Reflections

Recently, I have noticed a disturbingly common pattern of interaction on important topics.   One party represents a solidified position as “secular,” “scientific” or “based on fact.”   In response, another questions that position and declares a simple openness to various possible other perspectives.   The first party denounces this openness as lunacy, confuses it with an equally solidified opposing opinion, and attributes that opinion to “irrational beliefs.”   The now unquestionable “scientific, secular” position is defended with inquisitional fervor. Here is one such situation: a school demands that a student be “diagnosed” and “coded” by a psychologist so that appropriate resources can be made available to help in class.   The mother wants some of the resources but questions the diagnosis on rational grounds: the symptoms resulted from a childhood infection and the child’s teachers and other professionals involved with him say he has been im...