Apocalypse Fatigue

Patrick Keeney
October 24, 2016
Two pre-humans are shivering in a cave. On hearing a nearby lightning strike, one rushes outside to fetch a flaming faggot of wood ignited by the lightning. The other, fearing an existential threat to life, rushes to extinguish the fire. It was the first argument over global warming. People have been fretting over many such real and imagined threats to the planet ever since. Climate change, Y2K, flu pandemics, Clinton/Obama foreign policy. You name it, it’s an apocalyptic menace. Patrick Keeney is tired of it, and has concluded that news of Armageddon is greatly exaggerated.

Apocalypse Fatigue

Patrick Keeney
October 24, 2016
Two pre-humans are shivering in a cave. On hearing a nearby lightning strike, one rushes outside to fetch a flaming faggot of wood ignited by the lightning. The other, fearing an existential threat to life, rushes to extinguish the fire. It was the first argument over global warming. People have been fretting over many such real and imagined threats to the planet ever since. Climate change, Y2K, flu pandemics, Clinton/Obama foreign policy. You name it, it’s an apocalyptic menace. Patrick Keeney is tired of it, and has concluded that news of Armageddon is greatly exaggerated.
Share on facebook
Share on Facebook
Share on twitter
Share on Twitter

The celebrated American novelist Marilynne Robinson recently published a book of essays entitled When I Was a Child, I Read Books. It is a good read. As the title suggests, the author recounts the centrality of books in forming not only her literary sensibilities, but her broader appreciation of life’s mysteries.

As a child, I read books too. But I read the books of scientists, diligently taking heed of their prognostications. I thought it was the duty of responsible citizens to listen carefully to the analyses offered by scientists, those possessed of the expertise and specialist knowledge required to save the planet.

I soon discovered that the experts in any field rarely agree. We are first told to avoid eating eggs; then we are informed that eating eggs is essential to our health, both positions arising from seemingly unimpeachable research. Scientific expertise, I was disappointed to learn, isn’t all that it is cracked up to be.  Where I wanted certainty and truth, science would provide answers in 50 shades of grey.

Nonetheless, like some cognitively challenged lab rat, I persevered in the belief that somewhere there was a cohort of scientists who really knew the truth and weren’t afraid to state it, unlike the equivocating kind that it was my unhappy lot to encounter.

Given my enduring if naive faith in science, I bought into various scientifically predicted doomsday scenarios. I was a sucker for pedantic empiricists, for what I now think of as the “Jesus-is-a-coming-so-sing-you-sinners-sing” school of science.

For example, I believed Dr. Paul Ehrlich. His 1969 book The Population Bomb demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that the human species was reproducing faster than our ability to feed ourselves. He confidently predicted that by 1980 the world would be facing mass starvation unless we took radical steps to curtail the population. The book painted a bleak either/or scenario: either stop having babies, or face our doom.  It was a convincing and seemingly sound scientific thesis. I was justifiably worried. But the mass starvations and food riots of the 1980’s failed to materialize. Both Ehrlich and I survived.

Keeney - Inset1

Immediately on the heels of Ehrlich’s Neo-Malthusian scare came global cooling. According to the experts, the world was cooling at an alarming rate because of human activities. Popular media, including Time, Newsweek, and National Geographic, did stories on the topic. We were bringing on a new ice age, and we were all going to freeze to death. Unless, that is, the government consulted the scientific experts and took immediate action. We all know how that story ended. (Although, strange to say, global cooling is now making something of a comeback; it’s hard to keep a good theory down.)

In December of 1999, I remember watching on TV a finger-wagging professor from MIT. With the certainty of a preacher at a tent revival, he informed us that the Millennium Bug was about to unleash on the world a catastrophe of Biblical proportions. Only dullards and the scientifically illiterate could fail to see this. Fortunately, he had the solution. The one thing that could save us was, oddly enough, the sort of expertise that he himself possessed.

The end is ever nigh

I worried about and lived through other memorable, scientifically authenticated apocalypses, including the listeria scare, the avian flu, and the swine flu (which, we were promised, was to be “the greatest pandemic ever”). It appears that we humans like our doomsday scenarios. Whether it’s the population bomb, the Y2K bug, or global cooling (or should I say climate change?), the end, it appears, is always nigh. It’s later than you think. Repent at the altar of science, and sing you sinners, sing.

What is rarely commented on in such doomsday scenarios is what the Greeks called “hubris”, that is, the arrogant and excessive pride that goeth before a fall. Such arrogance too frequently accompanies scientific claims. Scientific hubris rests on two organizing principles.

First, doomsday scientists trade in what Bertrand Russell referred to as “cosmic impiety”, the assumption that we humans are the greatest force in the known universe. For example, while the climate change scenario focuses on anthropogenic changes to the climate, it is salutary to bear in mind that a few years ago the eruption of a single Icelandic volcano – what a friend defined as a geologic, after-dinner burp – shut down air traffic in Europe for a week. Nature doubtless has other surprises in store.

