At the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal, Loretta G. Breuning talks about social science nonsense presented as science:
Researchers, especially in the social sciences, insist that they only care about the greater good and not about selfish rewards. But they are highly rewarded if they create “evidence” that advances the Rousseauian agenda. Any graduate student can see which findings get respect and which do not. The grad student who conforms ends up with the credentials necessary to be included in “The Science.” If students don’t conform, they’re ignored, and if they keep it up, they’re discredited, personally or professionally.
A researcher can get conforming results more easily than you might expect. They just re-run a study over and over with slight changes until they get “data” that fit the paradigm. Results that advance the agenda get media attention, and the rest are forgotten. Studies are rarely replicated, so research cited as “The Science” for years may rest on the flimsiest of foundations. For example, we often hear that our hunter-gatherer ancestors worked four hours a day and spent the rest of the time making art and making love. It feels true because it fits the belief that life was easy before “our society” ruined things. So we don’t inspect the mountain of assumptions and extrapolations that studies like this one rest on. – February 15, 2023
But she finishes with,
After my early retirement, I had the chance to study social science with an open mind. I learned that our brains evolved to keep our genes alive, not to make us happy. The brain releases happy chemicals when we do things that help our genes survive. It doesn’t decide this with conscious logic. It decides with a limbic system that’s the same in all mammals, and with neural pathways built from our own early experiences. This is why we seek happiness in quirky ways. I was grateful to have a second chance at an open mind and hope today’s college students will find that chance someday.
There. She has just flushed down the toilet any chance of understanding the reality of human life and the human mind. Those pop psych academics are doing the right thing and she should support them.
If what she says is true: “our brains evolved to keep our genes alive, not to make us happy. The brain releases happy chemicals when we do things that help our genes survive. It doesn’t decide this with conscious logic,” fine. Support enthusiastically the biggest piles of flapdoodle that the academy can muster — as long as your brain is happy.
Keep reading Uncommon Descent and other ID sources, if you want a point of view that empowers you to reject the flapdoodle.
5 Replies to “Bad data from the academy? Darwinism makes it worse”
It’s kind of interesting that she insists that social science is dominated by a Rousseauian paradigm, yet presents absolutely no evidence for this assertion whatsoever.
It’s kind of interesting that she insists that our brains evolved to keep our genes alive,, yet presents absolutely no evidence for this assertion whatsoever.
Shoot, she can’t even show evidence for how just one neuron originated, much less does she, or anyone else, really know how a single neuron accomplishes what it does..
Another sad propaganda article. Sad.
I don’t want to be “empowered,” I want factual information. ‘Empower’ and ’empowered’ are on my List of Words to Never Use.
I will repeat, I highly recommend Loretta G. Breuning’s book.
Having watched myself and others form bad habits and then found out how to form good habits, her book should be an essential for everyone. Whatever her beliefs on the origin of the functions of the four happy chemicals and the negative chemical, cortisol, they exist and rule out daily lives. To the better or the worse.
I just came back from a cruise where about a third of the people were extremely obese. Eating certain foods generates these chemicals and the results are Ill health due to bad habits. Video games/social media usage are other habits with bad outcomes. Exercise is a positive habit and so are considerations of others.
I wrote an essay for my children on combining Breuning’s book with Dale Carnegie’s list of positive ways to treat other people. Hopefully, it will encourage myself and them to develop good habits when interacting with others.
I just saw she had another book that looks interesting.
Maybe we all should read her books.
From the Introduction of Breuning’s book on habits.
the word “evolution” is mentioned 6 times in the book.