academic freedom Ethics Intellectual freedom Intelligent Design Naturalism

The Darwinians’ cowardice before SJW mobs explained in detail

Spread the love

They thought the mob was coming for someone else.

Amid the dead silence in the combox following “The perfect storm: Darwinists meet the progressive “evolution deniers” — and cringe…, , EDTA pipes up 1,

Well, how does it feel now that the universal acid shoe is on the other foot? And who on the evolutionist side will have the guts to stand up for what they believe at the risk of their job now?

We are in the odd position of being able to supply an answer in which we are,. unfortunately, confident. No, they won’t. They will continue to pretend nothing is happening and abandon those who speak up, maybe at one of those new, “edgy” mags where you are still allowed to say something like what you really think.

One math and physics guy is quite candid about the capitulation and we appreciate his honesty:

In short, we don’t see most academics risking their careers to speak out against the creep of Social Justice ideology or other institutional and administrative nightmares because the risks just aren’t worth the potential rewards in most cases. This isn’t cowardice. It’s a legitimate problem to be overcome.

It’s cowardice. They  don’t care enough about what they know from experience is true compared to what their colleagues will applaud and promote.  You make all that quite clear in detail in your piece.

The thing is, there won’t be change if a few faculty members speak up. On the contrary, by putting themselves in the firing line and being summarily executed, other academics are likely to be further deterred from speaking out. …

That’s because your colleagues are not only cowards but potential traitors.

The question comes down to what working scientists and other academics who are concerned about Social Justice ideology can do about any of this. Here are a few suggestions. Do as much as you can feel safe doing. That may mean making anonymous posts on message boards, social media or elsewhere. It may mean signing your name to the same, if you think you can. It is probably helpful to feel out the situation with your colleagues and find out whom you can talk to or to seek out similar people online. The purpose of this is to realize that many other people are concerned that the educational reformers and Social Justice busybodies have gone too far. Recognize that what these groups are after is far more than the pleasant sounding diversity, inclusion and equity and look into what those terms really mean. You may find that a great deal of what they’re after is at direct odds with your core values, and this might rouse you to want to do more about it. Most importantly, realize that you’re not alone in this, and you probably have far more colleagues who agree with you than who do not.James A. Lindsay, “Are Academics Cowards? The Grip of Grievance Studies and the Sunk Costs of Academic Pursuits” at Areo

Lindsay, that’s the worst news ever. You are essentially admitting that your colleagues know full well that they are cowards and traitors, hoping to keep their positions by agreeing to whatever approved lies the SJWs demand. Why should we expect them to be honest enough to do good science? There’s no question that these attitudes will creep into their practice.

One last thought: Lindsay writes, “Recognize that what these groups are after is far more than the pleasant sounding diversity, inclusion and equity and look into what those terms really mean. You may find that a great deal of what they’re after is at direct odds with your core values, and this might rouse you to want to do more about it.”

Actually, to the extent that the academics in science believe that our brains are shaped for fitness, not truth, rule by the academic enforcers of the hooded SJWs is in no way at odds with what they believe. They believe that the idea of truth is an illusion that promotes fitness, so when it doesn’t promote fitness, in terms of personal survival, they should cave, right?

All that’s changed is, they didn’t expect a screaming mob to be their Omega Point. But that’s because they are ignoring the history of naturalist atheism, which has never had a clear reason to promote the pursuit of truth over the pursuit of useful falsehood. Or even to refrain from violence in the pursuit of entrenching falsehood.

Anyway, readers, we may soon see more beacons of science felled by a mob they must have thought was coming for someone else.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

See also: The perfect storm: Darwinists meet the progressive “evolution deniers” — and cringe… Double down cringe… Rob Sheldon: Despite the pain they feel, they don’t seem to realize it is their own hands that have torn down the edifice of knowledge. They still think that discrimination is valid when they are in charge, that courtesy is only for friends, that objectivity is their personal possession. The mere argumentation used in this article reveals that the academic battles for truth were lost a generation earlier, and today we are simply sweeping up the shards.

and

Larry Krauss? Francisco Ayala? And now Neil deGrasse Tyson? Were they really the intended targets?

3 Replies to “The Darwinians’ cowardice before SJW mobs explained in detail

  1. 1
    lantog says:

    The article discusses academics opposition to SJWs. To consider that, I think its useful to break them in sciences and humanities, so..
    How many humanities profs have resisted the SJWs? Answer: None. In fact most humanities profs grovel to the SJWs and a few led the charge and encouraged them. Remember the “lets get some muscle over here” woman who was encouraging SJWs to beat up other students at a protest?
    Now how many science faculty oppose it? I know of none that encourage it and 2 that have opposed it: Bret Weinstein and his wife….and both of them are evolutionary biologists. So the title of this piece implies precisely the opposite of the truth. 100% of the academics who have opposed the SJWs to date have been evolutionary biologists.

  2. 2
    News says:

    lantog at 1, thanks for writing. Some humanities profs have opposed the SJW shutdown too. You may have heard of Jordan Peterson but most simply sink out of sight. I am sure more biology profs oppose the shutdown as it affects science than are noted in media. The principal problem is that – as the OP noted – most scientists will simply let those who speak up get shut down.

    We’re not saying it on our own. Insiders are saying it. Prove them wrong.

  3. 3
    ScuzzaMan says:

    Jordan Peterson’s not opposing the SJW’s, he is a dedicated leftist progressive of the most mundane sort. His only beef with the extreme leading edge of madness in his preferred ideology is that they’re moving too fast and spooking the horses. He has openly said he wants to rein them in so they don’t derail the progressive agenda by precipitating effective resistance before that becomes impossible.

    He’s also one of the most incoherent speakers on the planet – no mean feat.

Leave a Reply