Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I'm not suggesting choosing between left and right, only pointing out that the bias is pervasive and undeniable. Can you point to specific examples of this where the science is actually robust and well documented but has somehow been blocked from being published or otherwise stopped due to this pervasive bias?
A list of victims of cancel culture would be handy. I'll start it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Donahue#MSNBC_program
'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?
111–120 of 368 posts
Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re asking people to prove a negative, and also assuming that there’s no chilling effect as people learn that certain topics are not a good idea if you want a career. The premier example of robust, well documented science with vociferous opposition has to be intelligence. Besides scholars with a fiercer attachment to their politics than the truth like Gould you also have introductory psychology textbooks that go o…
Hell, look at the insane , wholly unscientific public crucification of James Watson for commenting, totally reasonably, on this very subject. Stripped of a Nobel prize for suggesting that two and two may equal four. Find me one credible media outlet which even questioned such treatment! Edit: sorry, I misread a headline about him losing the prize, it read stripped of "honors". Point still stands.
You can’t be stripped of a Nobel prize.
Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I'm not suggesting choosing between left and right, only pointing out that the bias is pervasive and undeniable. Can you point to specific examples of this where the science is actually robust and well documented but has somehow been blocked from being published or otherwise stopped due to this pervasive bias?
How about a correlation between IQ and race. It seems that no one will touch the subject out of fear the it would end their career.
Not even race, but just suggesting that evolutionary psychology is a valid scientific field can get you crucified in some circles. Somehow the human brain avoided all sexual selection forces, environmental pressures, and even difference between the sexes; but everything else in our bodies was at the complete mercy of these factors.
Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?
#114>An unhappy side effect of the digital age is “cancel culture.” i.e. "I am uncomfortable with large amounts of people telling me I'm an asshole."
Or "I'm uncomfortable with a loud minority attempting to censor me by attacking my Maslow's hierarchy of needs."
Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?
#115While this explicit cancel culture has been slow to arrive, this is exactly the kind of traditionally left leaning activism which has gradually come to infest almost all of academia (and to a lesser but growing extent, industry). The result is an extremely strong, emergent cultural pressure against certain results and certain questions, which has been holding back a wide range of fields and ensuring pursuit of severe…
>I'm not suggesting choosing between left and right, only pointing out that the bias is pervasive and undeniable. Can you point to specific examples of this where the science is actually robust and well documented but has somehow been blocked from being published or otherwise stopped due to this pervasive bias?
I wouldn’t say robust beyond dispute, but Brown disavowed their own professor’s research because it disagreed with the orthodoxy:
https://thefederalist.com/2018/08/31/explosive-ivy-league-st...
Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I'm not suggesting choosing between left and right, only pointing out that the bias is pervasive and undeniable. Can you point to specific examples of this where the science is actually robust and well documented but has somehow been blocked from being published or otherwise stopped due to this pervasive bias?
How about a correlation between IQ and race. It seems that no one will touch the subject out of fear the it would end their career.
> How about a correlation between IQ and race. It seems that no one will touch the subject out of fear the it would end their career.
Uh, this has been and continues to be extensively studied (along with other correlates of each, causal mechanisms, etc.), so the “no one will touch it” claim is rather firmly empirically refuted.
Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Who are these people who feel that simply listening to someone speak is equivalent to endorsing them? There are certain topics that are so settled, that to engage with anyone with a contrary view is tantamount to giving them credibility and a platform to reach the uninformed. Some topics simply don't have "both sides" in any meaningful sense. Flat eartherism, Holocaust denial, and antivaxxerism are ones that immedi…
Yeah but climate science is complicated by the fact that it is overwhelmingly political. You could say the same thing about geocentrism, germs [1], fat vs sugars, etc. - which all turned out to be false, given time and scrutiny. Scientists have to learn the science to understand it, and that means encountering it from all perspectives. As new generations of people learn, they all have to go through it all again. To n…
"...climate science is complicated by the fact that it is overwhelmingly political."
We shouldn't use science to inform policy?
Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?
#118Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hell, look at the insane , wholly unscientific public crucification of James Watson for commenting, totally reasonably, on this very subject. Stripped of a Nobel prize for suggesting that two and two may equal four. Find me one credible media outlet which even questioned such treatment! Edit: sorry, I misread a headline about him losing the prize, it read stripped of "honors". Point still stands.
"Two and two may equal four" being a bunch of nonsensical racist slandering based on no evidence. Every result ever has pointed that all races and genders are equally "intelligent" and well-suited to the same tasks. And trust me, there's been no lack of racist scientists. It's just that bullshit doesn't stick.
> Every result ever has pointed that all races and genders are equally "intelligent" and well-suited to the same tasks.
This isn’t true. Ashkenazi Jews and East Asians have higher IQ scores than whites. Male and female scores on IQ tests are identical by construction. They have different scores on the component sub tests.
http://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1997mainstrea...
Mainstream Science on Intelligence: An Editorial With 52 Signatories, History, and Bibliography
Since the publication of “The Bell Curve,” many commentators have offered opinions about human intelligence that misstate cur- rent scientific evidence. Some conclusions dismissed in the media as discredited are ac- tually firmly supported. This statement outlines conclusions re- garded as mainstream among researchers on intelligence, in particular, on the nature, ori- gins, and practical consequences of individu- al and group differences in intelligence. Its aim is to promote more reasoned discussion of the vexing phenomenon that the research has revealed in recent decades. The follow- ing conclusions are fully described in the major textbooks, professional journals and encyclopedias in intelligence.
Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about a correlation between IQ and race. It seems that no one will touch the subject out of fear the it would end their career.
Not even race, but just suggesting that evolutionary psychology is a valid scientific field can get you crucified in some circles. Somehow the human brain avoided all sexual selection forces, environmental pressures, and even difference between the sexes; but everything else in our bodies was at the complete mercy of these factors.
But evo psych isn't a valid scientific field; there's no way to go back and conduct experiments to validate hypotheses. It's a bunch of nonsense just-so stories that appeal to people's existing biases. It's horoscopes-and-crystals-woo dressed up in the language of science.