• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Anti intellectualism directed against science.

Hans Blaster

On August Recess
Mar 11, 2017
21,835
16,470
55
USA
✟414,716.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Yes as I said I am not disputing those hard facts.
You were given facts so hard to dispute that they aren't "softball" questions, but T-ball* questions. Congratulations on not whiffing on those.
Tell me is it a fact that biological sex is binary being only male and female.
It is not a fact. It has been known since ancient times that some people (not many) have "ambiguous genitalia", what we now call "intersex". There are many causes for this including genetic and physiological causes. All found through the scientific process. Rejecting this empirical research and attacking the science is anti-intellectual.
Are there only 2 genders.
Gender identity gets into a fuzzier world, that of the brain and mind, but there are still empirical techniques and procedures to be used. That research has show that there is some fuzziness to gender (it is not strictly binary) and it is not strictly (though usually) aligned with biological sex. Rejecting the scientific research on gender to maintain an ideological position is an anti-intellectual attack on science.

What about human caused climate change, to what extent exactly is human made climate change a fact.
It is 100% a fact (and humans have been disturbing the climate and ecosystem for a very long time).

I suspect you refer to what has been called "global warming" or "anthropomorphic global warming" driven by increased, human released quantities of carbon dioxide. That is well established as well. That excess CO2 emissions would trigger surface warming has been well understood for 30+ years. That humans are the cause of extra CO2 is even better established than its impact as a surface warmer. The efforts to discredit this empirical science result are politically driven and anti-intellectual.
What about evolution by natural selection and genetic mutation. Is that a fact for all human change and behaviour.
Evolution is not only the best explanation for the diversity of species, but has been observed in the field and in the lab many times. Natural selection is a well known mechanism that has also been studied extensively. Genetic mutations have been quantified which is how we know that each of us has 50-100 new novel mutations not found in either of our parents. Rejecting evolution for ideological reasons is an anti-intellectual attack on science.


Despite the obsession with "woke/PC" in science instruction or inclusion in scientific training and employment by you or others, none of these areas of inquiry were created for ideological reasons, nor are the results ideological. Scientific investigation of sex and gender are not some effort by researchers to destroy "traditional sex norms", nor are investigations of climate motivated to destroy "industrial capitalism", nor are investigations of evolution driven to destroy "biblical literalism". No, they are to understand sex/gender outliers in our midst, understand our climate and provide data for policy making, and to understand how biological systems and organisms work and arose.

Attacking science because it provides results that one does not like is anti-intellectualism, plain and simple. No doubt about it. Complaints about the culture of scientists and scientific education with names like "DEI/Woke/PC" is nothing more than an anti-intellectual smokescreen to distract from the direct attacks on the process and results that challenge ones ideological positions.


*T-ball is a version of baseball where the ball is not thrown (or pitched) toward the batter, but instead the stationary ball is placed on stand to be swung at. It is played by small children who don't have the hand-eye coordination to hit a moving target.
 
Upvote 0

Diamond72

Dispensationalist 72
Nov 23, 2022
8,307
1,521
73
Akron
✟57,931.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
And again, your dreams aren't evidence of anything but the stuff going on in your head while you sleep.
They mean something to me. It does not matter if they mean anything to you or not.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

On August Recess
Mar 11, 2017
21,835
16,470
55
USA
✟414,716.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
They mean something to me. It does not matter if they mean anything to you or not.

That's my point. They aren't science. Have and enjoy all the dreams you want. But you can't use them as scientific evidence.
 
Upvote 0

Diamond72

Dispensationalist 72
Nov 23, 2022
8,307
1,521
73
Akron
✟57,931.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Gender identity
What is important is God's plan and purpose and why He made us male and female. People with gender identity issues do not care why things are the way they are. Or perhaps they do not want to face up to the fact that God has a plan for them and their life that is different from the product of their own imagination.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

On August Recess
Mar 11, 2017
21,835
16,470
55
USA
✟414,716.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat

And the scientists who study gender identity do so to understand it. Those studies are not to prop-up or knock-down any social or ideological vision of gender. Are you going to accept that, or engage in anti-intellectualism against science?
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
5,756
4,681
✟349,567.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The claim “I am not anti-science” doesn’t change one iota your erroneous idea that scientific facts are subjective.
To use your example of climate change, the scientific fact or empirical evidence which supports AGW comes from an unintuitive signature which was predicted in the 1960s before AGW was even seriously considered.

