That arbiter is not doing a good job considering the proliferation of antivax, race “science,” and climate change denialism, among other things.
Feel as above the fray as you like, but normalizing the mass distribution of junk/shit or otherwise false science under some lofty ideal of “the free marketplace of ideas will select for the correct data” is clearly, demonstratively, and repeatedly not doing that and hasn’t in the past either.
You have utterly no idea what’s even present in scientific publications. Antivax and climate change denialism are not rampant in published science. They’re rampant amongst ignorant members of the public. That’s not even remotely the fault of science.
And here’s a summary of the current state of race science:
Someone else responded better than I could to what amounts of your wall of arrogance that was toward someone with an opinion and a take so similar to yours that it applies to you as well.
Every single time someone does a report on crime and breaks down data by race you’re seeing racist social science in action. The way we do clinical trials. Decisions about what to study, like the impacts of lead, or education, or pharmaceuticals, all of it lies on top of and interpermeates racist superstructure. Recent? Forced hysterectomies. Public statements from researchers that genetics are not politically correct. Mauna Kea. Environmental impact studies in Guam. I mean, it’s never ending.
It’s not never ending. We’re very critical of the racism and sexism in medical research. And the younger generations of doctors are far more aware of it.
We used to butcher women in radical mastectomy surgeries and we don’t do that anymore. We used to do medical experiments on black Americans without telling them and we don’t do that anymore. For everything that you can point to as a current problem, I can point to another thing that used to be a problem and now has been corrected.
And still none of that has anything to do with physics, chemistry, materials science, geology, oceanography. You can’t just say “racism impacts some sciences therefore we shouldn’t do science at all”
We’re very critical of the racism and sexism in medical research.
You’re demonstratably actively and overtly ignoring examples given to you, right now, showing just how flawed your claimed “critical” status is of such issues.
And still none of that has anything to do with physics, chemistry, materials science, geology, oceanography.
Yes, you have that ivory tower of yours crammed so high that you’re willfully ignoring intersectional issues that do affect the application, interpretation, even the funding and political will to allocate resources to such fields.
For everything that you can point to as a current problem, I can point to another thing that used to be a problem and now has been corrected.
That only demonstrates that correcting the process and actively rejecting bad/false science requires ongoing vigilance, not smug and arrogant dismissal of concerns.
therefore we shouldn’t do science at all
No one said that and you’re willfully ignorant at this point.
You think it’s anti-intellectual to address intersectional society-wide concerns? Is it truly “intellectual” to pretend that they didn’t happen or that they only happened in the past?
It is the pinnacle of ideological arrogance to believe that scientific fields, as practiced by scientists, exist in perfectly sealed vacuums that require no interaction with government or society and that every experiment that is funded, all research undertaken, is powered by sheer scientific purity instead of the unfortunate material realities of funding and decisions made of “what” is researched and for how long.
It does affect all of the above fields if funding and resources are wasted in pursuit of junk science. Announcing that such junk should be “free” and distributed out there under the belief that it will magically be banished by the light of truth and cease being distributed entirely because it is wrong with no other actions necessary is willful ideological ignorance.
Are you suggesting there should be no arbiter?
I’ve said exactly what I think. The scientific community is the arbiter, as it is now.
That arbiter is not doing a good job considering the proliferation of antivax, race “science,” and climate change denialism, among other things.
Feel as above the fray as you like, but normalizing the mass distribution of junk/shit or otherwise false science under some lofty ideal of “the free marketplace of ideas will select for the correct data” is clearly, demonstratively, and repeatedly not doing that and hasn’t in the past either.
You have utterly no idea what’s even present in scientific publications. Antivax and climate change denialism are not rampant in published science. They’re rampant amongst ignorant members of the public. That’s not even remotely the fault of science.
And here’s a summary of the current state of race science:
“Race does not stand up scientifically, period.”
https://www.scribd.com/article/350285350/What-Both-The-Left-And-Right-Get-Wrong-About-Race
Someone else responded better than I could to what amounts of your wall of arrogance that was toward someone with an opinion and a take so similar to yours that it applies to you as well.
It’s not never ending. We’re very critical of the racism and sexism in medical research. And the younger generations of doctors are far more aware of it.
We used to butcher women in radical mastectomy surgeries and we don’t do that anymore. We used to do medical experiments on black Americans without telling them and we don’t do that anymore. For everything that you can point to as a current problem, I can point to another thing that used to be a problem and now has been corrected.
And still none of that has anything to do with physics, chemistry, materials science, geology, oceanography. You can’t just say “racism impacts some sciences therefore we shouldn’t do science at all”
You’re demonstratably actively and overtly ignoring examples given to you, right now, showing just how flawed your claimed “critical” status is of such issues.
Yes, you have that ivory tower of yours crammed so high that you’re willfully ignoring intersectional issues that do affect the application, interpretation, even the funding and political will to allocate resources to such fields.
That only demonstrates that correcting the process and actively rejecting bad/false science requires ongoing vigilance, not smug and arrogant dismissal of concerns.
No one said that and you’re willfully ignorant at this point.
Removed by mod
You think it’s anti-intellectual to address intersectional society-wide concerns? Is it truly “intellectual” to pretend that they didn’t happen or that they only happened in the past?
It is the pinnacle of ideological arrogance to believe that scientific fields, as practiced by scientists, exist in perfectly sealed vacuums that require no interaction with government or society and that every experiment that is funded, all research undertaken, is powered by sheer scientific purity instead of the unfortunate material realities of funding and decisions made of “what” is researched and for how long.
It does affect all of the above fields if funding and resources are wasted in pursuit of junk science. Announcing that such junk should be “free” and distributed out there under the belief that it will magically be banished by the light of truth and cease being distributed entirely because it is wrong with no other actions necessary is willful ideological ignorance.