Behaviors in Light of Covid-19

Ideological differences are but one trigger aggravating adherence to recommended practices for Covid-19 social protections. By conservatives, general discounting of the mainstream media leads to downplaying the health risks or perceived severity of Covid-19. The consequence of such perception aggravates adherence to the recommended actions of social distancing and wearing facial protective gear.

A common question emerges in our circle of liberal contemporaries whether to intervene when a member asserts a challenge to others concerning compliance with the protocols. Such challenges work in both directions: adherence believers rivaling adherence challengers; and, adherence challengers to believers.

Requiring social protocols to health often establishes negative consequences for non-compliance. No mask - no entry policies and police enforcement of social distancing are examples. The libertarian and anarchist see such enforcement as over-reach, believing their rights are usurped—no government has a right to interfere in a personal choice. “It’s my body.”

Those more risk-averse generally adhere to the social paradigm of everyone must play by the rules; otherwise, mitigating the spread of Covid-19 is fruitless. The same rationale used to support vaccinations.

And then there is just the plain old contrarian. The one that perceives their knowledge as superior and but for the passive, ignorant, blind followers, the truth would prevail. If they could only listen to the facts as proffered. Regardless of the aggregate behavior, the contrarian would use their selective facts to favor an opposing perspective.

There exist but three reactions to a social challenge. 1) Use facts to support a position and refute any questioning. 2) Keep silent, hide behind a tree, and stay quiet. Or, 3) be creative with ideas, embellish each person’s peccadilloes, and be empathetic towards the other.

Which are you?

— Geoffrey MacMillan

Sign up for topical updates and invitations to participate with Dr. Zur