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

“Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 883 posts

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#141

Post by brightball »

forbiddenvoid wrote: post #131
brightball wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, that was always true. It just wasn’t possible for those people to spend all day yelling at each other for it. The context of the disagreements was largely limited to newspapers and politicians. Some assumption of professionalism, editing and journalistic integrity was included with nationwide dialogues. The internet, Twitter, political amplification, bot amplification, media consolidation, etc have made it 1000x…

Some people could disagree on a topic and go about their day. That isn't true for everyone. One person's disagreement is another person's human rights. A lot of people prefer the comfort of ignorance to the discomfort of that knowledge.

And other people prefer to incite people to better control them via polarization.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#142

Post by throwawayacc2 »

From the article:

> Science has for too long been complicit in perpetuating structural inequalities and discrimination in society.

> Finally, authors should use inclusive, respectful, non-stigmatizing language in their submitted manuscripts.

> Race and ethnicity are sociopolitical constructs.

—-

To me, this sounds like a clergyman espousing articles of faith and commandments.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#143

Post by nitrixion »

volkadav wrote: post #62
NotYourLawyer wrote: post #20

No, science must pursue the truth, no matter where it leads. There is no such thing as a hate fact.

you'd probably benefit from reading and thinking about this wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism sadly, what is called a fact is a malleable thing in the hands of the ill-intentioned, and all too many bigots are more than happy to pass off pseudo-science as the real deal. "science" isn't some abstract thing, it's composed of people and their actions, and as i think every adult will recog…

Sorry, this is completely off topic. Why aren't you using capital letters? I've seen this trend starting to gain more traction and it makes no sense to me.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#144

Post by nathanaldensr »

dcow wrote: post #97

Most of this seems wildly unenforceable at a practical level. And yes that's all really bad and non-secular and society will be harmed because people, even with the best intentions, will try to filter facts. The two terminology clarifications they make I don't mind though: sex vs gender and race vs biological lineage. I think society would be better off with very clear and precise usage of those terms. I mentally fli…

As you've identified, they've tied themselves into knots with inconsistencies and hypocritical positions. There is no logic to be found here, only insanity masquerading as such. Luckily for everyone else, the scientific method will remain, even if it is temporarily suppressed.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#145

Post by nathanaldensr »

drorco wrote: post #78

Can anyone actually think of an actual discovery that harmed people? I'm missing some actual examples of what they're trying to protect people from.

Even if there are examples, they will be political examples and not scientific ones. Of course, they'd conveniently conflate the two to mislead the less observant among us.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#146

Post by mizzack »

NoboruWataya wrote: post #134
mizzack wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And many many people will be fooled. At least you can spot the acolytes with "I believe in Science" bumper stickers and yard signs. Science is not a belief system.

Is it not? I certainly don't know or understand even a fraction of what would be considered established science, but if a credible expert tells me that something is supported by established science I will believe it over something like religious dogma. I consider myself to be a "believer" in science.

Science exists in a perpetual state of being supported or challenged by evidence. If the clergy ("credible expert", Nature) make it impossible to challenge the orthodoxy ("established science") then it _is_ dogma.

By being a "believer" in science as you've laid it out, you aren't believing in science as a process, but science as an institution.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#147

Post by BurningFrog »

dcow wrote: post #27
tarakat wrote: post #6

Yet, people can be harmed indirectly. For example, research may — inadvertently — stigmatize individuals or human groups. It may be discriminatory, racist, sexist, ableist or homophobic. It may provide justification for undermining the human rights of specific groups, simply because of their social characteristics. [..] Advancing knowledge and understanding is a fundamental public good. In some cases, however, potent…

Moreover, how can any of these be enforced, and by whom? At least you know who your church authority figures are and who to criticize. Where do we even start if we let Twitter outrage decide whether science is potentially harmful and should be allowed or not? This is worse than religion because it’s pretending to be rational. And many many people will be fooled.

It can be enforced by Nature refusing to publish papers with bad results, obviously.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#148

Post by nathanaldensr »

n4r9 wrote: post #108

There is a very clear trend in the HN crowd's reaction to this statement, so I'm inclined to offer a defense. I'm not linked to Nature in any way, just of a rebellious bent. The principle objections to the guidance appear to fall into the following categories: * They threaten the objectivity of science * They prevent the publication of "heretical"/"non-PC" results * They are too vague I strongly recommend that people…

> At the end of the day, a journal has a great ethical responsibility for the impact of what it publishes, and is within its rights to say "no" on that basis.

You state this like it is or should be fact, but this is precisely the problem. Science should be the beginning of a chain starting at knowledge and leading to policy: science -> politics -> policy. It is not the job of scientists to try and predict or assume reactions to science; that partially inverts the flow: politics -> science -> policy. By placing politics first, science becomes politics, as nothing disapproved will reach the science phase of the process.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#149

Post by nathanaldensr »

Analemma_ wrote: post #31
yamrzou wrote: post #23

This is so general that its either very obvious or nonsense. They should include examples of what they consider "harmful science".

That would defeat the purpose. The whole point is to have rules vague enough that they can be selectively applied whenever there's an angry mob on Twitter that has to be appeased, while still saying "hey, we're just following our policy".

Right. Like many commenters on this thread, people tend to pick apart these types of messages from these now-woke institutions from a logical perspective, which is a huge mistake. These are effectively religious tenets; they aren't issues of logic but issues of faith.

Re: “Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans”

#150

Post by bigcat12345678 »

I am getting dumb-funded by the obvious senseless thinking in the title:

Science is about the mechanisms of natural worlds. It's the foundation of human civilization. It's the basis of human thoughts and the ideology etc.

To say Science must respect dignity and rights of all humans, it's like to say nature must respect the dignity and rights of all humans. But Science is the rendition of natural world's mechanisms, they do not have personality and emotions. They cannot respect anything!

It's reasonable to say "scientists must respect the dignity and rights of all humans". It's senseless to say Science must respect the dignity and rights of all humans.

Post reply on HN