4 ms·
>I'm talking about conservative politicians - external actors, not internal. Yes, I'm claiming (and evidence supports) that internal actors politicized these d
by k5329 10y ago
>I'm talking about conservative politicians - external actors, not internal.
Yes, I'm claiming (and evidence supports) that internal actors politicized these disciplines. Do some research into these fields. All of them were politicized in a remarkably short amount of time. Conservatives are just responding by denying public funding to self-identified partisan political activists.
> Also, I'd love to see some cites about the issue you raise from reliable sources.
I gave you cites from reliable sources. The second link I sent you is a review article of all of the research done into this subject. I'd highly recommend checking out some of the citations in that paper, they're very illuminating.
Another good one to check out is this paper[0] from Stanford which measured the implicit bias association test applied to political groups. In all of their studies (I believe they recreated 3) they found that implicit bias is as much as 50% stronger for political identity than it is for racial identity.
From that paper: "Compared with the most salient social divide in American society—race—partisanship elicits more extreme evaluations and behavioral responses to ingroups and outgroups. This remarkable patterns applies to both explicit and implicit measures of group affect and holds even when the tests of ingroup favoritism are unobtrusive
and completely nonpolitical, and partisans are incentivized to treat copartisans no differently from opposing partisans."
[0] https://pcl.stanford.edu/research/2015/iyengar-ajps-group-polarization.pdf https://pcl.stanford.edu/research/2015/iyengar-ajps-group-po...
- hackuser 10y ago> I gave you cites from reliable sources. The second link ... Heterodox Academy's stated mission is to advocate for more conservatives in academia. They also have no independent claim on credibility that I know of. That's not what I mean by a reliable source; it's the kind of source I avoid (of any political stripe). > Conservatives are just responding by denying public funding to self-identified partisan political activists. Can you give examples? I've seen them attack climate scientists and tenure for everyone.
- k5329 10y ago> Heterodox Academy's stated mission is to advocate for more conservatives in academia. Heterodox Academy advocates for ideological heterogeneity in departments, which in the context of the academy as it exists today means conservatives. It was created by Jonathan Haidt[0] who is not and has never been a conservative. Considering the results of the study, it would be impossible for any significant number of conservative social psychology professors to be a part of the organization (there are no significant numbers of conservative social psychology professors). If you choose not to read the studies that I've cited, that's your own partisan anti-intellectualism and it's a perfect example of how partisanship (even left-wing partisanship) prevents the search for truth. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt
- hackuser 10y ago> that's your own partisan anti-intellectualism I'm happy to discuss issues, whether or not we agree, but personal attacks aren't welcome here on HN. They create a few problems: 1) They are unpleasant for the recipient; 2) they don't inform other users or otherwise add value to the discussion; and 3) they derail discussion and spread like cancer - one personal attack breeds several more. No real harm done, but let's stick to comments that are worth everyone's time to read. That's why I asked about different cites; I wanted to learn something.