[PREV - TWO_WRONG]    [TOP]

TWO_NUKES

                                            September 17, 2021

                                            From material originally published
                                            at the dailykos in 2015.

                                                                TWO_GATES
On the nuclear power debate:

This is probably a subject for another time, but let's
touch on the way the first-stage filters function in
the nuclear power debate.

The anti-nuclear side has an awkward problem at this point,
in that they have to deal with folks like myself comparing
them to the climate change denialists. My take is that there
are some striking similarities: both sides ignore the vast
consensus of expert opinion and instead cherry-pick
exceptions that agree with their preconceptions.

So, how does the anti-nuclear side deal with this
accusation? They make two different, but related moves: 
                                                        
   (1) they insist they're not denying scientific evidence,
       they're just objecting to a particular technology, 
                                                            
   (2) they claim the technical experts in the nuclear power
       field are not independent and may very well be corrupted
       by their industrial connections.

(Note: you don't hear that second objection at the dailykos
much, because it gets too close to violating some site rules
that I have at best mixed feelings about: no "conspiracy
theory", and don't call people "shills".)

The way I would respond to those two moves: 


   (1) the distinction between science and technology is often
       greatly exaggerated (a reflection of the Cartesian
       mind-body dichotomy, I suspect), and evaluating evidence
       about phenomena and the efficacy of a technique are both
       actually very similar problems.
                                          
   (2) money can certainly corrupt, but then, money is everywhere,
       and presuming it only corrupts the people you don't want to
       listen to is actually just a cover for cherry-picking.
                                             
       Further, financial concerns aren't the only force that can
       corrupt judgment, any sort of engagement with an idea has
       a way of making people feel committed to it.
                                                        
    The deep need to avoid admitting that you got something     
    wrong seems like a tremendous force in human affairs...     
                                                                    
    The example at hand: people who are willing to risk the fate    
    of the planet rather than use nuclear power to save it.         
                                                                    



--------
[NEXT - TWO_RUDE]