COVID19, Conspiracies: Islamic Ethics and Predictability

To put it mildly, the COVID-19 pandemic is difficult to navigate. Apart from losing loved ones, near and far, the challenge of obtaining accurate and reliable information on the virus places additional strain.  And we turn to social media for getting information at a click or a finger push. But here the information is as ubiquitous as it is fraught with deep uncertainty. Is ethics possible when knowledge is not complete?

Ethics, COVID-19 and Science

Knowledge of COVID-19 has led to two problematic social outcomes. There are also good outcomes, but I want to address the former in this blog. The one is a headlong conviction in conspiracy theories. These range from the invisible hand of Bill Gates to the fact that there is no such thing as a unique virus. 'It is just a flu,' I have heard often. Secondly and relatedly, I have come across an increasing number of people who refuse to take social precautions to prevent the spread of the virus. 

It seems that knowledge of the virus is closely tied to the ethical behaviour of protecting oneself and others. Since many of these doubts have a tinge of religiosity, it might be good to take another look at science and its contribution to how we see and behave in the world. 

Knowledge and Predictability

Modern science is rooted in its predictability. When an experiment produces the same results repeatedly, it can be considered true until a new experiment refines or disproves it. We entered COVID with a new challenge, but with the conviction that it will soon pass. We will soon know how the virus behaves and develop a cure or vaccine against it.

Science, from this perspective, has introduced a dimension of predictability in the world. It creates a strong impression that the laws of nature are known or knowable. Knowledge or belief in science creates a conviction of the world. And, to a greater or lesser extent, we live and act by this conviction. Human action in a world of science is rooted in the predictability of the world.

When a mobile phone does not work, for example, we know that it can be fixed. Something that is supposed to work in a particular way has malfunctioned. Another way of saying this is that the malfunctioning has worked unpredictably. When repaired, it will again be as predictable as it was before. 

Medicine is more difficult but works more or less on the same foundation. The human body is highly complex and human behaviour is even more so.  But deep down, medicine works with the same model of knowledge and predictability. The more we know, the better we can behave in the future.

COVID19 and Unpredictability

Covid19 has introduced a dimension of unpredictability to this outlook. As the "behaviour" of the virus is tracked in experiments, it also changes regularly in relation to new variants. As the virus seems to react differently in different bodies, the unpredictability of its effects grows. And as scientific results and anecdotal information is shared across social media, the prognosis of the virus seems to defy predictability. 

COVID-19 is a great introduction to how science works. Scientists have been producing results and vaccines in peer-reviewed journals at great speed. But no sooner have these results been disseminated, new results refine or contradict the earlier results. And the process continues incrementally until we get a better idea of the virus, its effects and its prognosis. Or we might come up with information that we were wrong all the time. This is how science works.

COVID19 has given as a time-lapse version of this process. What used to take years and decades is now seen on television, Facebook and Twitter playing out in less than 18 months. 

But the picture is mediatized, which is better and worse for science and its goal of predictability. Journalists summarize, and scientists share their alternative results. Political leaders see COVID-19 as a challenge or opportunity. And pharmaceutical companies promote experiments and vaccines with profits, not always science, in mind. Social media has given us access to knowledge that we could never have imagined.

As many commentators have argued, this has created a perfect place for conspiracies. But conspiracies are not only the result of popular social or religious lore - they are not only spun from untested beliefs. They are supported by a perception of science that it can predict the future with pinpoint accuracy. Conspiracy theories are filling in the gaps that scientists cannot fill fast enough. 

Many conspiracies are based on pseudo-scientific notions that pretend to be science. New unknown "facts" are offered through "shares." An alternative is offered, one that is rooted in a scientific model that is more predictable than the one scientists are working with the COVID-19 epidemic. 

So while conspiracies seem to be defying all scientific norms, they peddle the predictability of science in highly problematic ways. 

Ethics and Full Knowledge

But I want to come back to the ethics of knowing and not knowing. When knowledge of something is not guaranteed, does it mean that ethical behaviour should be suspended? Since we do not know with certainty how the COVID-19 virus acts, we can suspend ethics towards others.

I am reminded of a central story in the Chapter of the Cave in the Qur'an where the Prophet Moses wishes to accompany a wise man to learn something from him. One of the main morals from this story is that much of life is obscured from full disclosure. Doing good does not sometimes appear to be doing good. Knowing everything is not a precondition for doing good. 

We live in a modern world determined by science and technology. But the COVID-19 might point to doing good when knowledge is not complete as yet, or will never be. So, ethics cannot be based on certain knowledge. It cannot be dependent on knowing everything beforehand. A good deed is one done in some darkness, and it may change the world.