I'm following a social science class (don't ask me why) and 50% of my grade is writing an essay about any subject in the philosophy of science. I've chosen to write my essay about moral reading in critical sciences. In my country (the netherlands) we've had quite a few scientists step forward and claim that the academia is morally and politically a very homogenous environment and that a lot of research gets altered or simply ignored if it does not fit a certain mindset.
I believe this is inherent to the critical sciences, where an important pillar is emancipation. I believe that the critical sciences have much more idealism which detracts from the aim to do objective and indepent research (no research is 100% objective or independent, but it's an important value to hold). This hurts the credibility of science as a whole and the sciences like anthropology in particular. This will be the main point of my whole essay: idealism detracts from the values of objective and indepent research and hurts scientific credibility.
Critical theory is the neo-marxist philosophy of the Frankfurt school. Their theory is largely influenced by Marx and Freud. In 'Theses on Feuerbach' Marx wrote "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.". I think this illustrates the central premise of critical theory very well. A large part of critical theory is emancipatory - meaning they seek to 'better' the world. This brings idealism into the sciences - at the cost of objectivity and independency. This damages the credibility of sciences.
Now this essay needs to be 1500 words and I'm having a hard time starting it. It seemed to me that this would be the place to ask if you have any resources or tips for me. Maybe some people here have good pro or anti arguments. It'll help me a lot, thanks!
You are right regarding FS, their starting premise is idological. They dont even think of themselves as sci in the traditional meaning of the word...which makes their theories unfalsifiable and faggot level.
Lincoln Martin
look up Sokal affair and Poppers concept of falsifiability of scientific theory.. if you need more help we can contact by mail
Ian Cruz
I already got some research quoted by Haidt as a set up. I started the essay by proving there was quite a lot of political homogenity in academia - Haidt wrote a couple of good papers about it and also gave a speech.
Now I'm trying to find the link between the political homogenity/moral conformity in academia and critical theory (if that makes sense).
Jaxon Taylor
Sokal is a good example of moral > objectivity in science. What does Popper's falsifiability have to do with it though?
Colton Hernandez
>link between the political homogenity/moral conformity in academia and critical theory
its a multilevel connection that predates FS, the "ivory towers" phenom is older...hard to date it.
>What does Popper's falsifiability have to do with it though?
starting thesises of FS are unfalsifiable, like all marxism/hegelianism. One of their thesises is smth like "you cant objectivly observe society since you participate in it so you have to criticize it". It starts from broad strokes and its pseudoscience.
Jayden Murphy
you fucking nog. philosophy of science isn't some meme. it deals with how science/scientists discern facts and how to validate theories and so much more. why don't you try looking shit up on wikipedia next time before jamming a candle in your ass for everyone to see.
Brayden Ross
easy on the newfags user
Luis Howard
they need tough love or they'll never learn
Julian Phillips
global warming science would be an interesting thing to write about. Non scientists seem to be the most confident it's occurring or not occurring. Politics and even religion are mixed in with it (carbon emission is our "original sin", carbon credits are indulgences)
Are you a scientist yourself or familiar?
Adam Campbell
The amount of political homogenity we're seeing today in academia is unprecedented. Iirc 4 to 1 liberal to conservative in the 90's. 14 to 1 in 2010. Apart from that we see a lot of protest and threats against conservative speakers and some scientist in the Netherlands report having to self censor in order to keep doing their work. This is, in short, my first paragraph. This is something new, but what's the cause? I think the cause is critical theory - am I correct?
P.s. I've built my essay in the following order:
1. Symptoms ; this is what I told you in the first paragraph of this comment, the symptoms of academia being poisened > ratio liberals vs conservatives is unprecedented, self censoring academics and protests against conservative speakers.
2. Diagnosis; this is the cause of the symptoms. What is it? I think critical theory and I try to explain it by explaining Marx's central thoughts of philosophers explaining the world while they should change it (this is largely where critical theory is built on).
3. Pathogeneses ; how did it come to this?
Now I have an answer to the symptoms, I somehwat know the Diagnosis, but I don't know the Pathogeneses.
Am I missing something? Am I looking in the wrong direction?
Oliver Sanders
Good
Easton Ortiz
>This is something new, but what's the cause? I think the cause is critical theory - am I correct?
for current situation - its definetly because of FS and ethnomasochisstic idology. But Im not sure if academia being ideological is something new or that its was jsut that ideology changed?
Sowell in pic rel tried to answer that q but wanst as succefull imo sicne its a very broad q (starting from Platos Republic).
Your essay structure seems solid, BUT stick just to the ideology of currentyearTM/current ethnomasochism...dont bring up questions of the nature of the group beliefs of academia since them you go back in preFS groupthink (which did existed but its hard to tell in what level).
Also, you might mention Lyschenkoism as an illustrative example, better skip Poppers concepts since you would have to be very well read on FS to grab it by the horns.
Carson Adams
Will I even be able to write an essay about this within 1500-2000 words?
Connor Lee
How would you, in short, describe the link between FS and the current state of academia if I may ask. I'm having trouble understanding/describing it.
