Republicans are openly anti-science

Hume

Verified User
Steven Teles deplores the underrepresentation of conservatives in the humanities and social sciences (“Why Are There So Few Conservative Professors?,” The Chronicle Review, July 1).

But the disparities are even greater in the natural sciences. In 2009, a Pew survey of members of the AAAS found that only 6 percent identified as Republicans, and there is no reason to think this has changed in the subsequent 15 years. One obvious reason for this is that Republicans are openly anti-science on a wide range of issues, notably including climate science, evolution, and vaccination.

 
All around America and Canada university STEM departments have converted to WOKE....I MEAN COME ON MAN!

Stupid Hurts! in this particular universe.
 
Steven Teles deplores the underrepresentation of conservatives in the humanities and social sciences (“Why Are There So Few Conservative Professors?,” The Chronicle Review, July 1).

But the disparities are even greater in the natural sciences. In 2009, a Pew survey of members of the AAAS found that only 6 percent identified as Republicans, and there is no reason to think this has changed in the subsequent 15 years. One obvious reason for this is that Republicans are openly anti-science on a wide range of issues, notably including climate science, evolution, and vaccination.

The best universities are typically in the northeast, upper Midwest, and west coast.

MAGA morons openly question the value of higher education.

Business, finance, law have always been more appealing for the more intelligent rightwingers.

Rightwingers are very pragmatic and transactional. A PhD in physics takes at least eight years to obtain, and the financial reward is not typically commensurate with the level of effort put in, especially compared to business, high finance, investment banking, real estate opportunities
 
The so called top science journals now alarmingly often publish regime propaganda cloaked as science.
 
The best universities are in the northeast, upper Midwest, and west coast.

MAGA morons openly question the value of higher education.

Business, finance, law have always been more appealing for the more intelligent rightwingers.

Rightwingers are very pragmatic and transactional. A PhD in physics takes at least eight years to obtain, and the financial reward is not typically commensurate with the level of effort, especially compared to business, high finance, investment banking.
The question of why there are not more conservative academics is why aren't applying for the jobs?
 
For starters we can look into the requirements for diversity statements. Universities have decided the ability to teach science relies upon ones diversity statement (diversity statements are by no means exclusive to any one subject matter). And make no mistake, these diversity statements are coming from a place of left wing ideology.

So not really surprising there is less and less diversity of thought among facility on our campuses.
 
Steven Teles deplores the underrepresentation of conservatives in the humanities and social sciences (“Why Are There So Few Conservative Professors?,” The Chronicle Review, July 1).

But the disparities are even greater in the natural sciences. In 2009, a Pew survey of members of the AAAS found that only 6 percent identified as Republicans, and there is no reason to think this has changed in the subsequent 15 years. One obvious reason for this is that Republicans are openly anti-science on a wide range of issues, notably including climate science, evolution, and vaccination.

This is just an Affirming the Consequent fallacy.
 
He is addressing the question of why right wingers are not in academia. Because they don't want jobs in academia.
Once again you are proving yourself an idiot.

An affirming the consequent fallacy is a formal fallacy. Here it works like this:

Almost all professors / scientists at universities in the natural sciences are Democrats.
Republicans are anti-science
Therefore, all professors / scientists are Democrats because Republicans are anti-science.

No proof is offered that professors / scientists at universities are Democrats because Republicans are supposedly anti-science.

To the contrary, it is far more likely that most academics in the field of science are Democrats--at least on record--because it aligns with the university's administration and the wide range of academics in other, particularly liberal arts, fields. That is, they say they are Democrats to get along and not be bothered by campus politics.



Immersion in a culture of Leftist politics is arguably another reason. If most of your peers, again particularly in the liberal arts, are Leftists, there is pressure for you to conform or be cast out.


Yet another reason might be that academics, including those in the sciences, are well-paid and see some degree of socialism and Leftist ideas as a good thing because they can afford them.



So, some simplistic argument that academics are Democrats (aka Leftists today) because Republicans are "anti-science" is both simplistic and juvenile. The OP argument is a fail.
 
Mr "I am science" Fauci and his crew refused to even look at evidence as they were crafting national COVID policy says Scott Atlas....who was there at the top.
 
Back
Top