• SuperIce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      It wasn’t common sense at the time. Germ theory wouldn’t exist for another 20 years after Semmelweis’s discovery. His idea of “corpse particles that might turn a living person into a corpse after contact” seemed superstitious and crazy at the time. It was only after germ theory that we learned that these “corpse particles” were in fact germs.

          • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            11 months ago

            Maybe they will, maybe they won’t. All we know is that the climate is changing and we appear to be causing it as the average global temperature reversed and began increasing during what would normally be a cooling period. We also believe that we’re the ones causing it because the increase in temperature correlates with the increase in CO2, methane and other greenhouse gases emitted. Now, of course correlation isn’t causation, but because gases like CO2 are known to have a warming effect due to their ability to trap heat, it makes sense to believe that these gases would contribute to a hotter climate.

            It’s entirely possible that, in hindsight, we’ll find that we were panicking over nothing, and that the earth fixes itself or that this is somehow normal. However, that’s a hell of a gamble considering this is our only home in the cosmos. Do you really want to take that gamble?

            • aksdb@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              If we only ever act on things we think we got 100% nailed down, we will either be as ignorant as these fools who locked Semmelweis away or we will stop doing anything at all, because realistically there is always a chance we got some seemingly basic understanding wrong.

              The only intelligent thing is to work with a good mix of “what you know” paired with a sane amount of “critical thinking” and an assessment of potentially involved risks.

              Covid was also an example (at least here in Germany). People fought against the invonvenience of having to wear masks or stay inside (or get vaccinated) because (as they said) we don’t know for certain how dangerous the illness really is and/or how effectice these measures are.

              For me the calculation was simple: doing these measures and being wrong has far far less fatal consequences than being wrong and not doing these measures.

      • aksdb@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        IMO the common sense part isn’t “oh right of course those are germs”, but following the observation that points to some correlation. They don’t have to know or understand the root cause to at least consider (or accept) that something is wrong.

        • Slotos@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          That’s the scientific part. Conventional wisdom, on the other hand, is often neither.

        • gandalf_der_12te@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Well, I’m not so sure about that. Consider this:

          Quantum Mechanics (QM) makes accurate statements and predictions about a lot of physical experiments.

          That doesn’t mean, however, that the theory in especially well-liked, especially among common people. There are a lot of people who think that QM is incorrect, or at least incomplete, simply because it contradicts their intuition.

          • aksdb@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            But that’s a good thing. If everyone considers the status quo as final, no one would research anything. It’s fine to question stuff, if you at least follow scientific methodologies. Just saying “nah, I don’t buy it” and then leaning back doing nothing is just lazy, and not critical thinking.

    • RunawayFixer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      If Semmelweis’ s theories were correct, it would have meant that many deaths of their patients would have been easily avoidable. So those other doctors could either ridicule the theory and continue living + practicing in ignorance, or accept the theory and also accept that they had (unknowingly) caused the deaths of many of their patients.

      I’m not surprised that they chose the route of ridicule. I’m also not surprised that 20 or 30 years later, when the assistants of the old doctors had become the new generation of doctors, that the theory was then more easily accepted.

    • cameron_vale@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      But ignorance is only really appreciated in retrospect.

      When the ignoramus is contemporary, he knows he’s right. He’s thinking what all the smart modern people are thinking. Of course he’s right.

      And any idea that contradicts him (and contradict the modern, right-thinking majority) is clearly foolishness.

      So maybe it’s the modern right-thinkers that we need to be wary of.