Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

When progressivism hit the science journals…

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

… they bust down part of the wall to let the Trojan Horse in:

Earlier this month, Science, one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the world, published an editorial that could have appeared in the Nation or Washington Post on . . . how to fix the United States Supreme Court that has grown too conservative. From “Save the Supreme Court and Democracy,” by Maya Sen — a Harvard social scientist, meaning not a “scientist” at all:

“The US Supreme Court has been busy. It recently overturned a nearly 50-year-old precedent protecting abortion rights, upheld the right to carry guns outside the home, and hamstrung the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate emissions—all while signaling an aversion to contemporary empirical evidence and instead favoring “history and tradition.” Although the majority of Americans disagree with many of these decisions, the court has only just begun to reshape the country. When it resumes in October, the court will be poised to outlaw affirmative action, undercut federal regulations regarding clean water, and possibly allow state legislatures to restrict voting rights without oversight by state courts.”

With the exception of environmental regulation, none of that has anything to do with actual science. Science isn’t about politics, opinion polls, or subjective opinions. It is supposed to be about adducing facts about the natural world and applying them. Whether to permit, outlaw, or regulate abortion isn’t a question that science can answer. That issue belongs to the realms of morality, ethics, and politics. Ditto gun policy.

Wesley J. Smith, “Progressivism Colonizes the Science Journals” at National Review (August 31, 2022)

“Prestige” is gradually coming to mean “prestigious because of its prestigiousness,” not because of its content. Maybe they’ll get round to the war on math before long.

You may also wish to read: Which side will atheists choose in the war on science? They need to re-evaluate their alliance with progressivism, which is doing science no favours.

Comments
The Marxist state within a state seeks to impose its own version of reality. It opposes reality as it is. It is naive to think science is driven by politics. Science is driven by money. However, actual science is being carried out by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and others. Just because Marxist/Atheists are trying to stir the pot it does not mean actual science is not getting done. Anarchy, division, these are the tools of the Marxist-Anarchists. Most media, also Marxist controlled, distort science. Instead of just providing clear facts, too often, it's about death, death and more death, and creating an atmosphere not of knowledge but one of fear. Creating fear is a form of control. "Whether to permit, outlaw, or regulate abortion isn’t a question that science can answer." A lie. Science can tell people, including politicians, that life begins at conception. Everyone reading this became human at the moment of conception and science backs that up.relatd
September 11, 2022
September
09
Sep
11
11
2022
12:20 PM
12
12
20
PM
PST
" ... all while signaling an aversion to contemporary empirical evidence and instead favoring “history and tradition.” I am thankful that our founders deeply understood and respected the lessons of "history and tradition" that the writers at Science so blithely throw aside. A (very)little study exposes the hard fought rational behind the Second Amendment. Take a look: https://stream.org/as-christians-grow-less-popular-our-gun-rights-get-more-important/ And ... https://www.spartanfirearmstraininggroup.com/a-brief-history-of-gun-control-a-disarmed-population-is-easier-to-oppress-than-an-armed-one/ayearningforpublius
September 11, 2022
September
09
Sep
11
11
2022
06:38 AM
6
06
38
AM
PST
With the exception of environmental regulation, none of that has anything to do with actual science
Once Science meant truth. No longer. For example, does environmental regulations have anything to do with science? Not the way it’s practiced in the US. So it is not an exception. Science is still practiced but is not something to respect any more because it is mainly no longer about truth. Politics control funding. Scientists like to eat too.jerry
September 11, 2022
September
09
Sep
11
11
2022
05:05 AM
5
05
05
AM
PST
When agenda driven radicals take an institution, they divert it from its due, functional purpose. Notice how in this case, killing one's child is somehow an unquestionable right being undermined. Then, there is an undermining of time tested principles of liberty, justice and limits on the state; principles that, were they to soundly consult the history, would be found to be most firmly empirically anchored. Traditions, too, can be firmly based, they are core to culture, we speak of the Western Tradition. And this is tied to Big-S Science, in a journal of that very name. Truly, we here see the impact of marginalising moral knowledge and inconvenient facts as well as persons.kairosfocus
September 11, 2022
September
09
Sep
11
11
2022
03:36 AM
3
03
36
AM
PST

Leave a Reply