Obtuse and incurious

Without the habit of correct observation, no one can ever excel or be successful in his profession. Observation does not consist in the mere habitual sight of objects – in a kind of vague looking-on, so to speak – but in the power of comparing the known with the unknown, of contrasting the similar with the dissimilar, in justly appreciating the connection between cause and effect, the sequence of events and in estimating at their correct value established facts. (Thomas Hawkes Tanner on the methods of medical diagnoses, 1869)

It’s been interesting to observe American behavior in the wake of the “killing” of Osama bin Laden. There’s been no objective evidence put forth around the event. There’s no body. “DNA evidence” is said to exist, but is not made available. There is no independent verification. Standard denigration propaganda has been offered up – drugs and pornography, and there might be “evidence” of this, as if such evidence could not be manufactured by any normal American teenager.

And yet to doubt official truth is to be subjected to ridicule. Hawkes above wrote in a pre-mass media era, so that world view could only be the subject of verbal evidence, spoken and written, and a few pictures. So much has changed since that time. It is possible now for “reality” to be entirely supplied by artificial means. Television is a window, but one that is easily filtered to offer a controlled vision of reality. I would imagine that if Hawkes had been told that a villain of his time, if such a thing even existed, had been killed, body disposed of, no autopsy or independent verification offered, he would have laughed heartily.

The problems that a normal inquisitive person encounters are not lack of evidence, but an overabundance of evidence, and ridicule. The latter is the most off-putting facet in the management of public opinion. Obtuse and incurious dolts can sit back and jeer at normally curious people, saying “That’s some conspiracy theory you got there,” as if doltism conferred superior intelligence.

Life in a controlled media environment offers countless avenues for discovering hidden truth. This makes living an inquisitive life a delightful journey. The notion that we should not be curious, that we should not stray from gray, monotonous fealty; that we should all be “journalists” and accept the words of public official at face value, is an intellectual death sentence.

Of course, the problem with living on the curious side of life is the temptation to think that we have captured all that we need to know, and that we are able to advance theories based on what we think adequate evidence. That’s the rub – adequacy of evidence is always going to be subject to personal failings. We are fallible humans. We make mistakes, presume too much. I made a mistake in the post immediately below, presuming, failing to note the facts that are not subject to interpretation by media outlets. But that path that led me there, the surveillance state, evidence of massive eavesdropping on American citizens, testimony of an NSA official that virtually every high profile journalist in the country is being spied upon … stands.

But I maintain that given the thousands of clowns who have bought, with all the absence of credible evidence supported only by the words of authoritative officials, that Osama bin Laden was “killed,” that I live in a sane place in an insane world. I’ll defend that idea against all comers. I can say with certainty that bin Laden is dead, as all he would have to do is make an appearance to set the record straight. The question is, when did he die? And if indeed he died almost ten years ago, as I suspect, then his having been kept alive for ten years in our virtual reality is a path of inquiry that every thinking person needs to travel.