There is a strange video on the corona-virus that has earned some attention:
It concerns the so-called « insides » of the panic around the sanitary crisis provoked by the spread of the corona virus. The « insider ». perspective is given by a specialist, Dr Wolfgang Wodarg.
1) STATISTICAL EMPIRICISM. Wodarg’s argument is political despite its seeming scientific content and reasoning. He uses a statistical argument to make a « scientific » point that is already outdated by ongoing developments, i.e. his epidemiological facts are wrong.
2) STATISTICAL FRAGILITY. This political video argues that « you can prove anything with statistics » by itself using statistics. It does not address the sanitary crisis unfolding in the hospitals and clinics. The fragility of our health-care systems is tied to downsizing due to debunking arguments such as these.
3) EXPERT FRAGILITY. Wodarg does give some interesting information concerning the methodological and sociological fragility of the science-community’s response to the epidemiological crisis and to its political management.
4) EPISTEMOLOGICAL FRAGILITY. The epistemological fragility of claims to scientific knowledge stemming from the presence in science of personal motivation, experts’ partisan interests, political strategies, and path-dependency of results and conclusions is always present and does not in itself invalidate these results and conclusions.
5) META-PREDICTIONS. I agree with Wodarg’s arguments on the fragility of the scientific pathway to validation of a consensus on the virus, but not with his sceptical conclusion, and also on the fragility for our healthcare systems due to not dealing with the meta-prediction that unpredictable crises will emerge.
6) NOETIC SHOCK. The noetic shock provoked by the Corona-virus crisis is similar to that administered by the geoclimatic crisis. It demands of us that we think and act in terms of statistical and systemic arguments. Otherwise, disaster ensues.