Beneath all the data and debating points, the accusations and insults, lies an unspoken difference in what we might call the philosophy of living. The two teams are not arguing about science, but about civilization. One team envisions a society of well-defined limits, of common purpose and behaviors, in the interest of keeping everyone as safe as possible: a society organized around the prevention of disease. The other team leans toward a society that champions personal responsibility and choice, while accepting a background risk of disease as an inescapable feature of sharing a planet with viruses.
One thing is for sure: we’re arguing about something bigger than masks, bigger than science. That’s why new mask data will never put an end to the debate. As long as masks persist in society — which by the looks of it, could be a while — the two teams will continue to hurl invective at each other on social media and elsewhere, burning up energy in the most frustrating and futile tug-of-war of the pandemic era. It’s a battle that science will never solve on its own. Perhaps we need a poet or two in the mix?
