Book by Orsi and Pasternak is the son of the monster called science – 06/08/2023 – Health

In recent years, I “lived” with Natalia Pasternak on social media and with many of her, now, opponents in scientific dissemination during the coronavirus pandemic. While I feel comfortable talking about the subject, I hesitated before accepting the invitation to write about the book “Que Bobagem!”, by the couple Carlos Orsi and Natalia Pasternak, due to the great stir created around it.

“Nonsense!” it begins with a well-founded introduction where the epistemological basis and foundation that describe Orsi and Pasternak’s “way of looking at the world” are made explicit. They bring the objectivism of the modern scientific method almost palpable in reading. From Pavlov to the classic work of placebo physiology. The authors are so clear and didactic that they list the criteria that make a scientific study in the area of ​​health methodologically adequate.

Following these principles given to the reader, Orsi and Pasternak delve into each of the 12 subjects. Or “nonsense” families. Whether it is a deliberate marketing strategy with the intention of causing outrage or not, for me –who am not a fan of any of the analyzed practices– it caused some discomfort.

Okay, answering Daniel Dennett, there’s no polite way to ask someone if they’ve considered the possibility that their entire life has been devoted to an illusion. And, if the simple question may sound like offense, I remember that Orsi and Pasternak do not bring the subtlety of doubt in their pages.

Anyone who understands that science is a method or a tool whose usefulness is to evaluate objective outcomes and, only from these results, a theory of knowledge can be built, read the book with great naturalness and agreed with most of the authors’ statements.

This present article was written by someone who also has a more reductionist, exclusionary and objective view of the scientific method. But I know that the concept of objectivity is prior to humanity than the concept of science.

Each culture in its time or each predominant ideology is capable of finding itself possessing objectivity and the universal principles that define the concepts by which knowledge is constructed and thus creating its own definition of science.

Undoubtedly there are doctors and many other deceivers who advocate quantum and energetic cures, immunity serums, coolers and other, now yes, nonsense. Just take a stroll through Instagram to immediately recognize them. They deserve all the criticism and the nickname of pseudoscientists. I believe that the book fails to put acupuncture, psychoanalysis and some other practices in the same basket. Because the seriousness and intention of the people behind these practices should have been taken into account before using them pejoratively.

Due to the limited space, I will not go into the merits of their respective efficiencies. There is specific literature for this. Science from the point of view of the authors (and mine), even being capable of assessing the effectiveness of these practices, could hardly extend itself satisfactorily to evaluating the theoretical framework of acupuncture, the psychoanalytic unconscious, drives, libidos, etc. In the same way that our science does not encompass philosophy or spirituality.

Despite this, the authors did not personalize their criticisms. On the other hand, there were personal attacks aimed at Pasternak, inferring his lack of legitimacy to participate in the discussion. These, in addition to showing an anti-scientific posture and intellectual pettiness, only exemplified the bias of authority in science also discussed in the book. Ideas must be countered with other ideas.

The data presented in “What nonsense!” must be countered with better data. I disagree, however, with the thesis of misogyny as a reason for criticism, defended in a recent article by Pasternak herself. Few people, male or female, have had more spotlight to talk about science in recent years.

Is it a boastful book? Perhaps. Hard? Yes. But honest because from the beginning the way of looking at the world of its authors and their definition of science is described. They stayed true to these principles throughout the book.

Finally, I would venture to say that most people define science somewhere in the middle between Popper and Feyerabend. Closest to this one. And he would say that Pasternak and Orsi believe there is a monster: science. And that when he speaks he repeats a single coherent message. How silly! he is one of the most beloved children the monster has ever borne.