Jun 12, 2023·edited Jun 12, 2023Liked by Dorian Abbot, Anna Krylov
One fundamental difference between the authoritarians (e.g., USSR) and recent trends in the U.S.:
there was resistance from many scientists/academics to politicizing science in the former (at least in early decades), whereas here we see nearly monolithic support by faculty (some looking to be more relevant in newly created activist positions) that voluntarily come up with initiatives to go farther with the policies described in the article.
Jun 12, 2023·edited Jun 12, 2023Liked by Anna Krylov
I agree that Critical Social Justice is a danger to science. They are rejecting papers and grants because of ideological reasons. People are not being hired because of ideological reasons, this is a real risk as science should be judged but its merit and not ideology.
Why do we keep paying an astronomical sum of money to companies whose products are made predominantly by volunteers and that now also distorts science?
One fundamental difference between the authoritarians (e.g., USSR) and recent trends in the U.S.:
there was resistance from many scientists/academics to politicizing science in the former (at least in early decades), whereas here we see nearly monolithic support by faculty (some looking to be more relevant in newly created activist positions) that voluntarily come up with initiatives to go farther with the policies described in the article.
Exactly
The woke are dangerous.
I agree that Critical Social Justice is a danger to science. They are rejecting papers and grants because of ideological reasons. People are not being hired because of ideological reasons, this is a real risk as science should be judged but its merit and not ideology.
Most recent example of politically motivated retraction of a scientific paper: "Springer to Retract a Key Paper in Response to Activist Demands", https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/springer-to-retract-a-key-paper-in
Why do we keep paying an astronomical sum of money to companies whose products are made predominantly by volunteers and that now also distorts science?