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

We Must Defend Science in the Face of Political Attacks

blogs.scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 134 posts

Re: We Must Defend Science in the Face of Political Attacks

#31

Post by [deleted] »

chris_mc wrote: post #14
fromthestart wrote: post #6

>Diversity in science is not just for optics. We need scientists from diverse backgrounds in all senses of the word—race, ethnicity, gender, class, ability, geography, etc If you don't want science to be attacked politically, don't politicize science. We don't need to make sure that our scientists represent every color of the skin spectrum with a representative range of disabilities. We need objective, competent work…

>diversity of scientific, not cultural views Your cultural views can affect your scientific work. The imagination of children in America vs. China is different, people have different dreams and experiences, etc. I am constantly baffled by people like yourself who don't understand that cultural diversity IS diversity of ideas. Whether that culture comes from your location, race, upbringing, wealth, religion, or someth…

[deleted]

Re: We Must Defend Science in the Face of Political Attacks

#32

Post by otaviokz »

ilikehurdles wrote: post #7
drilldrive wrote: post #3

If you cannot see that the March for Science is part of the problem of the politicization of science, then you are lost all the same.

Calling the march a part of the problem is a cop-out excusing the real problems - the political response to science that spurred the march, the political response to the march itself, and mass-media's role in the politicization of science. If we say that the march is the problem, then we're saying that we should be taking at face-value anything the lobbyist talking heads of Fox News and CNN say about whatever they're…

Text interpretation should also be valued, as well as the importance of "not completely twisting another person's comment to suit your own views". Your comment extrapolates wildly from the one you responded too, and thats AMAZINGLY POLITICAL AND ALSO DISHONEST.

*ps sorry for any English mistake, as it's not my first language.

Re: We Must Defend Science in the Face of Political Attacks

#33

Post by otaviokz »

creaghpatr wrote: post #17
ilikehurdles wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling the march a part of the problem is a cop-out excusing the real problems - the political response to science that spurred the march, the political response to the march itself, and mass-media's role in the politicization of science. If we say that the march is the problem, then we're saying that we should be taking at face-value anything the lobbyist talking heads of Fox News and CNN say about whatever they're…

>it feels filthy wrong Fortunately science is about facts, not feelings.

Spot on mate. Not only a sharp and valid point, but also made me laugh.

Re: We Must Defend Science in the Face of Political Attacks

#34

Post by georgeburdell »

The benefits of diversity is the Left’s pseudoscience, so I can’t take an article seriously that so prominently features it. There is an unbelievable amount of grift involved in getting a government scientific grant these days - major awards must have a D&I component and I know from personal experience it’s largely wasted.

The author only wants conservatives purged. I want climate deniers and diversity sycophants alike purged from the scientific apparatus.

Re: We Must Defend Science in the Face of Political Attacks

#35

Post by fromthestart »

chris_mc wrote: post #14
fromthestart wrote: post #6

>Diversity in science is not just for optics. We need scientists from diverse backgrounds in all senses of the word—race, ethnicity, gender, class, ability, geography, etc If you don't want science to be attacked politically, don't politicize science. We don't need to make sure that our scientists represent every color of the skin spectrum with a representative range of disabilities. We need objective, competent work…

>diversity of scientific, not cultural views Your cultural views can affect your scientific work. The imagination of children in America vs. China is different, people have different dreams and experiences, etc. I am constantly baffled by people like yourself who don't understand that cultural diversity IS diversity of ideas. Whether that culture comes from your location, race, upbringing, wealth, religion, or someth…

And I'm constantly baffled by people like yourself who have accepted that culture influences technical work, but are unable to draw the logical conclusion that certain cultures are therefore better predisposed to success in a given industry than others.

You can't have it both ways. If we concede that culture influences ability, then we must accept that merit based hiring will inevitably result in disproportionate representation, and that hiring for the purpose of representation is very likely to have a negative impact on technical work.

Re: We Must Defend Science in the Face of Political Attacks

#36

Post by povertyworld »

weberc2 wrote: post #11
specialist wrote: post #5

SciAm made the same battlecry (plea) back in the 90s. I supported it then as I support it now. But it didn't work then and won't work now. Because we don't understand the enemy. The remedy isn't messaging, framing, engagement, empathy, discussion, or whatever else rational people hope will induce irrationals to step into the light. Trying to sneak science thru the infotainment propaganda blockade ain't gonna work. An…

Do you seriously believe there is a dearth of left-wing mainstream media outlets? And the problem with the politicization of science is not a right-vs-left issue. The left has its own bag of anti-science positions (e.g., blank slatism, anti-GMO, implicit bias, etc). EDIT: Do downvoters question that the majority of prominent news outlets are left-wing or that the left has anti-science positions?

I think it depends on how you define "left-wing". Some consider the "woke capitalism" of corporate media and SV to be "left", others consider only an explicitly anti-capitalist and pro-labor stance to be left.

Re: We Must Defend Science in the Face of Political Attacks

#37

Post by gumby »

dnautics wrote: post #28
gumby wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Academia is political too. Inherently relations between people are by definition political. The point is to raise the role of epistemology in decision making where it is possible. That's all.

I think the parent comment was referring to "political" specifically in the sense of "dealing with the government", not the general (e.g. "office politics") sense.

Indeed, and I was saying that government politics is ultimately no different.

Re: We Must Defend Science in the Face of Political Attacks

#38

Post by GreaterFool »

> We Must Defend Science

Yes!

> Because it matters who does science: Who the scientists are determines what science gets done

Uhm... no? Science is science and true scientists are not identitarians.

The author complains about politicizing science and then proceeds to politicize science:

> The fishing research I have done was most certainly informed by having a Jamaican father who showed me the cultural value of seafood

Because those of us unfortunate souls without Jamaican fathers would never understood the importance of seafood? Tell that to coastal people... anywhere where's a coast.

Re: We Must Defend Science in the Face of Political Attacks

#39

Post by Mikeb85 »

So the solution to bias in the sciences is to double down on bias? Make sure only the bias you support is present?

> Ayana Elizabeth Johnson, Ph.D. is a marine biologist and founder of Ocean Collectiv, a consulting firm for conservation solutions grounded in social justice.

Literally a think tank trying to advance scientific policies based on politics.

Post reply on HN