Total disregard of science from mainstream left and right when it suits them

professore

See post 35 for the edited version which is more correct.

Something I've been mulling over recently. How the left and the right both totally disregard science when it suits them. Below I've outlined some of the ridiculous positions.

Here in Ireland our media and culture is heavily left leaning so we get the typical left leaning science denial:

• Gender is a social construct - men and women are identical in every way except when they aren't. Yet people are born gay. So being straight is a social construct while being gay isn't. Also toxic masculinity exists, and is socially constructed, but it must be the mothers and mainly female teachers of these toxic men that are training them to be toxic?
• If men and women, ethnic and gender groups are not represented in certain prestigious careers in exact proportion to their incidence in the population, it must be discrimination, while less attractive occupations are ignored (bin collectors, mining etc), or occupations that are overwhelmingly women (medicine, psychology, nursing) or LGBT (media, acting), or all female boards of directors are seen as "victories for equality"
• Global warming is real, but the obvious solution of nuclear power is seen as evil and dangerous, despite it being by far and away the safest, most reliable and cleanest form of energy we have that can ACTUALLY replace fossil fuels and not send us back to the 1500s.
• Western men are sexist if they suggest a woman shouldn't wear a tight mini skirt and in your face boobs in the workplace while men have to conform to a rigid dress code in the office, yet Muslim men telling their women to cover their faces is somehow empowering.
• Palestinians good, Israelis bad
• Young men who stare at women a little too long who dress with their arse cheeks hanging out or barely any clothes with stuffed bras somehow have something wrong with them, but a man who walked around with his arse cheeks showing, or their package enhanced, would be stared at, ridiculed and/or arrested.
• Religion has nothing whatsoever of value and is totally evil. Unless it's Islam.

The right:

• People choose to be gay because they are depraved perverts.
• Global warming is a hoax. Continuing to drive the concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere beyond levels seen 350000 years ago and on a long cycle will have no affect on the climate despite 98% of scientists saying otherwise.
• The bible is literally true
• Israelis good, Palestinians bad
• ALL immigrants are evil and out to take your job. Unless they are cleaning your house or minding your kids for a pittance.
• The Koran is full of terrible advice about stoning people and is therefore a book of war but the Old Testament, which preaches pretty much the same thing isn't.

Mentioning you think anything off this list isn't true will get you attacked online. The media all follow one or the other narrative.

TheValeyard

Facts and truth don't seem to be needed these days when you got popular opinion instead. It's dangerous. The extremes on both sides are at it. Everyones at it. 67% of all groups are making up their own facts and figures.

.......

This post has been deleted.

hatrickpatrick

I agree with pretty much everything you've said except the conflation of religion with science, which seems odd. The left's rejection of religion has nothing to do with science, it's about rejecting socially authoritarian cultural values which most religions (with the possible exception of Buddhism) tend to demand of their followers and society at large.

Also, what has the Israel/Palestine conflict got to do with science? The reason it divides along left and right lines is fairly obvious, believing that territory can be "won" in war regardless of the consent of its residents is a very right wing belief, while the left rejects the idea that power and victory matter more than moral and ethical right and wrong. That's a fairly simple dichotomy to understand, but it's not exactly a scientific issue.

You have only discovered now that people can appropriate science to suit their own purpose

Karl Popper

"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood.
Our knowledge can only be finite, while our ignorance must necessarily be infinite.
No rational argument will have a rational effect on a man who does not want to adopt a rational attitude".

O and I thought the immigrant were here for the welfare and free houses.

Captain Obvious

You've mostly chosen opinions. Apart from the global warming issue these are mostly ideological differences and not simply ignoring science. Many of them appear to be your own biased interpretation of opinions you don't like too. In reality, most people have much more complex opinions and understandings of all the issues you have simplified so poorly.

professore

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I'm using gender in it's original meaning and how it was always used here until the late 80s:

Sexologist John Money introduced the terminological distinction between biological sex and gender as a role in 1955. Before his work, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories.[1][2] However, Money's meaning of the word did not become widespread until the 1970s, when feminist theory embraced the concept of a distinction between biological sex and the social construct of gender. Today the distinction is strictly followed in some contexts, especially the social sciences[4][5] and documents written by the World Health Organization (WHO).[3]

Ragnar Lothbrok

Any person with any strong opinion can easily fool themselves into ignoring logic, science, common sense etc whenever it suits them.

