Redefining "Science"?
When I saw this editorial in the USAToday this past weekend I thought I was in for more bad news and/or complaining about Young-Earth Creationists hijacking public school science education and curriculum.
The actual topic was far more interesting, speaking of growing pressure to accept or include the Social Sciences as "hard sciences" in the same sense as, say Physics or Chemistry. For me, the political aspects of this story are quite interesting (and disturbing) as well. I invite you to ponder the following excerpt:
"Not all studies within the hard sciences measure up. The majority of studies do, though. However, while there are notable exceptions, a substantial proportion of studies in the social sciences are not considered scientifically rigorous because the human experience is highly subjective and changeable across culture and time.
Second, the politics. It's not a secret that academia, particularly the humanities, skews heavily left.
A recent survey by economics professor Daniel Klein revealed that Democrats outnumbered Republicans by a whopping 30-to-1 ratio in anthropology; 28-to-1 in sociology; nearly 10-to-1 in history; and nearly 7-to-1 in political science. In economics, which is widely considered "conservative" by other social fields, Republicans are merely outnumbered 3-to-1.
As psychology professor Jonathan Haidt, the liberal-turned-centrist would say, "This is a statistically impossible lack of diversity." Yet, some progressives in academia and the news media justify it by referring to Democrats as "pro-science" and the Republicans as "anti-science," rather than addressing the obvious lack of political tolerance in the modern world of universities. That partisanship has brought with it a willingness to discard science that refutes pet ideological causes appealing to the left..."
Given the lack of diversity of political out-looks, I wonder if perhaps the Universities might consider formal or informal "diversity quotas" requiring that certain percentages of their faculty should be not only female, non-white, or gay, but also politically conservative? Just a thought.
The actual topic was far more interesting, speaking of growing pressure to accept or include the Social Sciences as "hard sciences" in the same sense as, say Physics or Chemistry. For me, the political aspects of this story are quite interesting (and disturbing) as well. I invite you to ponder the following excerpt:
"Not all studies within the hard sciences measure up. The majority of studies do, though. However, while there are notable exceptions, a substantial proportion of studies in the social sciences are not considered scientifically rigorous because the human experience is highly subjective and changeable across culture and time.
Second, the politics. It's not a secret that academia, particularly the humanities, skews heavily left.
A recent survey by economics professor Daniel Klein revealed that Democrats outnumbered Republicans by a whopping 30-to-1 ratio in anthropology; 28-to-1 in sociology; nearly 10-to-1 in history; and nearly 7-to-1 in political science. In economics, which is widely considered "conservative" by other social fields, Republicans are merely outnumbered 3-to-1.
As psychology professor Jonathan Haidt, the liberal-turned-centrist would say, "This is a statistically impossible lack of diversity." Yet, some progressives in academia and the news media justify it by referring to Democrats as "pro-science" and the Republicans as "anti-science," rather than addressing the obvious lack of political tolerance in the modern world of universities. That partisanship has brought with it a willingness to discard science that refutes pet ideological causes appealing to the left..."
Given the lack of diversity of political out-looks, I wonder if perhaps the Universities might consider formal or informal "diversity quotas" requiring that certain percentages of their faculty should be not only female, non-white, or gay, but also politically conservative? Just a thought.
Labels: Cultural issues, Education
posted by Rev. Daniel McLain Hixon at 10/05/2012
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home