяй, но проверяй – “Trust but verify.” President Reagan^xix may have been concerned specifically with its application to American foreign policy, but it's good advice for all of us.

“If not now, when?”^xx

Next episode: “A La Whatever” – Food for thought.

i         Future science.

ii        “Wrong” is a loaded word – both in terms of factual accuracy and cultural or philosophical acceptability. Who decides such things? How is the culture in which a child is reared (or in which an adult lives) a determining factor in “rightness” or “wrongness?”

iii      They know more than their parents anyway, so there's no real loss.

iv       Parents are simultaneously horrified that their children are learning about sex from their friends (juvenile delinquents with dirty minds), and relieved that the need to have “that talk” no longer exists.

v       And like nothing. Of course our parents didn't share our taste in music either.

vi       Given the choice between natural and unnatural potatoes, which would you choose? And “organic” used to mean that something contained carbon.

vii       Or don't learn.

viii     The FDA has just issued a warning that “antibacterial soaps” have never been demonstrated to be useful, and they may actually do more harm than good by fostering the growth of resistant forms.

ix      The cosmetics usually contain some amazing ingredients like prune oil, vitamin Q, and some unspellable scientific-sounding material that the hucksters try to convince us is the answer to all the ravages of time. The “expert” in the television advertisement will be wearing a white coat, and the “delighted” consumer will usually be a beautiful model.

x       See Tuck And Cover, October 11, 2010.

xi      Actually, good chicken soup is the best cure for almost anything. But it has no medicinal effect on a cold or anything else.

xii     Most medical authorities consider them a waste of money and, in large quantities, potentially harmful. But what do they know? The vitamin salesman knows best.

xiii     He said “bigot,” but the same truth applies to anyone absolutely convinced that he is right about something.

xiv      Conspiracy theories abound. There are so many things that “THEY” are doing to us and that “THEY” don't want us to know.

xv       See 1984 by George Orwell.

xvi     Even worse, we may be taught something that seems right but is wrong. Or we may have such a belief from childhood.

xvii    Much – but not all – of what we are taught is true, but,

xviii   It's also important to consider the reliability of the source. Too often we are given a biased source as “proof” of the validity of a particular claim. A comparison of different perspectives may be revealing, but it's often the case that we accept what we already believe and reject anything that disagrees with it.

xix     Citing a Russian proverb.

xx      Hillel. Pirke Avot, 1:14.