Looking back to my youth when I was a hardline communist and Stalinist, I now realise that I ignored a whole truck-load of evidence, which at the time I dismissed as CIA propaganda

professore

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I agree with pretty much everything you've said except the conflation of religion with science, which seems odd. The left's rejection of religion has nothing to do with science, it's about rejecting socially authoritarian cultural values which most religions (with the possible exception of Buddhism) tend to demand of their followers and society at large.

Also, what has the Israel/Palestine conflict got to do with science? The reason it divides along left and right lines is fairly obvious, believing that territory can be "won" in war regardless of the consent of its residents is a very right wing belief, while the left rejects the idea that power and victory matter more than moral and ethical right and wrong. That's a fairly simple dichotomy to understand, but it's not exactly a scientific issue.

Well I guess the search for truth is the ultimate goal of science.

professore

Captain Obvious wrote: »

You've mostly chosen opinions. Apart from the global warming issue these are mostly ideological differences and not simply ignoring science. Many of them appear to be your own biased interpretation of opinions you don't like too. In reality, most people have much more complex opinions and understandings of all the issues you have simplified so poorly.

Nope. There is a weight of scientific evidence for every point I've made (except the political stuff, which are so clearly double standards they require no further explanation). I don't care about political positions, I only care about what the weight of the evidence says.

ohnonotgmail

professore wrote: »

I'm using gender in it's original meaning and how it was always used here until the late 80s:

It is not the 1980's any more. The world has moved on as is our understanding. You complain about others ignorance of science and then decide to ignore science you dont agree with.

Ragnar Lothbrok

Ragnar Lothbrok wrote: »

Any person with any strong opinion can easily fool themselves into ignoring logic, science, common sense etc whenever it suits them.

Looking back to my youth when I was a hardline communist and Stalinist, I now realise that I ignored a whole truck-load of evidence, which at the time I dismissed as CIA propaganda

The reason you or anyone ignored evidence is always more interesting than the fact that evidence is ignored.

riffmongous

Well in many cases 'science' isn't clear cut, right or wrong either. In fact it pretty much can never be, we just take it as such. In most areas though there will be a consensus of current thought that we can go by

Hector Savage

Thats why it's good to have a mix of opinions from right and left , and be stuck somewhere in the middle ...

ElKavo

Plants CRAVE electrolytes!

That is where we are headed.

Varik

Video and book is a few years old. Most is still relevant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pess_UpSCZ8

El Weirdo

professore wrote: »

• If men and women, ethnic and gender groups are not represented in certain prestigious careers in exact proportion to their incidence in the population, it must be discrimination, while less attractive occupations are ignored (bin collectors, mining etc), or occupations that are overwhelmingly women (medicine, psychology, nursing) or LGBT (media, acting), or all female boards of directors are seen as "victories for equality"
• Western men are sexist if they suggest a woman shouldn't wear a tight mini skirt and in your face boobs in the workplace while men have to conform to a rigid dress code in the office, yet Muslim men telling their women to cover their faces is somehow empowering.
• Palestinians good, Israelis bad
• Young men who stare at women a little too long who dress with their arse cheeks hanging out or barely any clothes with stuffed bras somehow have something wrong with them, but a man who walked around with his arse cheeks showing, or their package enhanced, would be stared at, ridiculed and/or arrested.
• Religion has nothing whatsoever of value and is totally evil. Unless it's Islam.

The right:

• The bible is literally true
• Israelis good, Palestinians bad
• ALL immigrants are evil and out to take your job. Unless they are cleaning your house or minding your kids for a pittance.
• The Koran is full of terrible advice about stoning people and is therefore a book of war but the Old Testament, which preaches pretty much the same thing isn't.

What have any of these got to do with science?

ohnonotgmail

ElKavo wrote: »

Plants CRAVE electrolytes!

That is where we are headed.

that took me a second.

Ragnar Lothbrok

mariaalice wrote: »

The reason you or anyone ignored evidence is always more interesting than the fact that evidence is ignored.

I suppose it was due to blind faith. I believed the so-called communist countries were workers' paradises and that the only faults there were caused by spies and saboteurs! The "facts" about the Eastern Bloc that came from the USSR were totally acceptable to me, whereas the "facts" about the Eastern Bloc that came from the BBC etc were dismissed as lies and anti-Soviet propaganda.

