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

701–710 of 883 posts

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

#701

Post by matheusmoreira »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #667
justnotworthit wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was common in the middle of the 20th century to not tell a terminally ill patient he/she was dying. We look back at that with horror. In your example, I'd prefer chosing (assisted) suicide or not. Surely you're not doing me a favor by not letting me die how I want.

In 1972 people with horrific treatable diseases were being lied to, so that science could record exactly how they suffered and died: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study And that's what led to ethics rules that said you can't do that. You'd think you wouldn't need to write it down, but we did and we do. > By then, 28 patients had died directly from syphilis, 100 died from complications related to s…

I know about Tuskegee. That's a clear example of what not to do. Just one of many documented cases of criminal abuse of human beings. Stuff like this is the reason why informed consent is an absolute requirement these days.

What I meant to say is I'd think twice before telling a depressed patient with a history of suicide attempts about a diagnosis of terminal illness.

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

#702

Post by mike00632 »

the_omegist wrote: post #604
rhcom2 wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "trans activism with kids" What does this even mean? Medical care?

I guess promoting and using kids with psychological problems as icons for the ideology...

Bullying trans people and using them as a societal scapegoat is more of an "ideology" than just being trans.

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

#703

Post by mike00632 »

andreskytt wrote: post #568
drekipus wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This should be handled with care, and extra consideration should be given to whether the tenuous, fallible results from this research will result in violence. What is "results in violence" though? One person's violence would be another person's justice. I think trans activism with kids is a severe violence. Would research in allowing transgenderism for children be considered violence or not in your eyes? I'm sure t…

Exactly. Anything novel is, by definition, risky. Therefore any and all research has the potential to harm people. What the article says is, that there is an apparently all-knowing group of people, who will decide, where an article lies on a scale between abstract algebra and direct calls to genocide in terms of its impact on people. Oh, and the same group of people is also directly interested in publishing (so they’…

Being trans is not novel. The recent scaremongering about trans people is what's new. Previously people being gay was the end of the world. Now that homosexuality is more acceptable bigots are focusing on trans people to use as a punching bag.

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

#704

Post by blueflow »

EntropyIsAHoax wrote: post #685
blueflow wrote: post #663

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where i got my thought from: Whats the purpose of transitioning when you aren't performing your gender in the first place? There isn't much left them.

I assume you mean medical transition, since socially transitioning--such as by changing your name and pronouns--would generally be considered performing a gender even if that doesn't involve changing things like clothing and behaviours (e.g. cis tomboys and femboys exist and are performing the gender they were assigned at birth, just not in a typical way) A short answer is impossible here, I think. But if you're genu…

Next transgenderism dogma: Socially transitioning being a thing.

I don't believe that wearing specific clothes and demanding she/her pronouns from other people makes me less male than i happened to be. Or more female. Nor do i believe this applies for other people or sex swapped.

> just not in a typical way

We are in a post-enlightenment democracy. You can just do atypical things. And it doesn't make you more or less female or male or transitioning or anything like that. Not everything will fit into words, but that's the nature of things.

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

#705

Post by UnpossibleJim »

makeitdouble wrote: post #274
UnpossibleJim wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people are truly worried about electing people like Donald Trump they'll broaden education and, in particular, education in the hard sciences like maths and computer science to bolster critical thinking and logic. At that point we won't elect reality show hucksters who blatantly lie and foment sedition.

We should get past the belief that those who aren’t on our political side are just lacking education and not thinking properly. You might despise the candidate (and to my opinion most candidate can be despised in many ways), but that doesn’t put all their voters at the candidate’s level, nor preclude supporters from “using” their candidates to push a specific aspect. To me that’s the lesson times and times again, whe…

I understand your point and it's well taken. Just to point out, as I feel I misspoke or was mischaracterized by my statement, because I hold the Republicans in disdain doesn't mean I hold any less disdain for the Democrats. I haven't seen any shortage of political hucksters on the stage, "he who must not be named" (for fear of moderation) is just the latest example.

Sorry if I came off as a single sided zealot =) I, like most people, just want a little compromise and moderation, and most of all respect out of my politicians. What I don't want is fealty to a political party first, like a bunch of gang bangers.

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

#706

Post by ragazzina »

laverya wrote: post #693
abdullahkhalids wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is one very common case where people abort fetuses because of reasons that are not "saving the child from worse prospects". This is people not wanting girls because "girls are economic and social liabilities and boys are assets". In my country, sex-selective abortion has been so prevalent that doctors now don't tell parents the sex of the fetus. If they did, very quickly would there be a difference of millions…

The more western equivalent of this is screening for Down's Syndrome. In certain countries, essentially all Down's babies are aborted. (98% in Denmark, for example)

>all Down's babies are aborted. (98% in Denmark

98% of all babies with Down's syndrome, or 98% of all babies diagnosed with it? How popular is the test in Denmark?

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

#707

Post by mike00632 »

Jensson wrote: post #571
AgentME wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It frustrates me how in many discussions people act as if certain controversial research is always obviously correct and objective science up against inherently anti-science people tearing it down. Not at all! Plenty of it is of science specifically known to be done badly, presented badly, in a field with regular systematic issues. If a field is regularly producing these inaccurate results with bad social side effect…

If it is bad science then just reject it for being bad science. Don't reject it for not catering to your special interests group.

The study of racial differences is famous for being bad science.

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

#708

Post by PuppyTailWags »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #511
PuppyTailWags wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it depends on what's considered political. Family estrangement due to religious differences (such as marrying a catholic) was so commonplace it was practically a sitcom joke. There was also family estrangement about potentially dating outside your race.

Heh, my family is mixed Lutheran and Catholic, but that's not the line it split along. My mother and her sister are Lutheran, while their husbands are Catholics. I'm aware of this social schism only in the academic sense; it's not something I've ever personally seen or experienced. These are people who more or less believe the same sort of thing, but disagree about which party will best implement it. It's a differenc…

I should clarify that I'm inquiring whether or not not dating based on religion or race is considered political, because if it is, it brings into question the idea that estrangement for political reasons is a relatively new phenomenon. It might be better to suggest estrangement for political party affiliation might be relatively new.

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

#709

Post by Banana699 »

FabHK wrote: post #646
nubero wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the international FIDE list of chess grandmasters, 39 out of 1953 are female. That’s 2%. And while I’m certain that there’s some icky misogynistic men who have made some decisions in that regard, I’m equally certain that we will never see the ratio being fifty-fifty. Not even close. That being said, I really don’t care what we will see or what the outcome will be in a truly meritocratic system. I’m just interested…

Could that fact still be published in Nature?

Nah man, it would be hArMfUL.

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

#710

Post by Banana699 »

n4r9 wrote: post #656
Banana699 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. No. This is really hilarious, but really though, No. The whole point of science is no content-related norms. You can put content-related norms wherever you want. You can put them in your useless HR departments, you can put them in the brainwashing (uh, ahem, "orientation") of new hire…

I don't feel that the guidelines could or would ban entire topics from being published. Do you have any specific topics in mind?

Yes, see Monkey Pox. We all know who spreads it, we all know how can this fact be used.
Post reply on HN