Wokeness the Death of Science in the Western World

[childeye 2]

Scientists say 'binary terms' male and female should be banned

More inclusive terminology like "sperm-producing" and "egg-producing" should be encouraged instead, scientists have said

www.lancs.live

There is a saying "give them an inch they take a yard". What was only suppose to be limited to social sphere has infected and starting to destroy the intellectual sphere. Wokeness is more of a religion at this point. There are taboo words and subjects that people cannot question. In comes the old blasphemy & less majeste dressed as progressiveness.

I now live in a world where authoritarian nations like China and Russia teach proper science and free democratic nations teach pseudo science. No wonder the younger generations of the west especially North America is no where near the top ten smartest people on earth. America is 20 and Canada is 16. With what is transpiring in the west I doubt North America nations will be in the top 20 for long.

Smartest Countries in the World 2023 - Wisevoter

There are many ways to determine how smart a country’s population is, whether it be from their IQ scores or from their reading and writing ability comprehension. The IQ of a person refers to their intelligence quotient which measures their critical thinking ability. Generally, when discussing...

wisevoter.com

Feelings should never interfere with truths. Unfortunately in the west wokeness is the new state religion. And like any state religion there is always a form of doctrinal supremacy enforced. You're all doing great ruining the future generations.

The problem is that the term woke has been hijacked, which creates a false premise, which is a method of propaganda. It's now being used to just provoke one another rather than understand one another. I guarantee you, we all know what male and female mean, and finding a different label doesn't ever change the sentiment behind the words. Science is a methodology and has nothing to do with any actual problem behind gender confusion or whatever else is playing to the fears to deceive voters. Speaking about education, people need to learn how to tell when someone is trying to push their buttons.

 

[Diamond72]

Outside the spiritual Kingdom of God, the powers of darkness are busy spewing out false images of god, but God knows His people.

I see a lot of that with atheists. They simply do not know God. I do not believe in their concept of God any more than they do. It is difficult though. If God is so good, why is there so much pain, misery, and suffering in the world? Why do people want to harm others? It makes no sense.

 

[Diamond72]

That settles it, when a man thinks he is a woman,
if he cannot give birth he is not a woman.

God made them male and female so they can only be united together with Him. The problem is that people do not know or love God. United we stand, divided we fall. People think they do not need God and then they make a mess out of things.

 

[Robban]

God made them male and female so they can only be united together with Him. The problem is that people do not know or love God. United we stand, divided we fall. People think they do not need God and then they make a mess out of things.

Well,
"All is foreseen, and freedom of choice is granted."
Ethics of the fathers 3:15

 

[IceJad]

Now a days you need a chemist. Also, most everything is undercooked. Except for meat because the government regulates that.

I'm quite sure I don't want to eat undercook instant ramen even if it is safe to eat uncooked. But if people's digestive systems can handle it by all means.

 

[IceJad]

So if she removes her womb or even cuts her tubes she is no longer a female?

The main crux of my displeasure the unnecessary changes in scientific language. We all know what a female is whether they can reproduce or not. Ants are majority female except for the queens all other females can't produce eggs. Therefore using term like "egg-producing" is more scientifically inaccurate. Male and female are suppose to be labels to denote sexual dimorphism. It should include some common features of that dimorphism like male having sperm or penile genital or the XY chromosomes.

These changes have nothing to do with the inaccuracy of the current scientific fact. It is an ideological one. And the absolute vast majority of such pushes are from the woke west. Always the main reason is something historically & geographically limited to the west. Scientific standards should be universal. A female should be female even when translated to non-english.

Example in Malay female is betina. I don't want a piece of white paper using the word "egg-producing" which translate in Malay to "pembuat telur" (literal translation: egg-maker).

Betina - female for non-humans
Perempuan - female for human

 

[IceJad]

The problem is that the term woke has been hijacked, which creates a false premise, which is a method of propaganda. It's now being used to just provoke one another rather than understand one another.

Terms get hijacked and ultimately usurped. Take gay for example. It started out as meaning happy/joy/elation then later use to mean becoming prostitutes then into homosexual men then into anyone who is not heterosexual.