"Evidence" can always be perverted and a true believer will only ever believe the "evidence" that supports their beliefs.

El Weirdo

El Weirdo wrote: »

What have any of these got to do with science?

In many of his examples, science, or more often, psychology is used as justification for them.

.......

This post has been deleted.

professore

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

It is not the 1980's any more. The world has moved on as is our understanding. You complain about others ignorance of science and then decide to ignore science you dont agree with.

Redefining a word isn't science. Sex is indeed the correct term now for what I was referring to, not gender.

TheValeyard

ElKavo wrote: »

Plants CRAVE electrolytes!

That is where we are headed.

Yeah, but why do they use them to make Brawndo?

professore

El Weirdo wrote: »

What have any of these got to do with science?

A lot of them can be proven using statistics. The rest are indeed political points that contradict each other.

LLMMLL

professore wrote: »

Something I've been mulling over recently. How the left and the right both totally disregard science when it suits them. Below I've outlined some of the ridiculous positions.

Here in Ireland our media and culture is heavily left leaning so we get the typical left leaning science denial:

• Gender is a social construct - men and women are identical in every way except when they aren't. Yet people are born gay. So being straight is a social construct while being gay isn't. Also toxic masculinity exists, and is socially constructed, but it must be the mothers and mainly female teachers of these toxic men that are training them to be toxic?
• If men and women, ethnic and gender groups are not represented in certain prestigious careers in exact proportion to their incidence in the population, it must be discrimination, while less attractive occupations are ignored (bin collectors, mining etc), or occupations that are overwhelmingly women (medicine, psychology, nursing) or LGBT (media, acting), or all female boards of directors are seen as "victories for equality"
• Global warming is real, but the obvious solution of nuclear power is seen as evil and dangerous, despite it being by far and away the safest, most reliable and cleanest form of energy we have that can ACTUALLY replace fossil fuels and not send us back to the 1500s.
• Western men are sexist if they suggest a woman shouldn't wear a tight mini skirt and in your face boobs in the workplace while men have to conform to a rigid dress code in the office, yet Muslim men telling their women to cover their faces is somehow empowering.
• Palestinians good, Israelis bad
• Young men who stare at women a little too long who dress with their arse cheeks hanging out or barely any clothes with stuffed bras somehow have something wrong with them, but a man who walked around with his arse cheeks showing, or their package enhanced, would be stared at, ridiculed and/or arrested.
• Religion has nothing whatsoever of value and is totally evil. Unless it's Islam.

The right:

• People choose to be gay because they are depraved perverts.
• Global warming is a hoax. Continuing to drive the concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere beyond levels seen 350000 years ago and on a long cycle will have no affect on the climate despite 98% of scientists saying otherwise.
• The bible is literally true
• Israelis good, Palestinians bad
• ALL immigrants are evil and out to take your job. Unless they are cleaning your house or minding your kids for a pittance.
• The Koran is full of terrible advice about stoning people and is therefore a book of war but the Old Testament, which preaches pretty much the same thing isn't.

Mentioning you think anything off this list isn't true will get you attacked online. The media all follow one or the other narrative.

Not sure you know what science is......

professore

riffmongous wrote: »

Well in many cases 'science' isn't clear cut, right or wrong either. In fact it pretty much can never be, we just take it as such. In most areas though there will be a consensus of current thought that we can go by

Science is - or should be - the best explanation based on the facts that are at hand at the time. For example a scientist doesn't "believe" in global warming. They invesigate it, read the mechanisms how it might take place, try to disprove it etc. Ideology is "I don't believe in global warming" and their "research" consists of listening to some crackpot on YouTube.

_Dara_

professore wrote: »

Nope. There is a weight of scientific evidence for every point I've made (except the political stuff, which are so clearly double standards they require no further explanation). I don't care about political positions, I only care about what the weight of the evidence says.

There’s a weight of scientific evidence for the “arse cheeks, barely any clothes” bullet point? (not honing in that point for any particular reason. It’s an example)

professore

LLMMLL wrote: »

Not sure you know what science is......

I do. I kind of forgot what the title of the post was half way though and made it more broad than science ....

ohnonotgmail

professore wrote: »

Redefining a word isn't science. Sex is indeed the correct term now for what I was referring to, not gender.

well i am pretty sure we are living in the now so why not use the term we use now? or is it a just a cheap attempt to prove some point on your behalf?

professore

_Dara_ wrote: »

There’s a weight of scientific evidence for the “arse cheeks, barely any clothes” bullet point?

