A conversation about coronavirus response this morning left me with a “raw thought.”
It seems that the current divide in the response to this pandemic is caused by tradeoffs between human health and economic impacts. And it’s a serious concern. With perfect information, we could determine the exact restrictions and timing to “reopen” the economy that will minimize human death and suffering.
With imperfect information we find ourselves arguing in circles about what to do and ultimately differing on fundamental principles that won’t change. I find this argument, though somewhat necessary (there will never be a perfect answer), also boring.
When faced with tradeoffs, yes we have to make difficult choices, but also we should be looking for alternatives. Are there other options that for one reason or another we have not considered.
I think there could be. But it will require a paradigm shift. The raw thought came when I remembered Thomas Khun’s theory of scientific revolution. Basically a paradigm* represents a way of thinking that usually holds a certain model of the universe in mind. This results in gradual (scientific) progress within a paradigm until a paradigm is replaced (paradigm shift) and progress leaps forward. Interestingly, biological evolution functions in the same way – gradual genetic change followed but huge jumps.
I’m pessimistic about our situation. Although we’re working hard to control this pandemic, within our current paradigm I think gradual progress isn’t good enough.
In medical science, I don’t know of any other models we could move to that would help.
However, I think there are paradigm shifts in our economic model which could handle this situation better. It’s clear that a free market cannot solve collective problems. A free market can’t fight a war, can’t prop up the stock market, can’t care for the sick. We need a national and global mechanism to suspend (if not replace) free-market capitalism in times of crisis.
I think this is a paradigm shift which we are resistant of and we will stumble through this crisis. There are plenty of practical (gradual) decisions that we could/should make to minimize the damage. But we are lucky that it is not a more devastating pandemic, like in 1918, which will come again.
*I know there is controversy about what exactly Kuhn meant by paradigms but I think I’m close.