Woke may start out as the visibility of black people's issues. However it is not the "against" crowd that generalized the term to include all intersectionality of leftist progressive ideologies (such as 3rd wave feminism, CRT & LGBT). It was the "for" crowd that incorporated the all under the umbrella term of woke. Many far-leftists chose to identify with the term and in general have been vastly accepted within their own circle as the appropriate terminology.

So if anyone is hijacking the term it is the adjacent and ally to the side who created it to begin with. Now even the original group it referred to accepted the extra ideologies into their cause.

Just like how in the west conservatives have now include classical liberals, centrists and center-left along with the traditional right-leanings. Because the new liberals and progressive have moved to their further extreme left. Once talking points and standards of the classical liberals and centrists are now (at least in the west) right leanings.

 

[childeye 2]

I see a lot of that with atheists. They simply do not know God. I do not believe in their concept of God any more than they do. It is difficult though. If God is so good, why is there so much pain, misery, and suffering in the world? Why do people want to harm others? It makes no sense.

It makes sense that the Light can only be appreciated in the darkness. The fact is compassion is experienced only where there is suffering. What makes no sense to me is how can anyone care about pain, misery, suffering, and people harming others without God (brotherly Love)?

 

[childeye 2]

Terms get hijacked and ultimately usurped. Take gay for example. It started out as meaning happy/joy/elation then later use to mean becoming prostitutes then into homosexual men then into anyone who is not heterosexual.

Woke may start out as the visibility of black people's issues. However it is not the "against" crowd that generalized the term to include all intersectionality of leftist progressive ideologies (such as 3rd wave feminism, CRT & LGBT). It was the "for" crowd that incorporated the all under the umbrella term of woke. Many far-leftists chose to identify with the term and in general have been vastly accepted within their own circle as the appropriate terminology.

So if anyone is hijacking the term it is the adjacent and ally to the side who created it to begin with. Now even the original group it referred to accepted the extra ideologies into their cause.

Just like how in the west conservatives have now include classical liberals, centrists and center-left along with the traditional right-leanings. Because the new liberals and progressive have moved to their further extreme left. Once talking points and standards of the classical liberals and centrists are now (at least in the west) right leanings.

In other words, the term woke has been hijacked for propaganda, and lies always usurp from the Truth. Why participate in hypocrisy and be a part of the problem? Do you not know accepting a lie and passing it on will only lead to being deceived and deceiving others?

Here's the Truth, The Woke term originally means enlightened about the suffering of those in Black America. It's a positive connotation alluding to being aware of inequality and injustice. If it's being applied by the LGBTQ community then it still implies being aware of inequality and injustice. If anyone changes that meaning to a negative connotation, then they are for inequality and injustice.

Every lie of the powers of darkness intends to undermine this essential Truth: Love God with all your heart mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself.

This is the base political dichotomy, Democracy/Autocracy. It is used to reason upon degrees of the delegation of power.

Any left/right or east/west configuration in the context of politics that doesn't exist as a subset of that fundamental base reasoning is a false dichotomy.

This is a North/south dichotomy, positive/negative. The negative represents the absence of the positive and it is used to reason upon absolutes. True/false, Light/Darkness, up/down are all dichotomies that reason in absolutes.

Love God with all you heart mind and soul is the positive in a North/south Dichotomy. Love others as yourself is an east/west or left/right dichotomy typically meaning a give/take between two opposing subjective views. For example, Buyer/Seller is a valid left/right dichotomy with an objective center.

 

[IceJad]

In other words, the term woke has been hijacked for propaganda, and lies always usurp from the Truth. Why participate in hypocrisy and be a part of the problem? Do you not know accepting a lie and passing it on will only lead to being deceived and deceiving others?

What hypocrisy? I didn't write the article. It is a group of scientists who are woke (encompassing the ideology) who came out with the paper proposing to ban generally accepted terms in science. It is also not my editorial input. They specifically wrote it out in their paper the words to be banned and the reason behind it. And this is a growing trend that I notice from past incidents such as the "birthing person/people" case not to long ago and other cases in the same vein.

