How Can They All Be Wrong?
Interesting Book Examines One Reason
Regarding the pieces I post from time to time on skepticism toward the official line on AIDS, and other areas where I suspect that what "everyone knows" is a lot less firmly based than we're given to believe, I often get asked, "But how can they all be wrong?"; In other words, is it really credible that virtually the entire body of acknowledged expert opinion could have misled itself in some kind of internally sustained exercise in self-delusion? Well, one only has to recall flat Earths, the geo-centered cosmos, and the happy days of heretic burning to answer that, yes, it's credible. "But not in today's age of reason reigning triumphant, and scientific enlightenment, surely."; Yeah, right.
Frank Lusardi brought my attention to a book called Disciplined Minds, by Jeff Schmidt, published by Rowman & Littlefield, Inc.
David Rasnick, a biochemical research scientist very active in challenging the official dogma of HIV=AIDS=Death, wrote, in recommending the book: "I used to be asked 'How could they all be wrong?' That question of course refers to the fact that virtually all scientists and doctors accept the obviously and hopelessly wrong contagious/HIV hypothesis of AIDS. Indeed, how could they do that? Why do they still do it? Disciplined Minds gives the best explanation of how it is that so many professionals can be so wrong, and it does that without even mentioning AIDS once. As a group, Professionals are perhaps the least independent thinkers in society. Their training and credentialing produces conformists who maintain and protect the status quo. Their very careers depend on it."
Further information is available from the Disciplined Minds web site at disciplinedminds.tripod.com, including the story of how the author was fired for writing it.
The opening paragraph of the web site reads:
In this riveting book about the world of professional work, Jeff Schmidt demonstrates that the workplace is a battleground for the very identity of the individual, as is graduate school, where professionals are trained. He shows that professional work is inherently political, and that professionals are hired to subordinate their own vision and maintain strict Ideological discipline.