4 ms·

>mostly left-leaning scientists I know it's popular to say "reality has a liberal bias" but I don't think it does us a service to keep promoting that myth.

pg314 10y ago
According to [1] most scientists are indeed liberal: 52% of scientists describe themselves as liberal versus 9% as conservative. The numbers for the general public are 20% and 37%, respectively. [1] http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-4-scientists-politics-and-religion/ http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-4-scientists-...
- omegaworks 10y ago
  Maybe my meaning was lost. I don't think it does a service to our political dialogue when we casually throw "mostly left-leaning" on "scientists." We don't want to encourage the instant siloing / ignorance that can accompany labeling someone whose profession is gathering objective evidence with a particular subjective political tribe. Language matters. I think "reality has a liberal bias" and other patronizing quips have helped usher us into a post-truth era.
serge2k 10y ago
What myth? Until the right stops rejecting science and promoting lies (cough crowd size cough) that saying is pretty much true.
- jcranmer 10y ago
  The left is equally guilty of being anti-science when it suits them. The anti-vaxxer and anti-GMO crowds tend to be predominantly left-wing, for example.
  - st3v3r 10y ago
    Anti-vaxxers are a fringe element of the left. Climate deniers are the mainstay of the right. Do not falsely equivalate the two.
    - jcranmer 10y ago
      Anti-GMO is most certainly not fringe, particularly not in Europe where it's as mainstream a position as climate change denial is in the US, and just as dismissive of science.
      - tacomonstrous 10y ago
        In the US, though, it's most definitely fringe, and that's what's pertinent to the discussion in this thread.
        jack9 10y ago
        Without context, fringe has no meaning, that is what's pertinent. It's about as popular as Scientology (anti-GMO seems to be about twice the anti-vax).
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]

pg314 10y ago

According to [1] most scientists are indeed liberal: 52% of scientists describe themselves as liberal versus 9% as conservative. The numbers for the general public are 20% and 37%, respectively. [1] http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-4-scientists-politics-and-religion/ http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-4-scientists-...

omegaworks 10y ago
Maybe my meaning was lost. I don't think it does a service to our political dialogue when we casually throw "mostly left-leaning" on "scientists." We don't want to encourage the instant siloing / ignorance that can accompany labeling someone whose profession is gathering objective evidence with a particular subjective political tribe. Language matters. I think "reality has a liberal bias" and other patronizing quips have helped usher us into a post-truth era.

serge2k 10y ago

What myth? Until the right stops rejecting science and promoting lies (cough crowd size cough) that saying is pretty much true.

jcranmer 10y ago
The left is equally guilty of being anti-science when it suits them. The anti-vaxxer and anti-GMO crowds tend to be predominantly left-wing, for example.
- st3v3r 10y ago
  Anti-vaxxers are a fringe element of the left. Climate deniers are the mainstay of the right. Do not falsely equivalate the two.
  - jcranmer 10y ago
    Anti-GMO is most certainly not fringe, particularly not in Europe where it's as mainstream a position as climate change denial is in the US, and just as dismissive of science.
    - tacomonstrous 10y ago
      In the US, though, it's most definitely fringe, and that's what's pertinent to the discussion in this thread.
      - jack9 10y ago
        Without context, fringe has no meaning, that is what's pertinent. It's about as popular as Scientology (anti-GMO seems to be about twice the anti-vax).
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]