Read on Twitter
A couple of recent retractions have brought attention to the large number of racist papers based on painfully flawed science that have infested the psychology literature.
I want to talk here about this slide and how race science is enabled by the rise of “heterodoxy” culture. https://twitter.com/CantlonLab/status/1274427896757706765
I want to talk here about this slide and how race science is enabled by the rise of “heterodoxy” culture. https://twitter.com/CantlonLab/status/1274427896757706765
Last month I documented how far-right activists (not researchers doing good faith but controversial work) have spent decades abusing the flaws in academic publishing to smuggle junk science into the mainstream. https://twitter.com/Simon_Whitten/status/1267207915133427712
But once published why doesn’t it get challenged and retracted? Why has pushback against these activists been so ineffective?
Why are papers relying on datasets shown to be BS over a decade ago still being published in 2020? https://twitter.com/RetractionWatch/status/1274721848182407169
Why are papers relying on datasets shown to be BS over a decade ago still being published in 2020? https://twitter.com/RetractionWatch/status/1274721848182407169
We might catch a glimpse of the answer by viewing this clip from the lecture in which Jonathan Haidt used this now infamous slide.
To say that Haidt is constructing a strawman here would be too generous. No actual critics of Hereditarianism or EvoPsych would make the arguments to which he alludes, but this left wing academic bogeyman is a creature he can expect his intended audience to recognise.
Together with the propaganda of groups like Heterodox Academy, Quillette, the “Grievance Studies” trio, etc. people like Haidt have constructed an elaborate mythscape populated by academic science deniers who attack honest IQ researchers with the zeal of Red Guards.
When our perception of reality is unadulterated by this mythscape we can see the “innate race differences in intelligence” papers for the junk that they are, and we can read the statistically-rigorous debunking of these papers by people who are anything but SJWs.
But when Haidt’s mythscape clouds one’s perception of reality things look rather different. The reasonable objections backed by evidence are obscured by the censorious evolution-denying phantasms who haunt every corner of the academy.
The effect of this is that a defence of the racialists claims becomes unnecessary because the objections to it must be in bad faith.
Just take a look at the comments below this tweet for an example of this mindset in action: https://twitter.com/CantlonLab/status/1274427896757706765
Just take a look at the comments below this tweet for an example of this mindset in action: https://twitter.com/CantlonLab/status/1274427896757706765
Spreading the heterodoxy myths legitimises racism and sexism not by honestly defending them but by dishonestly stereotyping their critics.
As Jessica Cantlon puts it it’s “a Trojan horse of racist elitism.” https://twitter.com/CantlonLab/status/1274427896757706765
As Jessica Cantlon puts it it’s “a Trojan horse of racist elitism.” https://twitter.com/CantlonLab/status/1274427896757706765