The vast majority of climate scientists agree with AGW and the opposition invariably comes from a political, pseudoscience or religious perspective which portrays scientists as being fraudulent and are examples of anti-intellectualism.
Science doesn’t question the facts or empirical evidence, it is the theories and hypotheses which are supported by or disproven by the evidence.
Most people who question the science are scientifically illiterate and rely on confirmation bias for their opinions.
Enough is enough.
This rambling is nothing more than an exercise in obfuscation because you couldn’t answer the question of how Harvard University is an example of wokeism/PC resulting in science being dumbed down.
In order to answer the question you needed to demonstrate how increasing the entrance requirements for an education whether it is through wokeism/PC or any other mechanism impacts on the education standard itself.

Nobel Prize winners can be also be used as a barometer to further refute your argument.
Since you admit Asian countries are free from wokeism/PC then why has China with its massive investment in science education not created a production line of Nobel Prize winners compared with the supposedly woke affected US education system?

Reasons for US dominating Nobel Prize winners;

Why does the US dominate? We suggest that such achievements may result from a combination of academic freedom, a tradition of basic research, well-established research universities, high academic salaries (relative to most other countries), a welcoming academic system for international scholars, a combination of a competitive merit-based academic culture as well as cooperation in science and relatively accessible competition-based grant and contract funding.
Academic culture and governance is central to building a rich environment for Nobel-level science. The US, over time, has developed in its research university sector a pattern of organisation and culture friendly to fundamental research.


The recent decline in the global academic rating of US universities is attributed to;

However, as is noticeable in the modest decline of the United States in the global academic rankings, a combination of long-term disinvestment in public higher education and the growing anti-intellectualism in segments of US society may well contribute to a decline in American Nobel domination in coming years.

Here you have engaged in blatant cherry picking.
Your link makes it very clear the retraction rates even after this “disturbing trend” is around 2-4 papers per 10,000 papers.
You omitted this fact as it makes your sensationalist claim look rather insipid.
This is your own brand of anti-intellectualism at work by making fraud look widespread in science when its incidence is rare.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Shemjaza
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

On August Recess
Mar 11, 2017
21,835
16,470
55
USA
✟414,716.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
No more than your desire to engage in anti-intellectualism against religion.

You say this as if the comment to which I was responding (to which you responded as above) was "intellectual". It was not. Even more so...

1. I did not say in my post that religion could not be intellectual,
2. Nor was I talking about religion generally.

I was speaking of dogma (in this case dogma about gender). Let's look at the bit of my post that you cut out:

And the scientists who study gender identity do so to understand it. Those studies are not to prop-up or knock-down any social or ideological vision of gender.

Here I am noting that the scientific inquiry into gender is just that. It is not driven by ideology or to attack religion or other social positions on gender. I wrote all of that in response to you post:


In this post you don't make anything like an intellectual argument, but rather dismiss the scientific/intellectual pursuit of understanding of gender identity and assert a dogma constructed from bible extract referring to "made us male and female" and some general notion common in Christianity that "God has a plan for them". Additionally you assert (without evidence) that "People with gender identity issues do not care why things are the way they are." This is a flat dismissal of the intellectual examination of gender while asserting facts about people in a group I presume you are not part of. That whole post is an exercise in anti-intellectualism.

That post was a response to this, but you only clipped the words "gender identity" and ignore the rest:


This is (I think) a reasonable summary of the state of investigation into gender identity. One that is suitable for usage in this thread as it is not the topic. The last line still holds: "Rejecting the scientific research on gender to maintain an ideological position is an anti-intellectual attack on science." If one wishes to not be anti-intellectual about the science of gender it is best not to dismiss it or attack it. You may accept it and still layer on top a theological judgement. (For example: "gender identity issues exist, but people who succumb to them are sinful.")


