Averse to Risk

For the last two years or so I’ve been saying that scientists, doctors, and researchers, are the ones who are best equipped to understand what’s going on, and that they should be in the lead on this. I’ve said that it’s not primarily a political issue, not a regional or national problem, not a social or religious question, but rather at the core a question of biology – that is, science. People have been working and studying for years to learn the techniques and ways of thinking necessary to understand and eventually solve this kind of problem. I would not trust a person who had read a few articles about PTSD to help me through my trauma of a few years back, or hire someone to diagnose and repair an electrical issue in my home who had no training but very strong opinions about the subject. Feelings, opinions, flashes of inspiration, building group consensus, all these things are important in some areas of life. Science and fact-based reasoning are important in others. This is not to say that social, religious, and political leaders have no role to play in this situation, only that, in my opinion, they should not be in the lead.

My knowledge of the scientific method is limited, but it has not surprised me that it has taken some time for the scientific community to understand the pandemic and come up with ways to address it. In our present-day world, with its rapid communication, feedback loops, and incestuous amplification, it’s also not surprising that the perception has been that arriving at a solution has taken forever. Moving from one educated guess to the next, revising and sharpening the guesses based on knowledge gained from the previous attempts, has in the past been done without an audience commenting on each step along the way. This is no longer the case, and there is no way to distinguish, without careful examination, the difference between an unsupported claim and a hypothesis that is one of the steps of the scientific method. Figuring out the nature of the virus, its strengths and weaknesses, and the best way to combat it while minimizing the risk, is a deliberate process. Visiting a construction site and saying to the contractor, “That’s not what I want it to look like,” only demonstrates a lack of understanding that a thing, or an idea, or a work of art for that matter, looks very different while being created than it does when complete. There’s an old saying that states that it’s better not to know how laws and sausages are made, meaning, among other things, that the details of creation are messy.

So, when the scientific community in general and the CDC in particular told me I needed to stay at least six feet away from people, stop going out to eat, wear a mask when mingling with others was unavoidable, use curbside pickup at the grocery store, and all the other strategies that have been recommended or required, I followed the instructions without complaint or question. I assumed that these measures were temporary, and that after the crisis had been dealt with that we could relax our vigilance. I have long been a private person, introverted by nature, so this was largely a matter of inconvenience rather than anything more serious.

I have been, so I thought, looking forward to the “return to normal” that we’ve all assumed was coming. A couple of days ago the CDC lowered the risk for my particular corner of the world from high to medium and said, essentially, that I can leave my mask at home and go to the store, out to eat, and so on, since I am not immunocompromised or in any of the other high risk categories, and my vaccination and booster shots are up to date.

As it turns out, the fact that I have been living my life for the last two years or so in a way that deliberately minimizes risk has resulted in a pretty high degree of discomfort at the thought of, for example, just walking into a store and doing some shopping. Or going out to eat with friends. Or going to church. Or having a few people over for a dinner and conversation. That last one has been one of the pleasures even an introvert like me can enjoy.

The church shooting in 2008 left me with, among other things, an increased aversion to risk, particularly in regard to being in groups of people. COVID-19 is rekindling that mindset, I fear, and I don’t relish the thought of stepping back into the social world. The temptation to stay in retreat is very strong. On the other hand, last fall I did buy a weekend pass to this year’s Big Ears festival, so there’s that. Whether or not I go remains to be seen.

Published by


A career working with teenagers on the fringes of society has made me both sensitive to and appreciative of the complexities of character and the struggles, inner and outer, that we all wrestle with in one form or another. My writing emphasizes character development over action, and, as a lifelong Southerner, the rhythms and cadence of the Southeastern United States influence both my spoken and written voice.

One thought on “Averse to Risk

  1. I hope that you do choose to go to Big Ears! The few times I have been out to go to a concert or see friends has always brought so much joy. Sometimes in isolation you forget what that felt like. It’s essential to connect with the arts, and one of the true pleasures in life. I definitely miss our conversations!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s