Page 1 of 1
When Liberals attack social science
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:35 am
by PaulSacramento
While conservatives typically get the "anti science" flak, that is not always the case:
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/12/wh ... ience.html
Excerpt:
At its core, Galileo’s Middle Finger is about what happens when science and dogma collide — specifically, what happens when science makes a claim that doesn’t fit into an activist community’s accepted worldview. And many of Dreger’s most interesting, explosive examples of this phenomenon involve liberals, not conservatives, fighting tooth and nail against open scientific inquiry.
Re: When Liberals attack social science
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:36 am
by PaulSacramento
As one poster put it:
Nassim Nicholas Taleb
March 9 at 4:44am ·
What we are seeing worldwide, from India to the UK to the US, is the rebellion against the inner circle of no-skin-in-the-game policymaking "clerks" and journalists-insiders, that class of paternalistic semi-intellectual experts with some Ivy league, Oxford-Cambridge, or similar label-driven education who are telling the rest of us 1) what to do, 2) what to eat, 3) how to speak, 4) how to think... and 5) who to vote for.
With psychology papers replicating less than 40%, dietary advice reversing after 30y of fatphobia, macroeconomic analysis working worse than astrology, microeconomic papers wrong 40% of the time, the appointment of Bernanke who was less than clueless of the risks, and pharmaceutical trials replicating only 1/5th of the time, people are perfectly entitled to rely on their own ancestral instinct and listen to their grandmothers with a better track record than these policymaking goons.
Indeed one can see that these academico-bureaucrats wanting to run our lives aren't even rigorous, whether in medical statistics or policymaking. I have shown that most of what Cass-Sunstein-Richard Thaler types call "rational" or "irrational" comes from misunderstanding of probability theory.
https://www.facebook.com/nntaleb/posts/ ... 8794008375
Re: When Liberals attack social science
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:16 pm
by IceMobster
Maybe a bit off topic, but:
Do you consider "Christian socialism" to be a contradictory term? (i.e. noone can be a true Christian and a true socialist at the same time.)
Re: When Liberals attack social science
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:30 pm
by RickD
IceMobster wrote:Maybe a bit off topic, but:
Do you consider "Christian socialism" to be a contradictory term? (i.e. noone can be a true Christian and a true socialist at the same time.)
Being a Christian is being someone who has trusted in Christ for eternal life. It's not about having a specific political belief.
Re: When Liberals attack social science
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:17 pm
by IceMobster
RickD wrote:IceMobster wrote:Maybe a bit off topic, but:
Do you consider "Christian socialism" to be a contradictory term? (i.e. noone can be a true Christian and a true socialist at the same time.)
Being a Christian is being someone who has trusted in Christ for eternal life. It's not about having a specific political belief.
Exactly. Which is why I don't understand how can someone claim that.
Re: When Liberals attack social science
Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:44 pm
by RickD
IceMobster wrote:RickD wrote:IceMobster wrote:Maybe a bit off topic, but:
Do you consider "Christian socialism" to be a contradictory term? (i.e. noone can be a true Christian and a true socialist at the same time.)
Being a Christian is being someone who has trusted in Christ for eternal life. It's not about having a specific political belief.
Exactly. Which is why I don't understand how can someone claim that.
Maybe whoever claimed that, really doesn't know what it means to be a Christian?