Hem / Filmer / Feedback|tips / Uppdaterat (Sajt mer aktiv januari 2008-september 2011. Har haft ca 320 000 sidvisningar.)
Diverse i media:
klimat, klimatforskare, climate, koldioxid, solaktivitet. (Skapa nyhetsbox här.)

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Läsvärt om bl a grupptänk

Ett par texter att fundera på.

Patrick J. Michaels: The politicization of science is undermining the credibility of academia. Inledning:

"In a recent and wonderful New York Times essay, John Tierney documented the pervasive left-leaning bias of the social sciences in particular and academia in general, which he persuasively painted as the home of tired ideological groupthink. No doubt his essay was an eye-opener for anyone without much experience in the ivy morass, even as it came up short in its search for causation.

There is a dangerous synergy between the academy’s attitudes and what is permitted or proscribed in our scientific journals. An interesting example is in the February 4th issue of Science, the nation’s most prestigious technical magazine and the flagship of scientists’ Washington lobby, the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

The mixing of politics and science, particularly with respect to climate change, has been spilling onto Science’s pages for decades now, but no more blatantly than in the recent paper by Ulf Büntgen of the Swiss Federal Research Institute and 11 coauthors.

This paper is one of many reviving the grizzled ghost of climatic determinism, an idea that originated in the 19th century, which attempts to explain complex social phenomena with simple phenomena like average temperature. ...


Artikeln av John Tierney som Michaels nämner bör vara Social Scientist Sees Bias Within. Några inledande stycken, där vi nog ska översätta liberal med vänster, radikal eller progressiv:

"SAN ANTONIO — Some of the world’s pre-eminent experts on bias discovered an unexpected form of it at their annual meeting.


It was identified by Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist at the University of Virginia who studies the intuitive foundations of morality and ideology. He polled his audience at the San Antonio Convention Center, starting by asking how many considered themselves politically liberal. A sea of hands appeared, and Dr. Haidt estimated that liberals made up 80 percent of the 1,000 psychologists in the ballroom. When he asked for centrists and libertarians, he spotted fewer than three dozen hands. And then, when he asked for conservatives, he counted a grand total of three.

“This is a statistically impossible lack of diversity,” Dr. Haidt concluded, noting polls showing that 40 percent of Americans are conservative and 20 percent are liberal. In his speech and in an interview, Dr. Haidt argued that social psychologists are a “tribal-moral community” united by “sacred values” that hinder research and damage their credibility — and blind them to the hostile climate they’ve created for non-liberals.

“Anywhere in the world that social psychologists see women or minorities underrepresented by a factor of two or three, our minds jump to discrimination as the explanation,” said Dr. Haidt, who called himself a longtime liberal turned centrist. “But when we find out that conservatives are underrepresented among us by a factor of more than 100, suddenly everyone finds it quite easy to generate alternate explanations.”


Andra bloggar om: , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Anonyma, hitta på och ange signatur. Annars gäller att någorlunda hålla sig till ämnet och visa vanlig hyfs.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.