If you wan't to call me out for being "anti-intellectual about religion" do so in another thread. I suggest one of the ones about the flood. (I took a few days off, so I may not have seen every post relevant to past comments of mine.)
 
Upvote 0

Diamond72

Dispensationalist 72
Nov 23, 2022
8,307
1,521
73
Akron
✟57,931.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
You say this as if the comment to which I was responding (to which you responded as above) was "intellectual". It was not.
If you are going to be abusive, I am not going to respond. I have nothing to gain here, NOTHING> I am simply trying to help you and if you are abusive that means you do not want my help.
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
5,756
4,681
✟349,567.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The Times Higher Education global university rankings for 2023 have come out indicating "woke riddled" Harvard is holding firm in the rankings at number 2.
By comparison the "woke free" Chinese universities are at numbers 16 and 17.


University ranking methodology.
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
5,756
4,681
✟349,567.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The bot I used "Jackassbot" when asked about the Earth's diameter being 12,742 km came up with an even more applicable response.
"My hovercraft is full of eels."
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

On August Recess
Mar 11, 2017
21,835
16,470
55
USA
✟414,716.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
If you are going to be abusive, I am not going to respond. I have nothing to gain here, NOTHING> I am simply trying to help you and if you are abusive that means you do not want my help.

I'm not looking for your help. Certainly not with science. Nor with "spirituality" (at topic that does not interest me).

I only pointed out that your comment about gender identity was intellectual in nature.
 
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
15,967
1,726
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟320,696.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You are still missing the point. I am saying that woke and PC ideology is cancelling some science altogether. So scientific facts don't even get to be part of the cirriculum. If universities cancel say Enlightenment or Issac Newton because its percieved by some that these are racist or or not inclusive then we are cancelling how the west came to think in scientific terms.

So its not so much about specific obvious facts about the diameter of the earth ect but about a way of thinking (objective, reasoned and free thinking rather than ideological) that is being cancelled that is anti science ande anti intellectual. .
Yes that is about how we can get more accurate results by reflecting the reality of lived experience which can vary. That is gooed science as it considers all the relevant facts to avoied false results. But what I am talking about is how postmodern woke and PC ideology is actually rejecting scinece facts at face value.

For example the biological fact that there are only 2 sexes and that gender is associateed with biology. Or how a male can have a child. Or how any disadvantage to minorities is because of white oppression ect which is basically cancelling large chunks of western history and tradition that is the foundation of scientific thinking. Woke ideology has created an unreal world that cancels rational and free thinking and replaces it with ideology.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
15,967
1,726
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟320,696.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You were given facts so hard to dispute that they aren't "softball" questions, but T-ball* questions. Congratulations on not whiffing on those.
Lol it only took me several times to point this out and now you finally acknowledege this. I think part of the confusion is that not all scientific facts are 'hard' facts and can be open to interpretation. At least in the eyes of ideologues. I guess you could call them fake facts or alternative facts. Like in gender and how one side claims gender and sex is a biological fact based and the other claims its socially and individually constructed. Both appeal to the science and claim their position is based on fact. There are a lot of examples like this.
See here is a contested so called scientific fact. You just claimed a scientific truth because your saying that any opposing view is false. Yet your position is contested by biologist and psychologists. Biological sex is binary. There are only 2 sexes. The existence of intersex people are not 3rd, 4th or 5th sexes. They are deviations of the binary sexes of male and female caused by anomelies.

