Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem • Hacker News Board

Re: Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem

#21

Post by Jun8 » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 9:36 PM UTC

verysimple wrote: post #3

This kind of rhetoric disturbs me. The burden doesn't lie with the scientific community, but rather the republican party. Science is not a movement, it's a set of practices that emphasize observation and empirical analysis to interpret the world around us. Science is there for anybody who wants to open their mind to it to enjoy. I'm sure some republicans have and assuming those numbers are correct, 1 of 3 things happ…

Although it is true that the scientific method cannot be thought of as "political" in any sense, I think it's a big mistake to see science as deriving, almost mechanically from observations. It is done by scientists and in all ages scientists are affected by non-scientific aspects of their societies, i.e. traditions, commonly held beliefs, and politics.

Also, not all science is as abstract as, say, mathematics or hunting for dark matter. Some questions, e.g.: should we perform stem cell research on embryos, should we eradicate mosquitoes, should we try to affect human sexual patterns leading to AIDS, etc. are scientific but also contain a large dose of ethics, i.e. they cannot be approached by handling equations alone in an objective matter.

Re: Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem

#22

Post by sachinag » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 9:37 PM UTC

orangecat wrote: post #12

evgen wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would claim that there are two factors that lead to the fact that most scientists are Democrats: the overall lean of universities, and the source of funding. And the overwhelming anti-science bias within large segments of the Republican base has nothing to do with it? Yeah, it has just got to be all of those liberal universities and scientists living off the government teat... You can delude yourself all you want,…

Mostly true, but conservatives hardly have a monopoly on willful ignorance. Ask the stereotypical liberal what he thinks of nuclear power or GMO crops, and you're not likely to get a response based on sound science.

Nuclear power and GMO crops have the same issue for liberals like me: when they fail, they fail in catastrophic fashion. We've already had Cherynobol and Monsanto's "Terminator" seeds getting out into the wild. To paraphrase badly, liberals opposed to both are concerned about Black Swan events.

Your assessment of the risk and that of those of us who are a bit more "reactionary" are just different, but it doesn't mean that we willfully misrepresent the science.

Re: Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem

#23

Post by yummyfajitas » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 9:38 PM UTC

evgen wrote: post #7

CWuestefeld wrote: post #4

I would claim that there are two factors that lead to the fact that most scientists are Democrats: the overall lean of universities, and the source of funding. First, scientists tend to work in academia. It's well documented that universities are strongly slanted to the left. It seems reasonable to expect that when the left-leaning universities are looking to hire, they will tend to (possibly not intentionally) favor…

I would claim that there are two factors that lead to the fact that most scientists are Democrats: the overall lean of universities, and the source of funding. And the overwhelming anti-science bias within large segments of the Republican base has nothing to do with it? Yeah, it has just got to be all of those liberal universities and scientists living off the government teat... You can delude yourself all you want,…

And the overwhelming anti-science bias within large segments of the Republican base has nothing to do with it?

So how come people who oppose evolutionary/genetic theories on slightly different religious grounds haven't chased scientists away from the Dems?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Summers#Differences_be...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_D._Watson#Comments

Both parties are quite strongly anti-science when it suits their purposes. Consider this program - any guesses as to the party affiliation of people who oppose this experiment? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/nyregion/09placebo.html?re...

Re: Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem

#24

Post by jbooth » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 9:38 PM UTC

rubidium wrote: post #14

evgen wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would claim that there are two factors that lead to the fact that most scientists are Democrats: the overall lean of universities, and the source of funding. And the overwhelming anti-science bias within large segments of the Republican base has nothing to do with it? Yeah, it has just got to be all of those liberal universities and scientists living off the government teat... You can delude yourself all you want,…

balony. Most scientists do work that's not at all related to what the public knows about and talk about their work in ways that no one else can understand. Your claim that scientists are being "chased" from the Republican party is ridiculous. Unless, of course, you have data that shows they are?

Here's a small sample size:

http://www.conservapedia.com/Theory_of_relativity

This guy free-associated the theory of relativity with "moral relativism" (ideological bingo word!) and apparently concluded that that means relativity is wrong. Article full of cites follows. If it's cited, must be true, right? He also liberally (heh!) re-uses the bogus arguments from below about how relativity research is funded by the government, therefore the researchers must be marxists, therefore they're wrong about relativity.

For further reading, I'd suggest polls on the public's view of creationism, age of the earth, evolution, global warming, etc by political party.

Re: Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem

#25

Post by verysimple » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 9:38 PM UTC

drKarl wrote: post #2

I don't see why that should be a problem. There is also a clear correlation between scientists and religion (or lack of belief).

