tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
I have not read this piece, and already choose to comment: I don't think an academic journal should accept a piece with "White ignorance" in the title (or the text), at least not as used in this case.
This also happens in gender medicine. Either the intervention was beneficial, or minority stress, not measured or conrolled for, caused the poor outcome.
A few years ago, before I knew what the woke ideology was, I logged on to the American Psychological Association site in search of peer reviewed articles on urban gun violence. I immediately pulled up an article that had been posted on the APA site more as a position statement than a research report. The claims made in the article were inconsistent with a raft of existing data and research results, none of which were even mentioned, and the conclusions of the article consisted of activist exhortations to "pour money into" communities affected by gun violence. I was horrified and deeply upset when I discovered that the APA is no longer a place that follows what have been the norms and ethical standards of the scientific community regarding research. The colleagues I spoke with about this gave me blank looks. They didn't know or care about what the APA is doing, even though that is the authority that sets the standards for how we perform our work, whether it is academic research or clinical practice.
The worst thing for me about reading Mr. Nuzzo's article is that I am no longer shocked to hear about unethical treatment of research subjects and misuse of research itself to serve ideological goals. Beyond that, I no longer am surprised or upset to learn that my colleagues don't care whether the APA is ethical. I take it all for granted now.
Liars lie. You'll need to defund these institutions and start fresh. There's no reform that'll make a dishonest person honest.
You can help teach the applicable skills to their replacements. The skills are easy morals are learned early in life and eroded over time. These researchers had nothing to erode
What am I missing here? This article has nothing to do with gay people. I happen to be gay, at any rate, and I see nothing wrong with the exposure of academic corruption in the name of any group--including my own. That's because scholarship, per se, is about seeking objective truth, not promoting group identity or offering group therapy. In the long run, only those who resist political expediency will have any reputation that's worth having. And that, in turn, is because there can be no justice without truth. I don't know if the academic world can be rescued from its current state of intellectual and moral bankruptcy, but I do know that we must begin by rejecting all woke ideologies (which begin with identity politics).
It seems academia is not different than social media today.
Both the left and the right don't what to consider where each other really is. They have their stereotype/bias lenses on. A whole different level of the rose colored glasses concept.
As much as I would love to believe that academia can change, I don't see the motivation for them to. Government (e.g. Trump) will just enforce the current regimes ideological bias. Student's pick schools that align with their ideological bias. Professors gravitate to Universities that align with their ideology bias. I don't see anything motivating a change to an unbiased academic rigor in the social sciences.
The trans debate is a case in point. The obvious end to the trans debate from my perspective is for the trans-activists to make peace with JK Rowling. Ideally HRC engages Rowling to have a thoughtful discussion. HRC has been taken over by the trans-activists. Much of the LGB community no longer supports HRC. It does not seem to make a difference. They still seem to be able to get donations to continue their agenda. In fact, the polarized position is likely necessary to get donations.
Bottom line: the concept of "truth" or "reality" is not motivation for either side. Why would it be? Unlike STEM research where the money only comes from real conclusions, in the social science world, $ flow from ideology.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
Please make every effort not to just cover goofy, irrelevant papers for yucks. I personally would prefer that this Substack focus on shoddy research whose implications are dangerous for public policy. I think it’s bad optics to mainly focus on the work of queer people and people of color. I consider myself politically redistributionist but socially conservative, and I can see how progressives would view this as a racist, sexist project. Done well, you could reach folks on the center left.
I would also look at whether the graduate authors are on scholarship or if they’re paying tuition. If it’s the latter that’s a scandal because it means universities are taking tens of thousands of dollars from them not to teach them anything. The outcomes for these kids after graduation are likely to be pretty bleak.
There will be a diversity of the papers I cover here, since I think it's good to both evaluate ones that have major influence over policy and also remind people that there is a deeper issue of activism in academia that needs to be addressed.
I fully support this. I just think that ridicule of queer studies papers should be balanced with information about how universities exploit these students. Some of them pay full tuition. Some do unpaid or underpaid work for their schools. Most leave heavily in debt with terrible job prospects. The real scandal is how schools treat standards-less social sciences masters programs as cash cows.
Resist making fun of the kids and instead scrutinize their advisors and departments. I have a lot of sympathy for the grad students who write these papers because they’ve been sold a racket.
I felt that these pieces are a criticism of the professors, in many cases. However, I agree with your point. Perhaps there should be a low ratio of these kinds of pieces in this substack for achieving maximal societal benefit from the substack.
Could one however argue these papers should be retracted? I see a problem that journals are claiming these as legitimate research.
They're undermining the legitimacy of their field as well as taking someone's money, the student's, or university's or our taxes? to package these actions as research.
Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations! Don’t call out crappy research by queers and people of color because progressives will perceive it as racist or sexist or some sort of “ist.” I think it’s a bad idea to worry about the tender sensibilities of progressives.
As for the issue of defrauding students by charging them for worthless “education” — sure it’s a scandal. But if they are on scholarship, it’s taxpayers and donors to the school who are being defrauded.
I hear you. I just think politically you’ll be more effective if you focus less on the goofy grad students and more on the institutions that validate and exploit them. We don’t need to emulate left cancel culture by seeking out inconsequential randos to humiliate.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
I have not read this piece, and already choose to comment: I don't think an academic journal should accept a piece with "White ignorance" in the title (or the text), at least not as used in this case.