What all these cases have in common are
1) Comes from Western nations
2) Changes are always in response to woke ideology
3) Advocated by people who are intellectuals or people who have influence
4) Frequency is on the rise

I only point out the absurdity of such linguistic tempering. Maybe it is hyperbolic to say western science will die by the hands of wokeness. But if this trend of preoccupation on terminology instead of discoveries, it is not hard to deduce that the level of scientific output will be outstripped by other nations who don't take social ideology in scientific endavours.

This is not a rightwing narrative (for I care not for both political spectrum). This is my personal honest observation. And I stand in opposition to it both in intellectual and moral principles.

 

[childeye 2]

What hypocrisy? I didn't write the article. It is a group of scientists who are woke (encompassing the ideology) who came out with the paper proposing to ban generally accepted terms in science. It is also not my editorial input. They specifically wrote it out in their paper the words to be banned and the reason behind it. And this is a growing trend that I notice from past incidents such as the "birthing person/people" case not to long ago and other cases in the same vein.

What all these cases have in common are
1) Comes from Western nations
2) Changes are always in response to woke ideology
3) Advocated by people who are intellectuals or people who have influence
4) Frequency is on the rise

I only point out the absurdity of such linguistic tempering. Maybe it is hyperbolic to say western science will die by the hands of wokeness. But if this trend of preoccupation on terminology instead of discoveries, it is not hard to deduce that the level of scientific output will be outstripped by other nations who don't take social ideology in scientific endavours.

This is not a rightwing narrative (for I care not for both political spectrum). This is my personal honest observation. And I stand in opposition to it both in intellectual and moral principles.

The hypocrisy of spreading a false premise. Woke means aware of injustice and inequality. It's unethical to take what someone meant as a positive or neutral connotation and change it into a negative that they never intended. It doesn't matter who does it, it's wrong and divisive. I otherwise agree with your opposition to buying into the absurd linguistic tampering of male/female, if only you were not buying into the absurd linguistic tampering of "woke" in your posts.

 

[Larniavc]

There is a saying "give them an inch they take a yard".

Slippery slope fallacy in the first sentence?

Crikey!

 

[IceJad]

Slippery slope fallacy in the first sentence?

Crikey!

Slope? Good one. There is no longer a metaphorical slope when half of the western world have voluntary jumped off the mountain of moderation. Reminds me of a cartoon I watched on Youtube years ago.

PS: I don't identify with any political ideology but if I have to choose which spectrum I'm on I'm closest to classical liberal which in the west is considered a conservative today.

 

[IceJad]

The hypocrisy of spreading a false premise. Woke means aware of injustice and inequality. It's unethical to take what someone meant as a positive or neutral connotation and change it into a negative that they never intended. It doesn't matter who does it, it's wrong and divisive. I otherwise agree with your opposition to buying into the absurd linguistic tampering of male/female, if only you were not buying into the absurd linguistic tampering of "woke" in your posts.

You point is the preoccupation of the usage of the term woke? By the graces, in all writings there is always a form of generalization. Without some form of generalization everything we write will be long winded and boring to read. It also makes it easier to understand concepts.

Your understanding of the term woke is unfortunately not universal especially in social/political sphere. Like I said in a previous post the term has come to mean different things. I would like to continue to use the word gay in reference to elation, however if I use it in a social context the first and most forefront meaning others will understand is homosexuality.

Like it or not the term woke has come to mean people who subscribed to the far-left progressive political ideology. I would like the term to stay as the past tense of wake. But we both know better when we use "woke" people (especially in the west) will take it to mean a social/political ideology.

I stand in opposition to their actions of course I would use the term in a negative connotation. It would be no different if I use terms like "Christians righteousness" to refer to the wrongdoings of the group under the guise of righteousness. It would have negative connotation regardless of the original neutral or positive meaning.

Therefore it is not a false premise to say that woke people are pushing for ideologically changes in scientific terminology. Maybe not all woke people but the referenced individuals of the group is pretty much implied by earlier points given.

 

[dzheremi]

I'm not about to get upset or proclaim the death of western civilization over an obscure journal article, but I do think that if anyone does not recognize that there is widespread social engineering going on in this realm and many others, they really are not woke (to use the term as it was originally intended).

