32. Master in epidemiology, economics and public health

I have observed, in the last month, a curious phenomenon going on in my WhatsApp groups. Groups which, in the past, have devoted their conversations to mundane, if not even mendacious, subjects, are now discussing epidemiology, economic policy and public health. People are reading on these subjects, they are interested. This is a dangerous moment, if you believe the adage ‘A little knowledge is a dangerous thing’, and I have seen some situations which seem to illustrate this point. Most reading is done on WhatsApp, Facebook and highly selective Twitter threads. These are not the sources I would recommend for gaining a masters in any of these worthwhile, complex subjects. Information may be mistaken or even wilfully faked. And even if not, the critical reading of complex information, combined with awareness of potential intentional and unintentional bias, are essential when trying to gain full understanding. We should be moving to books and peer reviewed articles, if at all possible

Length: 995 characters

Comments

b8c said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jaime said…
It's well known that the wisest people are brothers in law... Master in all subjects... Hahahaha.
SantiDominguezV said…
Hahahaha, true, Jaime. I truly hope that not many people are locked down with their brothers in law. That may really overload the ICU after a while
Sandra K. said…
This is very true and accurate observation. The change of subjects into more meaningful ones and discussions via WhatsApp are good for a start though and, hopefully, will underpin some deep work...
SantiDominguezV said…
Yes, of course it is a start, but in the great majority of cases also the end. Very few will persevere to a level of understanding that actually becomes understanding. Most will stop at the illusion of understanding which is shared by those that don't. This has been our history so far, and will most likely remain so.

Popular posts from this blog

98. Choosing the best sources

283. The trouble with journalists these days

251. The privacy debate