The good thing about Science is that it’s true, whether or not you believe in it.
Neil deGrasse Tyson on Twitter
In short: I am very pro-science.
It’s more: I think I know (read: learned, studied) how to distinguish sound research methodology from the not-so-sound or even bogus one.
Maybe that also means I lack motivation to engage in certain conversations that are mostly about opinion, conspiracy theories, or personal experience as the only and sole accepted ‘proof’ or benchmark.
Whether this is about the disagreement of self-professed natural fibre advocates with currrent-state-of-science data, or over-prioritisation of sales figures over climate impact figures. To me they are largely the same: opinion based the way they happen right now.
Which is not saying that current state-of-science is complete or not change over time. It may very well. But in order to do so: science and the scientific methodology is the way to go.
Hence, I am very much pro scientific discourse.
Which means an approach whereby hard data and insights, together with the methodology how you got there, are transparently provided. In principle to everyone, but realistically to those who will be able to make sense of it: scientists and topical experts, and those with the considerable time commitment to dig deep.
And this gets me to the very point of why you will find this post on this blog:
I deplore the fact that the business community – reaching from leadership of companies that make products through to the proverbial supplier of its ingredient (fibre, food, extractives from mine or oile fields, …) do not engage in it. Instead they often prefer to accuse the scientists and generators as being partial, and driven by ‘big money’ (an interesting argument in itself ;). Or using bogus methodologies. Or being susceptible to bribery.
If all these accusations fail: ‘Common sense’ is being cited as the ultimate and last threshold.
If only ‘common sense’ was a) as common as the word suggests and b) commonly science based …
It goes without saying: All of these above very well be valid accusations in principle – if backuped by proof, data, evidence that indeed they are truthful. Not just by case studies and personal opinions or conjectures. Not just because you don’t like what science says, because it goes against what you prefer, sell, are an expert in and so on.
What is needed in business is more air time for scientific approaches and methods. More airtime for the scientific discourse. More requirement for the application of scientific approaches. In product creation, in business strategy. In assessing what is or is not a fair wage. In assessing what is or is not a genuinely better and more responsible fibre. In improving labour conditions in the supply chain. Everywhere.
With a genuine scientific discourse practiced by everyone involved – rather than the newspaper headline kind – we could have hard, inconvenient, but equally very fruitful discussions.
What will never change: Scientific insights and data will remain inconvenient for some in one case, and to others in other cases.
But at least it’s fact based. Forward looking, and leveraging the actual knowledge we have accumulated over the time of existence of our human society, while striving to know better still.
“Science is a cooperative enterprise, spanning the generations.
Neil de Grasse Tyson
It’s the passing of a torch from teacher, to student, to teacher.
A community of minds reaching back to antiquity and forward to the stars.”