But that is what gender ideology does. It takes dviations of the norm and make it the norm. This is to advance an ideology and not science. This is happening across the board which is resulting in absurd outcomes like claiming males can give birth because females can somehow magically become male when biologically they are still a female. The reality and fact is they are always a female despite their psychological state.
Yes and that is what I have been pointing out. Thankyou for acknowledging this. The point is even if the science is hared to establish we can still be open to discovering the science. But what woke and PC ideology are doing is claiming they already know the truth and any diviation from that thinking is racist and oppressive. So its not so much that we may know every fact but that ideology calims they know the truth and then want to impose that on society even at the expense of rational thinking and science.
Yes I agree and thats another example of how ideology is anti intellectual. But ideologues use various tactics to undermine the science. They try to muddy the waters by citing alternative facts or questioning the established facts as being wrong. For example by questioning the extent of human caused climate change/global warmimg. Like with graphs showing how warming and cooling have been going on forever. Or the other extreme of overstating human caused activity and then justifying radical interventions. Either way its anti intellectual.
Yes just as religious belief does. But what ideology does is take those facts and makes them irrelevant compared to other facts they cite associated with supporting their thinking. A bit like religion.

But part of the problem with evolution is not so much that evolution is a fact but rather how those facts are established. In that sense even the science is undermining traditional facts about evolution with alternative driving forces besides ranedom mutations and NS. For example the Extended evolutionary synthesis posits that much of evolution is not random mutations but directed mutations and rather than NS animal and especially human behaviour is artifically selecting for beneficial outcomes to further survival.

So in this situation certain facts are well established but there are many components that are not well established and open to interpretation aned claims of altwernative facts.
If only that was the truth. Unfatunately thats not the case. Science is never completely neutral or about cold hard facts. The type of questions we ask, the manner in which we investigate, the areas we investigate over others, how we choose to know certain facts rather than others all come into play and dictate what is the reality we live in. Its the fact that this type of thinking dominates the narrative that is the problem rather than a balanced view.

Western science proved itself but colonialists used that science to dictate the realities of everyone. Those effected couldn't care less about the cold hard facts the west held up when they could not experience those supposed benefits of western science. They liveed by completely different set of facts but were not able to practcie them. That is why PC ideology is now citing alternative facts and claiming western science is racist and oppressive and deon't reflect reality. So in that context what is a fact in this postmodern world.
Yet woke, PC, DEI and cancel culture are realities in todays post modernist society. So much so that they dictate policy and elections.
Yes but if in a persuit of intellectual excellence if we then restrict education to T-ball levels to accommate smaller people we then reduce the ability to achieve our intellectual potential. That is what is happening in woke education.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
15,967
1,726
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟320,696.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
And the scientists who study gender identity do so to understand it. Those studies are not to prop-up or knock-down any social or ideological vision of gender. Are you going to accept that, or engage in anti-intellectualism against science?
I just posteed evdience that a large % of peer review is false mainly due to ideological pressures. Its like your saying scientists are untainted by human nature.
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
5,756
4,681
✟349,567.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I just posteed evdience that a large % of peer review is false mainly due to ideological pressures. Its like your saying scientists are untainted by human nature.
Wow you have the gall of repeating this claim after being caught out cherry picking lines from the science.org link in order to make peer review look far worse than what it is when retraction rates per 10,000 papers is very small.

In another link Science.org looked at the retraction rates versus country.



It makes a complete mockery of suggesting the ideology of wokeness/PC is behind these retraction rates given Iran is at the top of the list.
Do you believe Iran of all countries is a bastion of wokeness and PC?


 
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

On August Recess
Mar 11, 2017
21,835
16,470
55
USA
✟414,716.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Perhaps this "evidence" was buried in your wall of quotes, but I had to stop looking it over when you started with a link to Hillsdale college as they are a tiny college that is only "relevant" because they are leading the charge against modernity and toward theocracy.

As for the Enlightenment, I am more concerned about Hillsdale and the anti-woke movement destroying the Enlightenment than I am the "woke fanatics" doing so.

As for Isaac Newton, we don't need him to teach or do physics. No one using his physics cares one bit that Newton spent more time doing alchemy and non-Trinitarian theology. Newton's physics is just call "Classical" physics. So go ahead, "cancel" Newton because he's a perv or racist, or imperialist, or whatever. We don't care. It does change the science, nor will physics suddenly not be taught.
 
Reactions: sjastro
Upvote 0