I'm sure someone somewhere has a PhD in it

_Dara_

professore wrote: »

I'm sure someone somewhere has a PhD in it

Oh, okay. You said there was. I thought you knew.

professore

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well i am pretty sure we are living in the now so why not use the term we use now? or is it a just a cheap attempt to prove some point on your behalf?

Nope. I genuinely used gender as I would have grown up using it. As interchangeable for biological sex. It's no longer appropriate to use it like that so I shouldn't have.

professore

I've edited the original post as follows due to feedback ...

Something I've been mulling over recently. How the left and the right both totally disregard science when it suits them. Below I've outlined some of the ridiculous positions.

Here in Ireland our media and culture is heavily left leaning so we get the typical left leaning science denial:

• Men and women are identical in every way except when they aren't. Yet people are born gay. So being straight is a social construct while being gay isn't. Also toxic masculinity exists, and is socially constructed, but it must be the mothers and mainly female teachers of these toxic men that are training them to be toxic?
• If men and women, ethnic and sex groups are not represented in certain prestigious careers in exact proportion to their incidence in the population, it must be discrimination, while less attractive occupations are ignored (bin collectors, mining etc), or occupations that are overwhelmingly women (medicine, psychology, nursing) or LGBT (media, acting), or all female boards of directors are seen as "victories for equality"
• Global warming is real, but the obvious solution of nuclear power is seen as evil and dangerous, despite it being by far and away the safest, most reliable and cleanest form of energy we have that can ACTUALLY replace fossil fuels and not send us back to the 1500s.
• Western men are sexist if they suggest a woman shouldn't wear a tight mini skirt and in your face boobs in the workplace while men have to conform to a rigid dress code in the office, yet Muslim men telling their women to cover their faces is somehow empowering.
• Palestinians good, Israelis bad
• Young men who stare at women a little too long who dress with their arse cheeks hanging out or barely any clothes with stuffed bras somehow have something wrong with them, but a man who walked around with his arse cheeks showing, or their package enhanced, would be stared at, ridiculed and/or arrested.
• Religion has nothing whatsoever of value and is totally evil. Unless it's Islam.

The right:

• People choose to be gay because they are depraved perverts.
• Global warming is a hoax. Continuing to drive the concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere beyond levels seen 350000 years ago and on a long cycle will have no affect on the climate despite 98% of scientists saying otherwise.
• The bible is literally true
• Israelis good, Palestinians bad
• ALL immigrants are evil and out to take your job. Unless they are cleaning your house or minding your kids for a pittance.
• The Koran is full of terrible advice about stoning people and is therefore a book of war but the Old Testament, which preaches pretty much the same thing isn't.

Mentioning you think anything off this list isn't true will get you attacked online. The media all follow one or the other narrative.

professore

OK so rather than nitpicking at the details, do people agree / disagree? Or at least come up with some witty insults I've come to love from boardsies?

RIGOLO

professore wrote: »

OK so rather than nitpicking at the details, do people agree / disagree?  Or at least come up with some witty insults I've come to love from boardsies?

Im going to take the line I spotted on another  thread today , 

Arguing with an idiot just makes 2 idiots.

ohnonotgmail

professore wrote: »

I've edited the original post as follows due to feedback ...

Something I've been mulling over recently. How the left and the right both totally disregard science when it suits them. Below I've outlined some of the ridiculous positions.

Here in Ireland our media and culture is heavily left leaning so we get the typical left leaning science denial:

Men and women are identical in every way except when they aren't. Yet people are born gay. So being straight is a social construct while being gay isn't.

What???? what nonsense is this?

professore wrote: »

Also toxic masculinity exists, and is socially constructed, but it must be the mothers and mainly female teachers of these toxic men that are training them to be toxic?

Why mainly mothers and female teachers?

hatrickpatrick

professore wrote: »

Well I guess the search for truth is the ultimate goal of science.

Sure, I'm just not sure how support or disdain for one side or another in a territorial conflict can really be talked about under the umbrella of "disregard for science". Science doesn't really have anything to do with the ideology of power vs fairness.

_Dara_

professore wrote: »

OK so rather than nitpicking at the details, do people agree / disagree? Or at least come up with some witty insults I've come to love from boardsies?