Secondly, scientific hubris rests on the idea that the science surrounding a given topic is settled, that there is a consensus among scientists. The consensus, so it is claimed, points to a clear course of action, one which invariably requires massive government intervention orchestrated by scientific experts who will direct the behavior of the great unwashed and save the day.

I’ve grown weary of scientifically predicted Armageddon. I’ve been gamed too often. And I find maddening the strident and categorical tones in which reputed experts couch their prophecies. They should know better. Science, by its nature, is never settled. It is defeasible, which is to say contentious and open to revision. Experts can and do hold mutually incompatible positions, whether in nutrition, psychology or particle physics. Consensus may be a useful term in politics, but as Galileo famously put it, “In matters of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.”

Scientific claims need to be tempered with Socratic humility. Socrates was told by the Delphic Oracle that he was the wisest man in Athens. This puzzled Socrates. By his own admission, he didn’t know very much. But after polling all of the experts, all of whom made spurious claims to knowledge, Socrates concluded that he was the wisest man in Athens because he, alone of all Athenians, was aware of his own ignorance.

Like all of us, scientists need to learn from Socrates. They need to temper their prophecies with the appropriate humility, respect and open-mindedness to those who hold opposing views. This is a simple and uncomplicated requirement for honest and open enquiry into any matter, scientific or otherwise. It is unfortunate that it so often gets swept aside in the rush to save the planet.

Love C2C Journal? Here's how you can help us grow.

More for you

Thirteen Things That Can’t Be Said About Aboriginal Law And Policy In Canada

How do you make new laws and policies or reform old ones in a democracy? You talk openly about every aspect, carefully consider the pros and cons and the long-term implications, and strive to come up with solutions that are fair to everyone. That has been the ideal, anyway, in Canada since Confederation. So what happens when vast areas of law and policy cannot even be discussed any longer? Bruce Pardy lists the things that have become perilous to say regarding Indigenous issues – but that need to be said if Canada is to maintain a legal system that is fair to all Canadians.

Democratic socialism is the new communism, but what does that mean for the people old enough to remember living under communism?

New Communism, Old Fears

Supporting or working to bring about “democratic” socialism has become an alluring option for ever-more voters across North America. It is ascending on clouds of virtuous intentions, high hopes and utopian goals, backed by elaborate theories, with good doses of anger and envy adding punch. Yet it has all been tried before – and failed calamitously, an unmitigated horror ending in ruination. Luckily, people who have personally lived through it are still around to tell the tale. Through the eyes of one survivor of Eastern European communism, Doug Firby issues a stark reminder of what real oppression looks like and a plea to younger Canadians to resist the seductive call of socialism.

What would have happened if Canada rejected "coronapsychosis"?

Rejecting “Coronapsychosis” Could Be Good for Our Health

It will remain forever unknowable how Canada would have fared had our country not largely aped the “lockdown” model adopted by most of the advanced countries. But there is meaningful evidence for those who care and dare to look – and the implications aren’t pretty for our public health officials and their political acolytes. Brian Giesbrecht examined an obscure, far-off country run by an eccentric old man who decided to do the pandemic his own way – and may well have saved not only his nation’s economy but hundreds of his compatriots as well.

More from this author

A mustang driving down the open road is the epitome of the freedom felt when driving.

Why the Freedom of Driving Still Matters

Most of us have heard it said that a lot of science and engineering went into bringing you the automobile gleaming beneath your gaze in the showroom. A lot goes into the act of driving as well. And while many people no doubt find driving banal or worse, Patrick Keeney believes there’s also a lot at stake. To drive, he writes, is to exercise our skill at being free, to display our competence, to accelerate for the sheer joy of it, and to negate the technocrats who strive to make our lives idiot-proof and safe. To steer our very lives, as it were. To Keeney and the author of the book he reviews in this essay, few places are better than behind the wheel, breathing the heady air of freedom.

Can Liberalism Survive the Coronavirus Era?

Covid-19 poses a grave threat to many things: nursing homes, music festivals and café culture among them. But what of its broader implications? The coronavirus cares nothing for identity, imaginative individual rights or past grievances. It is severely undermining globalist fantasies. And recovering from its ravages seems likely to reward countries that focus on conservative values of pragmatism, frugality, duty, markets and tradition. Patrick Keeney charts the likely fortunes of conservative and liberal convictions once the pandemic recedes.

Thailand Diary: Living Joyfully in a Time of Disease

Canadians have been hectored into essentially hunkering down in their homes. Nearly all of us at least have a home. But what if you found yourself halfway around the world, with nowhere to live, the situation changing almost hourly, and lacking even the legal rights of a local citizen? Patrick Keeney not only maintained his equanimity but found time on the fly to explain how one man adapted to the life of an expatriate vagabond. Keeney shares his observations about the pandemic’s impact on a vulnerable culture and shows us all how, amidst the many exigencies, it’s possible to continuing finding joy.

Share This Story

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print

Donate

Subscribe to the C2C Weekly
It's Free!

* indicates required
Interests
By providing your email you consent to receive news and updates from C2C Journal. You may unsubscribe at any time.