Luckily (?) for human beings, social engineering and language go hand-in-hand for things that we find beneficial, as well as for things we find objectionable. Since I got my master's degree in linguistics with a focus on sociolinguistics (social dimensions of language, including language planning and policy, language revitalization, speaker attitudes concerning language use, communal/racial/sexual dialects, etc.), I realize that my viewpoint probably won't please everyone (and I'm just some guy anyway), but I just want to point that when I was in the process of going to school to get that degree (which I eventually completed in 2015, so not a million years ago or before the rise of 'wokeness'), we definitely discussed the sociolinguistics of sex variation (male and female speech), as well as having a unit on 'gay accent' as an example of a sort of 'communal dialect', and the professor did not shy away from assigning us readings for our understanding and discussion (from papers written by a gay-identifying linguist, at that) that concluded that the stereotypical features of the 'gay accent' were not some sort of immutable signals of identity in keeping with the ideology expressed by the 'born this way' crowd, but actually functioned as negotiated/modulated identity markers, which were thereby 'turned up' or 'turned down' according to the context of the speech act. Please note that this does not mean in any way that they're 'fake', but that they are one example of a particularly politically sensitive and socially salient identity marker that gay men (the study that I can best recall focused on gay men, not lesbians, bisexuals, or any of the other parts of the LGBT pantheon) themselves can and do manipulate according to what best serves their objectives in communicating in whatever context in which they are doing so. The same is essentially true for the rest of us in different contexts that may or may not be related to sexual identity, so that revelation itself is not particularly earth-shaking, just (again) in some circles perhaps politically unpalatable because of the supposed implications it could have in the mouths of the wrong people. Sort of like this 'egg-producer' thing, I suppose. We all know what is meant in general terms by 'man' and 'woman' or 'male' and 'female', but for those whose job it is to study these categories in all their variations, it makes sense that they would use a specialized vocabulary that can more accurately capture variations in the human body's expression of chromosomes and hormones or what have you. The difference, as the OP has already observed, is that we now find ourselves increasingly in situations where more and more of society is expected to conform itself to rules concerning language and its intersection with various other topics that was once understood only by those who had coined the terms or otherwise had reason to use them. One of the most interesting things I studied while I was still a student was different models of language diffusion throughout society, which explain how and why certain terms and concepts are adopted or not adopted outside of the networks and communities that originally used them. I don't remember many of the details by this point (unfortunately, this came up in a class in which I did a rather poor job at remaining irenic in the face of the professor's entirely off-topic and bizarre attacks on my religion in particular, so I purposely put that mostly out of mind pretty much immediately after the class was over), but I do remember thinking even at the time that if people could see things at this level of analysis it sure would cut down on a lot of the conspiratorial thinking about words being taken away, injected, modified, etc. into some kind of amorphous and malleable national political discourse. It's not even that people who think that are always wrong (depending), but that there are some surprisingly banal origins and routes that some of the terms that are most closely associated with 'wokeness' in the west have taken that would probably take a lot of the wind out of certain people's sails if they knew the backstory of how all of this tends to work.

For every KGB/CIA/ISI/Mossad conspiracy to do whatever, there are probably at least a few dozen papers, working groups, presentations, etc. that are presented by dorks only to die on the vine surrounded by eggheads who don't even care about the social implications of any of it, because they're too weird and insular to realize how they're totally ruining society with their new-fangled terminology that they might not have ever imagined anyone outside of the conference room or office would ever even see. (As an example of something from a different area of the War of Woke Words, I first became aware of Antifa in about 1995...it wasn't what it is now, but my point is, things change whether it's someone's fault or not.)

 

[childeye 2]

You point is the preoccupation of the usage of the term woke? By the graces, in all writings there is always a form of generalization. Without some form of generalization everything we write will be long winded and boring to read. It also makes it easier to understand concepts.

Any reasoning based on a falsehood ends in a contradiction. Respectfully, you need to re-examine your priori. If you don't consider 3rd wave feminism, CRT & LGBT as woke, then simply say so rather than accept a premise you don't even agree with.

woke
[wōk]

VERB

1. past of wake.

ADJECTIVE
INFORMAL

1. alert to injustice and discrimination in society, especially racism:

Your understanding of the term woke is unfortunately not universal especially in social/political sphere.