"In God we trust; all others must bring data." -- W. Edwards Deming, Physicist

Re: Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem

#26

Post by Jun8 » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 9:39 PM UTC

evgen wrote: post #7

CWuestefeld wrote: post #4

I would claim that there are two factors that lead to the fact that most scientists are Democrats: the overall lean of universities, and the source of funding. First, scientists tend to work in academia. It's well documented that universities are strongly slanted to the left. It seems reasonable to expect that when the left-leaning universities are looking to hire, they will tend to (possibly not intentionally) favor…

I would claim that there are two factors that lead to the fact that most scientists are Democrats: the overall lean of universities, and the source of funding. And the overwhelming anti-science bias within large segments of the Republican base has nothing to do with it? Yeah, it has just got to be all of those liberal universities and scientists living off the government teat... You can delude yourself all you want,…

In order to understand any situation, we should go beyond simplistic stereotypes like "pitchfork-wielding, bible-thumping." This is no different than Fox TV anchors who view liberals as latte-drinking, gun-banning, gay marriage-backing wimps.

Re: Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem

#27

Post by jberryman » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 9:41 PM UTC

evgen wrote: post #7

CWuestefeld wrote: post #4

I would claim that there are two factors that lead to the fact that most scientists are Democrats: the overall lean of universities, and the source of funding. First, scientists tend to work in academia. It's well documented that universities are strongly slanted to the left. It seems reasonable to expect that when the left-leaning universities are looking to hire, they will tend to (possibly not intentionally) favor…

I would claim that there are two factors that lead to the fact that most scientists are Democrats: the overall lean of universities, and the source of funding. And the overwhelming anti-science bias within large segments of the Republican base has nothing to do with it? Yeah, it has just got to be all of those liberal universities and scientists living off the government teat... You can delude yourself all you want,…

I'm reminded of the '08 republican primary debates and "Raise your hand if you believe in evolution". I don't see many scientists happily getting behind a party made up of people who need to be asked that.

Re: Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem

#28

Post by MichaelSalib » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 9:42 PM UTC

CWuestefeld wrote: post #4

I would claim that there are two factors that lead to the fact that most scientists are Democrats: the overall lean of universities, and the source of funding. First, scientists tend to work in academia. It's well documented that universities are strongly slanted to the left. It seems reasonable to expect that when the left-leaning universities are looking to hire, they will tend to (possibly not intentionally) favor…

In the science of economics the opposite is true. For example, Democratic support of minimum wages and other price controls, and especially their opposition to free trade, fly against the wind of economic science.

I don't believe this is true. First, assertions that economics is a science seem...dubious at best.

Secondly, actual economic research suggests that negative effects of the minimum wage in practice are quite small. It is true that people who have no more economic knowledge than that imparted by a first semester intro to economics class do not know that, but that merely underscores the danger of a little bit of knowledge.

Finally, I have seen no evidence in the last decade that Democrats are particularly opposed to free trade deals per se. Can you cite some? I would point out that a great deal of some "free trade" deals actually has little if anything to do with free trade.

Re: Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem

#29

Post by drKarl » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 9:43 PM UTC

araneae wrote: post #9

drKarl wrote: post #2

I don't see why that should be a problem. There is also a clear correlation between scientists and religion (or lack of belief).

I think he was trying to point out that it's a credibility problem. For instance, where science aligns with political belief, it makes it harder for scientists to argue that they're impartial when they generally share the same political beliefs with eachother.

Science is based on facts, not in belief. Proving a scientific theory using a flawed logic to support a political belief would be fatal to the reputation of a scientific. Therefore, scientific credibility has nothing to do with political affiliation, religion beliefs (or lack thereof), colour of skin or any other personal treat. There were brilliant scientists amongst the nazis and amongst the soviet communists, so it has nothing to do with that. Political belief is a very personal choice and everyone has the right to choose, and also everyone has the choice to become a scientist. In my opinion this article is a poor defense of republican party.

Re: Most Scientists in the U.S. Are Democrats. That's a Problem

#30

Post by evgen » Thu, Dec 09, 2010, 9:43 PM UTC

rubidium wrote: post #14

evgen wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would claim that there are two factors that lead to the fact that most scientists are Democrats: the overall lean of universities, and the source of funding. And the overwhelming anti-science bias within large segments of the Republican base has nothing to do with it? Yeah, it has just got to be all of those liberal universities and scientists living off the government teat... You can delude yourself all you want,…

balony. Most scientists do work that's not at all related to what the public knows about and talk about their work in ways that no one else can understand. Your claim that scientists are being "chased" from the Republican party is ridiculous. Unless, of course, you have data that shows they are?

Most scientists do work that's not at all related to what the public knows about and talk about their work in ways that no one else can understand.

Yeah, because no field has jargon and standard methods that require a small amount of prior knowledge to understand... We use a ton of confusing and sometimes overlapping jargon in the computer industry, simplify complex systems using metaphors that are not really correct (e.g. the internet is a series of tubes...), and will often give vague answers to people who are not in the industry. It is not because we have anything to hide, but because we do not have the time or energy to give someone an introductory course on how computers work just to answer a simple question. If you had the time to learn and the necessary educational background you could in fact learn when they are working on and understand what they are saying without too much effort. Most of the public is too busy, too lazy, or too stupid to do this.

As far as scientists being "chased" from the republican party, start with The Republican War on Science by Chris Mooney, move on to Unscientific America by the same author, The Great Derangement by Matt Tiabbi, or Idiot America by Charles Pierce. Skim through Merchants of Doubt or Doubt is their Product to see some of the links to various corporate think tanks. The evidence is clear, maybe you should check some of it out.