A Paper That Says Science Should Be Impartial Was Rejected by Major Journals | Hacker News Reader

A Paper That Says Science Should Be Impartial Was Rejected by Major Journals

nytimes.com

This is utter nonsense:

> "Yet this belief — that science is somehow subjective and should be practiced and judged accordingly — has recently taken hold in academic, governmental and medical settings."

I've never heard any rational person espouse this view, it's not normal, no reasonable experienced scientist would ever adopt this nonsensical concept.

The NYTimes has become another part of the clown show, I guess. Oh hey I hear Saddam has WMDs maybe that's related?

No one say it out loud, and no one is probably thinks that they believe it. In this sense you are right. But the article describes how people act, and they act like they believe in it.

It is strikingly similar to a white person claiming that they are not a racist and protecting their privileges. People believe a lot of things about themselves, but not all of these things are true.

Litmus test for one's beliefs is their behavior, the choices they make, especially costly ones. Their words from other hand should be taken with a grain of salt. Words are cheap.

https://archive.is/nwZKw

"Of course, nobody wants to hire a racist. But that’s not what we’re talking about. "

Yeah I'm going to guess that's exactly what they want to be talking about.

This trend has been going on for decades. It doesn't help that all parties in the so-called culture war are engaged in similar antics.

I don't know why I got downvoted. As I see it, the other party is censoring books and the other party is banning books. Both parties are also attacking academia.

I cannot say for all, but I personally was in doubt which parties you are talking about. This comment I think uncovers your idea, it is far right and far left isn't it? But at first I thought you talked about parties from the article discussed: scientists sacrificing science for a noble goal of fighting social biases and scientists saying that science is more important, and the fight against biases should slow down to preserve science.

I am not sure any more about all the parties involved in the war, but some parts of it indeed seem to align with the Horseshoe theory. But then you have all the rest too, including the conspiracy theorists and whatnot. It is a dangerous game to play in this era of disinformation and propaganda.

As for science, diversity is of course a laudable goal. But it shouldn't come with a subsequent politicization of science.

PS. The actual article that NYT discussed was garbage too.

Twin goal posts of censorship and authoritarianism. As long as individuals focus on the tribal identity and blame the 'other', the charade continues uninterrupted.

Try to ignore the votes as much as possible.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com