7 thoughts on “Science In Academia”

  1. Hardly new. My older sisters Doctoral Thesis back about 1980 was on Educating Students in Math using Flash Cards… Unfortunately the current fad was the theories of Dr. Jean Piaget — and she was not a follower. My sister was, in effect a heretic and unemployable on the Collegiate Academic level.

    Funny thing about the “Soft Sciences” … Who You are a Disciple of is more important than whether or not you have a valid argument. The STEM Sciences have Math at least…

    1. “Funny thing about the “Soft Sciences” … Who You are a Disciple of is more important than whether or not you have a valid argument.”

      Which is why the female of the species does so well in them. They are just more innately temperamentally wired up to respond more appropriately to that type of environment.

    2. You are right, this isn’t new. The sciences are often portrayed with a mythos of dispassionate rational thought but are really made up of human beings that embody all the flaws of humanity and often magnified by hubris, cruelty made worse by intelligence, and a lack of self awareness about how human nature affects individuals or groups.

      Obviously this isn’t universal and the scientific method is the overt recognition of this.

  2. So what’s the SJW analog of Marxism-Leninism that scientists will have to quote in every paper, like back in the Soviet Union? Should we just continue to use Marxism-Leninism as the gold standard, since they’re related anyway?

  3. “I pointed out that if the deletion were permanent, it would leave me in an impossible position. I would not be able to republish anywhere else because I would be unable to sign a copyright form declaring that it had not already been published elsewhere.”

    Hill should sign the form with a note explaining that if Steinberger unpublished it, then by god it’s uncopyrighted too.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *