It came out at twelve o'clock in the morning on television screens. came out, as usual, with serious face, almost expressionless, Then one and the other said. It didn't bother him that they said it.. After all, His did not imply any emotion or sentimentality.. I left that thing about emotions and feelings for others., for politicians. They did know how to handle those things., thought. His thing was the data, nothing else. And nothing less. It had always been like this.
Since he was little he had liked numbers. Numbers don't fool anyone, his father had told him hundreds, millions of times. It is for this reason that he dedicated himself to science.. in science, things were not so debatable. Either they were or they weren't, and there was no more. That's about going there, making sense of the facts as the wind blows, It was a thing of people who dedicated themselves to the poor humanities. Y, in part, it had all its logic. There is nothing more interpretable or controversial than a human being. and the laws. The laws are also very problematic. That's why he didn't want to dedicate himself to that subject either. (although at some point in his youth he was tempted to do so, believing that, So, I would have better job opportunities). After all, Today he correctly thinks that laws are also made by humans and, like everything they do that refers to measuring their behavior in society, they couldn't be exact. But science does, with science there was no mistake possible. Even the youngest children learn it at school.. If A plus B equals C, C minus B is known to be always (and it will be) equal to A. And there is no turning back. And the same thing happens with the rest of the subjects.. in science, he said to himself before standing in front of the lectern, the figures are interpreted, data is read, rather, but that interpretation or reading, to do it, can only lead to one possible conclusion. One that may be revised over time, that's true, when new data appears that complement the previous ones. A, it was said, but not twenty or forty, not even a hundred thousand, as sometimes seemed to happen in those other areas of knowledge, that's what they called them, like history, the social sciences, Literature or the unbearable Philosophy.
He never liked Philosophy, I hated her. It seemed boring, absurd, illogical and, above all, unnecessarily cumbersome. And partially useless, also. How is it possible that, after more than two thousand years thinking about the same issue (What is that “being”?, the human), had not yet reached any reliable solution that would even lay the foundations of a minimally solid and coherent structure?, He always wondered when the topic came up in a conversation between friends or in a technical forum.. I didn't understand it. In the case of science, a discipline that had been mulling over the same thing for so long without reaching any conclusion, would have already been discarded. It is for all this that, in his public interventions, He always tried to appear as restrained as possible.. He wasn't doing it just to try to give an appearance of sobriety and confidence., As one of the image consultants from I don't know who had told him before, but out of respect. Out of respect for science. If he let the slightest hint of the mood he was in show on his face (and he could tell a lot about that state if someone had deigned to ask him), That would undermine the reliability of the reports and data that had to be presented to the public.. And he was not willing to allow something like that to happen.. That was, it was said, your mission. Earning respect for science.
However, despite the data that would give, despite the preparation of the reports, of the clarity of your presentation, of the evidence of the tests, of the calculations and forecasts they had made, of the conclusions, always sustained in the studies and the rigor required by the established protocols so that there was no possible misunderstanding, Those bastards in the press always managed to turn everything around in a thousand and one ways that not even he himself could have foreseen.. Then, when, later, after exposure, that same day or the next morning, I read the news that mentioned him, he was stunned, surprised and, in a way, also a little amazed. How was it possible, based on such specific facts, such an explosion of imagination? If the data he had given was so precise, so clear, How is it possible that so many different ratings fit?? I didn't understand it. What if he was the one who was wrong?? What if science wasn't as accurate as I had always believed?? that day, stunned, He came forward to stand again in front of the lectern that had been prepared for him as a simple stage for his daily speech in front of the cameras.. But, just a moment before taking the last step and stopping in front of his papers, made a wrong move and stumbled (a setback that would later be repeated thousands of times, millions of times on the news and on the Internet). something had gone wrong, it would be said later, at home, about to lie down in bed. What if he had been wrong his whole life??, it was said. Y, for the first time, doubted. He had lost his faith. His faith in science. GERARDO LEON
