Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 190 posts

Re: Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

#31

Post by philh »

jackmott wrote: post #27
hueving wrote: post #11

>For now, 314 Action will only back Democratic candidates. Great. When you're being accused of being partisan, the best way to come back is to form an organization backing potential political candidates of just one party. What a joke. This is a squandered opportunity to try to get scientific minded people into running for the republican seats, which is how you would get real change in the discourse. Anyone who thinks…

The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person. I realize that you, like many people, simply do not see it that way, and imagine that there is some kind of equivalence or near equivalence in how corrupt and crazy both parties are, but most of us don't. What we are seeing is horrific, a party that is against reason and goodness and civility at almost every step. They pick…

> The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person.

> I realize that you, like many people, simply do not see it that way,

Are you saying that hueving is not an intelligent, honest person?

Re: Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

#32

Post by nonbel »

Ok, but please do not vote for anyone calling themselves "scientist" who practices NHST, you will only be perpetuating this nation- (even civilization-) destroying practice:

"We are quite in danger of sending highly trained and highly intelligent young men out into the world with tables of erroneous numbers under their arms, and with a dense fog in the place where their brains ought to be. In this century, of course, they will be working on guided missiles and advising the medical profession on the control of disease, and there is no limit to the extent to which they could impede every sort of national effort."

Fisher, R N (1958). "The Nature of Probability". Centennial Review. 2: 261–274. http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/maths/histstat/fisher272.pdf

Do not be blinded by a degree, there are a lot of these people out there. As a heuristic, you may have to limit "scientist" to mean physicists and engineers, as those communities have been least affected.

Re: Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

#33

Post by seszett »

philh wrote: post #31
jackmott wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person. I realize that you, like many people, simply do not see it that way, and imagine that there is some kind of equivalence or near equivalence in how corrupt and crazy both parties are, but most of us don't. What we are seeing is horrific, a party that is against reason and goodness and civility at almost every step. They pick…

> The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person. > I realize that you, like many people, simply do not see it that way, Are you saying that hueving is not an intelligent, honest person?

I don't actually see any support for the Republican party in hueving's post.

Re: Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

#34

Post by croon »

maverick_iceman wrote: post #28
croon wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it applies. You can still be well educated and greedy/egotistical and not work for your constituents. But within elections, what else SHOULD we vote for other than merit? What really bothered me when Obama was elected was people throwing the word "elitism" around, because he was smart, eloquent and well educated, like that was somehow a bad thing. I sure as hell hope that the people elected are smarter t…

The idea that smarter people will be better at government is a fallacy which was conclusively disproved during 20th century. Since Plato's time there was this hypothesis that philosopher kings would somehow bring utopia or at least be better than the average ruler. Alas, the experiences of the 20th century belies that assumption. Communist parties were invariably led by formidable intellectuals (e.g. Lenin, Mao, Pol…

I don't disagree that it absolutely is no guarantee for success, but don't you agree that it's one requirement?

Re: Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

#35

Post by Sacho »

croon wrote: post #13
jasode wrote: post #6

The article doesn't mention the word "technocrat" but the wiki seems relevant even if the scientists only have modest goals of participating in government rather than grand ambitions of controlling the government from the top down. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy

I'm not sure it applies. You can still be well educated and greedy/egotistical and not work for your constituents. But within elections, what else SHOULD we vote for other than merit? What really bothered me when Obama was elected was people throwing the word "elitism" around, because he was smart, eloquent and well educated, like that was somehow a bad thing. I sure as hell hope that the people elected are smarter t…

I remember history a bit differently, with Obama being attacked due to his lack of political qualifications - he was too young, too inexperienced. I believe it was Clinton that ran with that narrative, although I may be misremembering.

Re: Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

#36

Post by wavefunction »

virmundi wrote: post #29
croon wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When science is a partisan issue, what else can you do?

First, realize that science is not just a partisan issue. The liberals in the United States hate science just as much when it's not on their side. They don't reason things through. I can't find it but there was an NPR story about a teach whose black students performed worse than the white students. The school's response, "Racist test!" The teacher reviewed the test, found nothing racist and looked further. The school…

>The liberals

It's highly unscientific to make such a sweeping generalization. There are plenty of liberals and leftists who will accept science and data that doesn't match their political agenda, just as there are still some conservatives who will. However the GOP has official policies opposing such nefarious plots as 'critical thinking.'

Re: Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

#37

Post by MaxfordAndSons »

hueving wrote: post #11

>For now, 314 Action will only back Democratic candidates. Great. When you're being accused of being partisan, the best way to come back is to form an organization backing potential political candidates of just one party. What a joke. This is a squandered opportunity to try to get scientific minded people into running for the republican seats, which is how you would get real change in the discourse. Anyone who thinks…

But if the official party platform includes climate change denial and other explicitly anti-science positions, wouldn't it just be a waste of time and money to try to put up candidates who the party would refuse? Sure, it worked for Trump, but I think he's an exception - good luck finding conservative scientists with his particular mix of personality traits and pre-existing celebrity status (and perceived business acumen).

More broadly I think the "changing the party from the inside" tack is a dead end, especially for the Republican party whose power actors seem to only ever double down on their positions and tactics.

Re: Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

#38

Post by aaron-lebo »

jackmott wrote: post #27
hueving wrote: post #11

>For now, 314 Action will only back Democratic candidates. Great. When you're being accused of being partisan, the best way to come back is to form an organization backing potential political candidates of just one party. What a joke. This is a squandered opportunity to try to get scientific minded people into running for the republican seats, which is how you would get real change in the discourse. Anyone who thinks…

The republican party is simply unacceptable on many levels for any intelligent, honest person. I realize that you, like many people, simply do not see it that way, and imagine that there is some kind of equivalence or near equivalence in how corrupt and crazy both parties are, but most of us don't. What we are seeing is horrific, a party that is against reason and goodness and civility at almost every step. They pick…

What you are advocating sounds like fundamentalism. That's a bad starting point for objectivity.

Re: Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

#39

Post by virmundi »

maverick_iceman wrote: post #22
mkaziz wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering how anti-science republicans tend to be, I'm not surprised.

You forget that Bernie Sanders wants mandatory labeling of GMO foods. That's also anti-science scaremongering.

Why is it scaremongering? Why should consumers not be informed what's in their food? We're told how many carbs something has. This allows keto followers to chose accordingly. We're told if it's kosher. This allows Jews and Muslims and people with taste to choose accordingly. We label the ingredients at a chemical level. This allows consumers to pick the types of fats or sweeteners. Why should we exclude stock/source information from the consumer?

Re: Scientists Are Planning to Run for Office

#40

Post by aphextron »

nonbel wrote: post #32

Ok, but please do not vote for anyone calling themselves "scientist" who practices NHST, you will only be perpetuating this nation- (even civilization-) destroying practice: "We are quite in danger of sending highly trained and highly intelligent young men out into the world with tables of erroneous numbers under their arms, and with a dense fog in the place where their brains ought to be. In this century, of course,…

>Ok, but please do not vote for anyone calling themselves "scientist" who practices NHST, you will only be perpetuating this nation- (even civilization-) destroying practice:

Can you expand on this? What is NHST?

Post reply on HN