The current monologue from Government voices attest that they have the truth, the sole truth, and that if anyone doubts them it is anathema.
Now permit me to examine this in the historical context of medicine. In the 2nd century, Galen was physician to Marcus Aurelius. Probably one of the better Roman dictators, if such can even make sense. He did his share of Christian slaughtering but as a Stoic he seems to be better than most.
Galen viewed medicine as an amalgam of facts and logic. He had a few facts and he possessed good Aristotelian logic. Thus Galen’s writings lasted until the mid 14th century. Along came the new medical schools such as Bologna which did autopsies and found Galen wanting. They corrected Galen, with some hew and cry from the old line docs, but alas the plague came along and really helped medicine. It killed off many of the old guard and opened the door for the new.
But logic was always a part of medicine and to a degree remains as such. Differential diagnosis is basically a logical tree, decision tree. The introduction of AI is not logical, in fact it is the antithesis of logic. It is a non-sequential alignment of facts driven to a conclusion. Lots of path images and weigh them properly and you get melanoma. NOT
Now with the plague we get instead of logic what I call Jesuitical Sophistry. Now what is Jesuitical Sophistry? Let me begin by providing some personal history. As a youth I studied for a while at St Francis Pro Seminary on Staten Island in anticipation of becoming a Franciscan. Never made it but I did become a strong adherent to Ockham and his Franciscan brethren as well as a long lasting follower of St Francis and his order.
Now in contrast, the Jesuits were formed in an attempt to educate the elite, to train the young minds of those whose path would lead to power. Think Georgetown, think CIA, think Regis High School in NYC. I will let you fill in the dots. The Jesuits “trained” these erstwhile “leaders” in true sophist fashion in my opinion and my experience. Namely, select the position you want to assert and then choose the facts that support this opinion. In case you missed this, Ockham forced one to do the opposite. Collect the facts, use logic, and then determine the conclusion. Ockhamistic Logic versus Jesuitical Sophistry.
So how does this apply today? Simple, the Jesuitical sophist concludes that the immunized are the source of the problem of Delta spread so have the immunized bear the burden of stopping it.
Now that is as dumb as dirt.
Fact 1: As we have stated well more than a year ago the virus can reside in the nasopharynx in a dormant but transmissible state.
Fact 2: In the immunized that is generally as far as it goes. But an Ockhamist would then say; how did it get there? Simple, from an un-immunized person.
Conclusion, for an Ockhamist, the problem lies solely with the un-vaccinated and the vaccinated have just been taken advantage of.
Yet for the Jesuitical Sophist the intent is to control everyone, so them limit the causality to fit their sophistry and say it is due solely to the inoculated.
I think one can fill in my gaps. My Ockhamistic conclusion
is that the problem lies solely with the un-vaccinated and those vaccinated
should be held harmless. This clearly is not the conclusion sought by the
Jesuitical Sophists.
Posts
