The Darwinians’ cowardice before SJW mobs explained in detail
|December 5, 2018||Posted by News under academic freedom, Ethics, Intellectual freedom, Intelligent Design, Naturalism|
They thought the mob was coming for someone else.
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.
Larry Krauss? Francisco Ayala? And now Neil deGrasse Tyson? Were they really the intended targets?