You can also email me at ripwinkel at hotmail dot com if you want to explain it a bit in depth. You would really help me out.
William Thompson
you will, no worries. just keep it structured, I would recommend not even mentioning FS since your prof is most likely a commie xerself and would slam dunk you when you mention them.
start from 1.Haidt and academic/groupthink bias 2.data proving that 3.historical examples (Lyshenkoism, "usefull idiots" during Cold war) 4.Further we conclude that we need more ideological diversity in academia..
voila!
>link between FS and the current state of academia if I may ask
its a sketchy area since FS is all about word games and its hard to point to corup delicty with them - that is why they were so succesfull
Daniel Gutierrez
>I'm following a social science class bonjour grenouille
Brayden Wright
forgot to take my shitposting flag off
Jaxson Robinson
this is a pretty important topic for Sup Forums, show some respect
snt!
Joseph Barnes
You should have visited us about 5 years ago, when people used to link data that came from outside the regular academic channels to support their arguments. These days, Sup Forums is all memes and 18-year old nazi larpers. However, one thing you could do is go to the 8ch website's Sup Forums and conduct a case study there. Those anons do still tend to use articles like we used to on this site, and I think they'd be much more valuable to your essay than we would be. Nice topic by the way; there's a lot that can be done with it, and very few academics (that I'm aware of anyway) have forayed into that area.
Sebastian Baker
>forgot to take my shitposting flag off You mean put it on.
Grayson Cruz
>you should have visited us about 5 years ago
I REMBER
but dont be so nostalgic, now we got the influence we could only dreamed of in trully dark times of 2010-13
Justin Gomez
Do you have any links, leads or resources to help me construct some proper arguments on the link between Frankfurt School/critical theory and the current state of academia or am I just better of posting this thread on 8ch?
Jack Edwards
>link between Frankfurt School/critical theory and the current state of academia
dont go there, youll shoot yourself in the foot. Stick to Haidt.
Blake Martinez
Right now I have a couple of quotes that can act as an explanation as to why FS is the influence that is to blame for the current hostility towards conservative views in academia.
> The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it. Marx (1845). Theses on Feuerbach.
> ‘Different opinions and 'philosophies' can no longer compete peacefully for adherence and persuasion on rational grounds: the 'marketplace of ideas' is organized and delimited by those who determine the national and the individual interest. In this society, for which the ideologists have proclaimed the 'end of ideology', the false consciousness has become the general consciousness--from the government down to its last objects. The small and powerless minorities which struggle against the false consciousness and its beneficiaries must be helped: their continued existence is more important than the preservation of abused rights and liberties which grant constitutional powers to those who oppress these minorities. It should be evident by now that the exercise of civil rights by those who don't have them presupposes the withdrawal of civil rights from those who prevent their exercise, and that liberation of the Damned of the Earth presupposes suppression not only of their old but also of their new masters.’
Marcuse, H. (1997). Repressive tolerance. In Wolff, R. (Red.), A Critique of Pure Tolerance (pp. 81). Boston: Beacon Press
I know the link is there, but I have to be able to convince my lefist teacher that FS is, at least partly, responsible.
Ryan Johnson
Can you summarize what I'm suppose to do. If I understand correctly, you're tip is to stay away from FS and keep it purely specific about the need for political diversity in academia?
I think that's a bit too shallow for an 'academic' essay. I want to partly explain the thinking that caused this climate.
If I want to prove that there is a lack of diversity and that academia needs more diversity, I can do that in 500 words - I already stated all that in my introductionary paragraph.
Logan Russell
>If I want to prove that there is a lack of diversity and that academia needs more diversity, I can do that in 500 words - I already stated all that in my introductionary paragraph
yes, but you didnt prove it (a prof can ask that question and probably will) and explained why it happens, which Haidt explains via groupthink that creates an ideological blind spot.
Ian Kelly
>emancipatory - meaning they seek to 'better' the world that is literally not what that word means.
In any event, your idea is good, but you're missing the main component. The Frankfurt School philosophers, Karl Marx, and all of their adherents are pure evil. It is not that they want to better the world. They want to destroy it.
Andrew Young
Even though I would agree with you. Writing this down without bringing any proper sources (pol and stormfront are no proper sources) this would make me sound like a conspirital nut.
I thought you said you were hollandish. You people speak frog and nazi.
Charles Powell
Not since 1945
Samuel Martin
>I believe this is inherent to the critical sciences, where an important pillar is emancipation. I believe that the critical sciences have much more idealism which detracts from the aim to do objective and indepent research (no research is 100% objective or independent, but it's an important value to hold)
this is true, critical therory "sciences" probably have more bias than right wing academic circles of the past, but how can you reference how much academic bias there was in the times of Newton - you expand way to much that way.
Luis Phillips
Then what use are you? Holland has got to be the most worthless eurotrash country.
Oliver Murphy
Le weed lmao xD
Nicholas Cook
Plenty of weed other places. I guess all you're good for is the prostitutes.
