I had coffee with a friend last week to discuss one topic in particular: science. She was concerned about a comparison I’d made in a recent Daily Post editorial, between ‘anecdotal information’ and ‘scientific information.’ As she explained her perspective — that science often relies on anecdotal information for some of its most valuable discoveries and insights — I understood that she was drawing a distinction between ‘qualitative scientific research’ and ‘quantitative scientific research.’ That is to say, a scientific theory might be built around an accumulation of numerical data, but it can also be based on anecdotal observations.
This is an interesting distinction, and one that I hadn’t considered fully when I wrote my editorial. It seems to me that many of us — many scientists included — tend to view something as ‘scientific’ if it’s supported by a collection of statistics, or calculated results… and view the information as ‘unscientific’ if it relies upon individual case studies. You then add into the mix the ‘politics’ of scientific research — funding sources, celebrity, and just good old politics in general — and you get some rather messy and sometimes non-scientific results. The problem of politics in science was eloquently covered recently in a lengthy essay by Norman Doidge, on the history of hydroxychloroquine research during the COVID pandemic.
You can read that essay — “Hydroxychloroquine: a Morality Tale” — here.
We — humans living in the 21st century — have developed a frightful tendency to place our faith in numbers, and quantities, and statistics — and to discount any information that isn’t supported by ‘data’. This has become true in business, in education, in medicine, in economics. We count calories to control our weight… the number of Likes on a Facebook post… the percentage of people who are unemployed… the number of feet that constitutes a safe “social distance”…
In 1956, the US government (and its “military-industrial complex”) found itself threatened by Global Atheistic Communism, and — as part of a propaganda campaign — began labeling our coins and paper money with the Christian motto, “In God We Trust”.
But if we were honest, our money would look like this instead:
Given a choice between trusting in God, and trusting in data, we typically pick data, it seems to me.
‘Numbers’ and ‘data’ are often on display when our local governments discuss Pagosa Springs’ remarkable economy. One of the numbers I hear mentioned most often, in that regard, is ‘Lodgers Tax Collections’… a number of dollars that has been increasing rather steadily over the past decade, giving some people the impression that our local economy is ‘successful’.
We have other ways to judge our environment, that are more ‘qualitative’ rather than ‘quantitative.’ Are we feeling isolated, or lonely, for example. Are we feeling anxious about the future. But it’s so easy to fall back on numbers as the most useful measure. There’s something comforting in knowing exactly how many cases of COVID we’ve had, so far, in Archuleta County. Even if we know the number is not really exact. Even if we know the number might be wildly wrong. It’s still comforting… because we’ve put our trust in numbers.
When I walked through downtown Pagosa with my camera last week, to collect a ‘qualitative’ picture of how our remarkable economy appeared on August 25, I wasn’t counting heads, or dollars, or percentages. I simply wanted a few photos, to paint a non-statistical picture of one particularly warm afternoon in a small mountain town.
A couple of photos I shot that afternoon, I haven’t yet shared.
Here’s one of them:
This poster is currently displayed outside the Liberty Theatre, a place where ordinary people had been gathering for the past 100 years for the purpose of being entertained. The theatre has been ‘closed temporarily’ for the past six months, and it’s now for sale for an asking price of $489,000. The poster suggests that the venue could be converted from a movie theater to some other use, such as a pub, or for live theater or live music. Some type of business that would help pay a half-million-dollar mortgage, presumably.
I have a special place in my heart for the Liberty Theatre, because its presence in Pagosa was one of the details my then-wife Clarissa listed, back in 1993, as a key reason why we ought to try relocating our family from Juneau, Alaska to Pagosa Springs, Colorado. She said the Liberty reminded her of the old Capitol Theatre in Juneau, where she’d worked, as a teenager, at the concession stand. Any town that had a funky old theatre like this, she thought, would be a great place to raise children. A great place to grow old, perhaps.
From the CREN (Colorado Real Estate Network) real estate listing:
REAL ESTATE IS NOW OFFERED SEPARATELY FROM THE BUSINESS. Liberty Theatre, the 4th oldest theatre in Colorado and the only movie theatre in Pagosa Springs, is available. It is located in the historic district of downtown Pagosa Springs, right across from the Pagosa Hot Springs – Great Exposure! This 150+ seat theatre has operated since 1919, and has recently been updated to digital technology. In front of the movie screen is a stage, perfect for performances/events. This is a prime business opportunity in beautiful downtown Pagosa Springs. Purchase price with real estate and business is negotiable.
The CREN listing offers two dozen photos of the interior and exterior, including the following photo, looking back towards the projection booth:
But as we noted, the theatre has been closed for several months, and I suspect it was struggling financially for several years. We might be wondering how many struggling movie theaters will finally go out of business as a result the COVID pandemic?
How many? Ah… there we have those pesky numbers again… creeping into our assessment of reality.
Bill Hudson began sharing his opinions in the Pagosa Daily Post in 2004 and can’t seem to break the habit. He claims that, in Pagosa Springs, opinions are like pickup trucks: everybody has one.