It’s a fairly rambling, ponderous post. It’s not exactly easy to parse. And much of it doesn’t seem grounded in science.

professore

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

What???? what nonsense is this?

Well what's wrong with that? Am I supposed to defend my own errors and insist I'm right all the time?

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Why mainly mothers and female teachers?

Most teachers are female and most people raising children are still female. If men are toxic because of societal influences (which by the way I don't agree with for the most part - a large part of it is biological as far as the research goes - look at twin studies) then a large proportion of that is on their heads, especially since many of these toxic men come from families where there is no father figure present.

professore

_Dara_ wrote: »

It’s a fairly rambling, ponderous post. It’s not exactly easy to parse. And much of it doesn’t seem grounded in science.

Well you could pick one bullet point you disagree / agree with most strongly ... they are 1 or 2 lines at most.

wexie

professore wrote: »

OK so rather than nitpicking at the details, do people agree / disagree? Or at least come up with some witty insults I've come to love from boardsies?

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

To me a lot of what you've pointed out is explained in the above quote.

Because we're now all 'equals' it's no longer acceptable to tell someone it's great that they have an opinion, and you support their right to have an opinion, but you still reserve the right to ignore their opinion because they have the intellect of a houseplant.

Combine that with the fact that many of these people now have been given a voice and a platform on the internet.....et voila

I don't know what era we're supposed to be moving into...but I doubt that it's going to be remembered as the golden age of science and reason.

Ipso

There is an anti science streak that pops up in liberalism in areas like vaccines and GMOs.

I’d recommend this book, basically people will go ridiculous lengths to avoid admitting being wrong.
https://www.amazon.com/Mistakes-Were-Made-but-Not/dp/0544574788/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1531234551&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=mistakes+were+made+but+not+by+me&dpPl=1&dpID=51%2Bu%2Ba69RoL&ref=plSrch

ohnonotgmail

professore wrote: »

Well what's wrong with that? Am I supposed to defend my own errors and insist I'm right all the time?

you say that being straight is a social construct while being gay is not. Presumably you have some evidence to support this rubbish?

professore wrote: »

Most teachers are female and most people raising children are still female. If men are toxic because of societal influences (which by the way I don't agree with for the most part - a large part of it is biological as far as the research goes - look at twin studies) then a large proportion of that is on their heads, especially since many of these toxic men come from families where there is no father figure present.

so women are responsible for something that you dont think is true? sweet baby jesus.

Taytoland

The left's rejection of religion has nothing to do with science, it's about rejecting socially authoritarian
cultural values 

News to me that the left rejects authoritarianism.

_Dara_

professore wrote: »

Well you could pick one bullet point you disagree / agree with most strongly ... they are 1 or 2 lines at most.

Well, I asked you what weight of scientific evidence was behind one point because you said there was science backing all of them and you said you assumed someone had done a PhD on the subject. So, you weren’t sure. And if there’s a PhD on the topic somewhere, it’ll be in a soft science.

wexie

_Dara_ wrote: »

Well, I asked you what weight of scientific evidence was behind one point because you said there was science backing all of them and you said you assumed someone had done a PhD on the subject. So, you weren’t sure. And if there’s a PhD on the topic somewhere, it’ll be in a soft science.

arse cracks I believe it was....:D

professore

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you say that being straight is a social construct while being gay is not. Presumably you have some evidence to support this rubbish?

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so women are responsible for something that you dont think is true? sweet baby jesus.

The points I made are all examples of the bull**** that is spouted today. I don't agree with ANY of them !!!! That's the whole point !!!!

s7ryf3925pivug

Toxic masculinity is stuff like ignoring symptoms of illness instead of going to the doctor because you identify as being tough as part of being male. That is valid - parts of masculine identity cause harm. It appears to be commonly misunderstood as the idea that masculinity itself is toxic. It's not; lots of very positive aspects of stereotypically male identies. Protecting loved ones, providing for kids, courage in adversity as examples.

Yeah I think a lot of guys act in negative ways because they think rightly or wrongly it attracts women... Something that tends to be ignored for some reason.

hatrickpatrick

Taytoland wrote: »

News to me that the left rejects authoritarianism.

A lot of us do, and that's why there are so many of us who get accused of being alt-right aligned simply for rejecting "authoritarian liberalism", which in my view and the view of many other liberals is an absolute oxymoron.