How Understanding the Scientific Method Makes You A Better or More Informed Citizen in the Age of Covid-19
Scientific methods can only cure information inadequacies in the covid-19 era. As Cozby and Bates (25) state, scientific understanding prompts critical thinking, which is vital amid confusion, misinformation, and lies that have characterized the covid-19 era. Other writers, such as Tom Nichol and Brian Doherty, also hail the importance of gaining facts before concluding. The scientific method hails analysis of facts and research methods, resulting in a detailed understanding of covid-19.
Grasping scientific methods helps in critical analysis of information. Cozby and Bates (25) note that a scientific background helps an individual analyze the research methods used to determine if the conclusion is viable, resulting in critical thinking. Correspondingly, in the era of covid-19, it is imperative to examine how various reports, experts, or public figures concluded the occurrence, spread, and containment of the disease to uncover whether what they are saying is true, biased, or false. Before supporting a claim or measure, one will have evaluated the arguments made based on the research used. Moreover, with scientific methods, a person can weigh the effectiveness of programs geared towards specific outcomes (Cozby and Bates 26). In the covid-19 era, a lot of programs and initiatives, such as stimulus packages and lockdowns, have been instituted by the government. Forthwith, one can assess the possible positive and negative outcomes of these programs and whether they should stop or continue. Scientific methods prompt a thorough examination of facts before making any judgment.
Again, the advantage of the scientific approach is that it relies on data. The data is used to create a thesis and back up ideas (Cozby and Bates 31). Without data, any claims about covid-19 can easily be brushed off. Moreover, it is possible to examine varying data since science is adversarial in a positive way (Cozby and Bates 31). The more a person compares conflicting data about covid-19, the likelier they will come to the truth. Better still, scientific data is peer-reviewed, which makes the information more reliable. In this case, if scientists or experts review each other’s work and agree on issues relating to covid-19, the public is persuaded and feels confident to follow any measures. Scientific methods are useful in that they present concrete data that results in varied and believable information.
Equally, Tom Nichol’s responses in an interview with Hari Sreenivasan have shown me the importance of respecting experts. Indeed, people tend to question experts’ credibility when they get something wrong (“Why Don’t Americans Trust Experts Anymore?”). However, as Nichol says, this does not mean that they are unknowledgeable in their field. I have also questioned experts in the past, but Nichol taught me that the expert is still more knowledgeable than me. For example, I will be more trusting of what doctors and other healthcare stakeholders state about covid-19 because they understand the human body and health challenges better. Although they may not get it right all the time, what they say is still essential, provided the claims are backed with scientific findings.
Similarly, Brian Doherty’s article has taught me the importance of being objective when analyzing information. The same argument is made by Cozby and Bates (31). Everyone has an opinion, which is supported by reason and research, on how to handle covid-19. Hence, it is crucial not to ignore the concerns of openers, those supporting the reopening of the economy to sustain GDP (gross domestic product), and closers, those who want the economy closed, as each party has valid points. Instead of being closed-minded and supporting either side, it is better to incorporate the opposing views to come up with a balanced solution.
Conclusively, the scientific method leads to a critical analysis of facts and objectivity. In this case, an individual examines the approach used to support a finding before making any choices. The approach also deals with facts, which must be proven and reviewed, leading to reliable information. I also support Nichol’s view that experts are still trustworthy despite their flaws. Similarly, I uphold Doherty’s argument against being biased on how to manage covid-19. To survive in the covid-19 era, one should rely on proven facts and be open-minded.
Works Cited
“Why Don’t Americans Trust Experts Anymore?.” PBS, 2020, www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/why-dont-americans-trust-experts-anymore/?fbclid=IwAR2i_Cc4Nds84LpqrQAOyzX9O6mCxx_sgNa-TWSiMqwuwScuFKD_phzGMzQ. (Accessed 1 May 2020).
Cozby, Paul, and Scott Bates. Methods in Behavioral Research. 13th ed., McGraw Hill, 2015.
Doherty, Brian. “What Each Side of the COVID-19 Debate Should Understand About the Other.” Reason, 2020, reason.com/2020/04/21/what-each-side-of-the-covid-19-debate-should-understand-about-the-other/?fbclid=IwAR0SJ0KHKNk7vMy0rtQBxpEt7SH9cfRJMK47jooLP1Rx1j9-46bS3YKjO0k. (Accessed 1 May 2020).