Lockdowns: Science vs. Morals

There are growing concerns that lockdown policies are not “based on science” but are, instead, a totalitarian Chinese export. The latter may be true—and seems to be—but that lockdowns are not scientific is not the biggest problem with them (assuming that indeed they aren’t).

The thing is, even if lockdowns were scientific, that would say nothing about the morality of the situation. The argument that lockdowns aren’t scientific runs the risk of being refuted tomorrow through new scientific findings. And it’s still letting scientism off the hook too lightly.

Let’s say the argument were refuted tomorrow. The moral problems would remain. Lockdowns would still be a horrendous evil.

Take an example where we know that the outcome of force, in purely scientific terms, is beneficial: that of forcing someone not to smoke. Or forcing them to exercise a few times a week. Scientifically speaking, their body will be healthier as a result of that force, and advocates of such force can always point to scientific evidence for that. It’d be “based on science.”

And still, forcing people not to smoke is wrong. Forcing them to exercise is wrong. Force in general is wrong, and no amount of scientific evidence changes that.

The same goes for lockdowns. Even if there were overwhelming scientific evidence that locking people into their homes lowers transmission rates, death rates, what have you, it would still be evil.

To those concerned about ICU numbers, their loved ones, etc: their is another way. Lockdowns are not the only way. You can persuade people to stay home. And those who are vulnerable are free to stay home already, no lockdowns required.

That’s why lockdowns are redundant: they lock down those who don’t want to in addition to those who’d voluntarily do so. There’s no added benefit to the latter group by having the former forced to stay home, too.

Voluntary self-isolation solves the moral problem and the medical problem.

But that won’t convince lockdown supporters, because they’re not after solving either of those problems. What they’re really after—and what they learned to do in school—is spreading altruism and forcing others to do what they think is right. Which is disgusting.