I understand that, but make no mistake, it's not my personal understanding that I am defending, but the actual sentiment of the term, which is therefore also spirit. As a spirit that denotes being alert to injustice and discrimination in a society, it is the Spirit of the Love of others. So don't throw the baby out with the bathwater so to speak.

Like I said in a previous post the term has come to mean different things.

That is why I said it is being used as political propaganda.

I would like to continue to use the word gay in reference to elation, however if I use it in a social context the first and most forefront meaning others will understand is homosexuality.

I get that. You don't want to be misunderstood or mischaracterized if you were to say you feel gay today. That's exactly why I'm against adulterating the term woke.

Like it or not the term woke has come to mean people who subscribed to the far-left progressive political ideology.

Injustice, iniquity, discrimination, prejudice, cynicism, racism, greed, fornication, hypocrisy and all forms of sin occur on either side. Sinners are not on one side of the political spectrum, and people talking as if that's the case are deceived.

I would like the term to stay as the past tense of wake. But we both know better when we use "woke" people (especially in the west) will take it to mean a social/political ideology.

To Love others as ourselves, we have to see others as ourselves. Those who use the term to self-identify as woke at least deserve to be understood, even as that's what I would want done to me. Woke applied as a negative would only carry a sentiment of mockery.

I stand in opposition to their actions of course I would use the term in a negative connotation. It would be no different if I use terms like "Christians righteousness" to refer to the wrongdoings of the group under the guise of righteousness. It would have negative connotation regardless of the original neutral or positive meaning.

You could just say they are not woke, or are misappropriating the term, rather than accept the false premise.

Therefore it is not a false premise to say that woke people are pushing for ideologically changes in scientific terminology. Maybe not all woke people but the referenced individuals of the group is pretty much implied by earlier points given.

As I said you need to re-examine your priori. Maybe not all woke people, or maybe a few woke people? Well, I feel you're getting sucked into the propaganda from both sides. The issue I see as the problem is actually lust of the flesh, and there is no cure but deliverance through Christ which is why I preach the Gospel. Grace, mercy and understanding, the Gospel is about understanding that all flesh is lustful, God alone is "good", and no one is better than anyone else in God's eyes. We need carry our own cross to walk in Christ, who when the Pharisees wondered why Jesus was sitting with the sinners, he told them that the sick need a doctor. To think secular laws against sinfulness need to be implemented to save secular society from moral decay, is going to backfire since according to scripture, the carnal mind cannot be subject to God.

In all honesty, I feel sorry for transgender and gays and all such lifestyles, but I would not tell them that to their faces because it would be taken wrong. I don't feel any need to shame others whose sins may be greater than my own. I don't see everything like God does. For all I know they may love others more than I do. They may even flaunt their sinful behavior in some form of blindness, but it isn't my place to judge them.

 

[LesSme]

Hey OP. Do you mind my asking if you are a Western ex-pat? As you seem to have a vested interest in these issues. Don’t get me wrong, I feel strongly about them myself. But I believe a lot of the non-Western world e.g. Malaysia where you are just laugh at a lot of our nonsense. Iow I believe they are wise enough to discern and reject the absurdities being pushed.

To paraphrase the Jewish saying, man makes his plans and God laughs. Probably more healthy for us in the long run to follow his example when it comes to these matters. After all no one save his son is going to change the world in the end. Not the righteous, and definitely not the “woke,” whichever hemisphere they may reside in.

 

[LesSme]

It makes sense that the Light can only be appreciated in the darkness. The fact is compassion is experienced only where there is suffering. What makes no sense to me is how can anyone care about pain, misery, suffering, and people harming others without God (brotherly Love)?

19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Rom 1, NIV)

 

[Larniavc]

now live in a world where authoritarian nations like China and Russia teach proper science and free democratic nations teach pseudo science.

Have you thought of leaving? Maybe western society is not for you?

 

[Larniavc]

Do you need to be a chef to know something is undercook? Do you need microbiology to know moldy bread is hazardous to consume? Do you need a degree in math to say 1+1=2? Do you need to be a mechanic and a petrol chemist combo to advise a person on how to change engine oil?

If you need a piece of paper to identity what gender you are then I have nothing to say.

As the answer to the question seems ‘none’ your opinion isn’t important.