This also happens in gender medicine. Either the intervention was beneficial, or minority stress, not measured or conrolled for, caused the poor outcome.
A few years ago, before I knew what the woke ideology was, I logged on to the American Psychological Association site in search of peer reviewed articles on urban gun violence. I immediately pulled up an article that had been posted on the APA site more as a position statement than a research report. The claims made in the article were inconsistent with a raft of existing data and research results, none of which were even mentioned, and the conclusions of the article consisted of activist exhortations to "pour money into" communities affected by gun violence. I was horrified and deeply upset when I discovered that the APA is no longer a place that follows what have been the norms and ethical standards of the scientific community regarding research. The colleagues I spoke with about this gave me blank looks. They didn't know or care about what the APA is doing, even though that is the authority that sets the standards for how we perform our work, whether it is academic research or clinical practice.
The worst thing for me about reading Mr. Nuzzo's article is that I am no longer shocked to hear about unethical treatment of research subjects and misuse of research itself to serve ideological goals. Beyond that, I no longer am surprised or upset to learn that my colleagues don't care whether the APA is ethical. I take it all for granted now.
Liars lie. You'll need to defund these institutions and start fresh. There's no reform that'll make a dishonest person honest.
You can help teach the applicable skills to their replacements. The skills are easy morals are learned early in life and eroded over time. These researchers had nothing to erode
What am I missing here? This article has nothing to do with gay people. I happen to be gay, at any rate, and I see nothing wrong with the exposure of academic corruption in the name of any group--including my own. That's because scholarship, per se, is about seeking objective truth, not promoting group identity or offering group therapy. In the long run, only those who resist political expediency will have any reputation that's worth having. And that, in turn, is because there can be no justice without truth. I don't know if the academic world can be rescued from its current state of intellectual and moral bankruptcy, but I do know that we must begin by rejecting all woke ideologies (which begin with identity politics).
I’m a subscriber but can’t get to the subscribers only version of the podcast. How do I get there?
Great article.
It seems academia is not different than social media today.
Both the left and the right don't what to consider where each other really is. They have their stereotype/bias lenses on. A whole different level of the rose colored glasses concept.
As much as I would love to believe that academia can change, I don't see the motivation for them to. Government (e.g. Trump) will just enforce the current regimes ideological bias. Student's pick schools that align with their ideological bias. Professors gravitate to Universities that align with their ideology bias. I don't see anything motivating a change to an unbiased academic rigor in the social sciences.
The trans debate is a case in point. The obvious end to the trans debate from my perspective is for the trans-activists to make peace with JK Rowling. Ideally HRC engages Rowling to have a thoughtful discussion. HRC has been taken over by the trans-activists. Much of the LGB community no longer supports HRC. It does not seem to make a difference. They still seem to be able to get donations to continue their agenda. In fact, the polarized position is likely necessary to get donations.
Bottom line: the concept of "truth" or "reality" is not motivation for either side. Why would it be? Unlike STEM research where the money only comes from real conclusions, in the social science world, $ flow from ideology.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
tl;dnr because after the first example it only reaffirmed my utter contempt for and distrust of everything in the social 'sciences' within the decaying halls of academia.
Please make every effort not to just cover goofy, irrelevant papers for yucks. I personally would prefer that this Substack focus on shoddy research whose implications are dangerous for public policy. I think it’s bad optics to mainly focus on the work of queer people and people of color. I consider myself politically redistributionist but socially conservative, and I can see how progressives would view this as a racist, sexist project. Done well, you could reach folks on the center left.
I would also look at whether the graduate authors are on scholarship or if they’re paying tuition. If it’s the latter that’s a scandal because it means universities are taking tens of thousands of dollars from them not to teach them anything. The outcomes for these kids after graduation are likely to be pretty bleak.
There will be a diversity of the papers I cover here, since I think it's good to both evaluate ones that have major influence over policy and also remind people that there is a deeper issue of activism in academia that needs to be addressed.
I fully support this. I just think that ridicule of queer studies papers should be balanced with information about how universities exploit these students. Some of them pay full tuition. Some do unpaid or underpaid work for their schools. Most leave heavily in debt with terrible job prospects. The real scandal is how schools treat standards-less social sciences masters programs as cash cows.
Resist making fun of the kids and instead scrutinize their advisors and departments. I have a lot of sympathy for the grad students who write these papers because they’ve been sold a racket.
My comment about this should have gone here. Instead, please see it as a general comment on Nuzzo's essay.
I felt that these pieces are a criticism of the professors, in many cases. However, I agree with your point. Perhaps there should be a low ratio of these kinds of pieces in this substack for achieving maximal societal benefit from the substack.
Could one however argue these papers should be retracted? I see a problem that journals are claiming these as legitimate research.
They're undermining the legitimacy of their field as well as taking someone's money, the student's, or university's or our taxes? to package these actions as research.
Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations! Don’t call out crappy research by queers and people of color because progressives will perceive it as racist or sexist or some sort of “ist.” I think it’s a bad idea to worry about the tender sensibilities of progressives.
As for the issue of defrauding students by charging them for worthless “education” — sure it’s a scandal. But if they are on scholarship, it’s taxpayers and donors to the school who are being defrauded.
I hear you. I just think politically you’ll be more effective if you focus less on the goofy grad students and more on the institutions that validate and exploit them. We don’t need to emulate left cancel culture by seeking out inconsequential randos to humiliate.