Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Of all people, NAS social scientists campaign for indoctrination in science consensus


Social scientists? And if there is a more scandal-ridden field in science today than theirs, we’ve not heard of it.

Creation-Evolution Headlines quotes examples of prescriptions for manipulating a doubtful public, and observes,

None of these papers suggest that scientists might be terribly wrong in their consensus views. None of them leave room for maverick scientists to buck the consensus. The “information delivery” is always assumed to be necessarily one-way: from scientist to “nonexpert.” The focus is on how to nudge the public toward the scientists’ view, even if it “raises ethical considerations.” It may be necessary, for instance, to dumb down the message in storybook format with lots of pictures. Prime examples of subjects needing effective information delivery to a resistant public are (1) the teaching of evolution and (2) gaining political support for action on climate change.

A similar attitude was expressed in Nature in a book review of Naomi Klein’s new book with the chilling title, This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs the Climate. Reviewer Nico Stehr thinks Klein overstated her case a bit, but agrees substantially: “The special appeal of Klein’s position is her insight that any successful effort to curb emissions or adapt to climate change demands popular, pragmatic and sensible transformative goals that go well beyond mere fencing in” (i.e., well beyond merely blocking capitalist attempts to increase energy production or continue “business as usual”). Klein and Stehr are looking at bigger goals: “the potential catalyst that will bring about an alternative future” More.

Alternative future: A future only a pressure group wants

See also: You? A guru effect victim? (Dan Sperber: he Guru Effect – the tendency for people to “judge profound what they have failed to grasp.”)

Of related interest: Neil deGrasse Tyson and the Metaphysical Dilemma of the Left - Sept. 2014 Excerpt: In the first go-around, these anti-capitalists (the left) tried to capture the science of economics, forming theories about how capitalism is a system of exploitation that will impoverish the common man, while scientific central planning would provide abundance for all. Let’s just say that this didn’t work out. When it turned out that central planning impoverishes the common man and capitalism provides abundance for all, they had to switch to a fallback position. Which is: to heck with prosperity—too many material goods are the problem. Our greed for more is destroying the planet by causing environmental catastrophes. This shift became official some time in the 1960s with the rise of the New Left. Some of the catastrophes didn’t pan out (overpopulation, global cooling) and others proved too small to be anything more than a speed bump in the path of capitalism (banning CFCs and DDT). But then along comes global warming—and it’s just too good not to be true. It tells us that capitalism is not just exploiting the workers or causing inequality or deadening our souls with crass materialism. It’s destroying the very planet itself. http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/19/neil-degrasse-tyson-and-the-metaphysical-dilemma-of-the-left/bornagain77
September 20, 2014
05:36 PM

Leave a Reply