Courtesy of wikipedia.org
The debate continued for several minutes until we realized we were using terms differently. Definitions were the source of our disagreement. I shouldn’t have been surprised. More than once, I’ve noted that language is as slippery as a well-greased pig.
An argument can be debilitating or productive, depending on how someone responds to it. In politics, such skirmishes may lead to gridlock, but in science, they often open minds to new possibilities. Unfortunately, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, has made science a political flashpoint. He’s not alone. A Pew report shows that among Republicans, respect for science has declined by over 20% since 2020. Respect among Democrats remains stable. (“Improving Psychological through Adversarial Collaboration,” by Stuart Vyse, Skeptical Inquirer, Jan/Feb 2026, pg. 12.)
A linguistic misunderstanding is but one source of argument. There are many. After all, a universe observed through eye slits is likely to be misinterpreted.
Donald Trump’s view of reality, for example, has forced us to be nimble thinkers. When he imposes tariffs on the American people and calls it ‘Liberation Day,’ we must adjust our understanding of what liberation means. When he liberates Venezuela’s oil, yet leaves dictators to govern the country, we must adjust that understanding again.
To be fair, science poses similar quandaries. For years, I’ve supported organic farmers, believing that doing so benefited me and the planet. But not so fast. Andrea Lee, an award-winning immunologist and microbiologist, insists organic farming is no more nutritious nor better for the environment than traditional farming. What’s more, organic farmers do use pesticides. The list is long and includes copper sulfate, copper oxide, and potassium silicate. (“Organic Is the Wellness Industry of Agriculture,” by Andrea Love, Skeptical Enquirer, Jan/Feb. 2025, pg. 17.)
True, these elements are natural to the earth, but at high concentrations they become toxic to fish (Ibid, pg. 17). In addition, unlike chemical pesticides, they are less regulated. The basic difference between natural and chemical pesticides is price, the former being more expensive.
According to Love, organic farming is a marketing tool. Wealthy consumers may pay more to feel superior, but, as she points out, “nature’s way” is the argument of anti-vaxxers, too–a comparison that leaves my cheeks burning.
Okay. My eyes have opened, but will I change my habits? Am I ready to turn away from organic salad greens? Doing so would save money… That leads me to think, “Well, what’s in a name?” An organic banana protected by nothing more than its natural wrapping will taste as sweet.
BOYCOTT: TESLA, APPLE, AMAZON
