3 ms·
>Not because I think it's impossible, but because it's such a charged thing we should really make sure the science is solid before we speculate. We shouldn't ra
by bloaf 6y ago
>Not because I think it's impossible, but because it's such a charged thing we should really make sure the science is solid before we speculate. We shouldn't randomly speculate on something that sensitive.
I think he doesn't go far enough. Its not enough to just "not speculate," you have to also be responsible with how you use your reputation as a researcher in the field. As an analogy, it doesn't matter how principled or academic a political philosopher's belief in state's rights is, he'll lose his credibility if he agrees to speak at a bunch of racist confederate organizations. Even if he sticks to a boring non-racist script.
There is a movement out there seeking to drape their racist ideas in the trappings of science and reason. This researcher knows this. He ought to view it as his responsibility to make sure his good name is not attached to that movement. He could stay completely inside his ivory tower until he has the solid science, or he could heavily screen the media he speaks to. He has very clearly failed in that responsibility by going on Mr. "Humanity is not a single species[1]" Molyneux's show and saying that he thinks appealing to the environment as an explanation for group differences in IQ is a-scientific.
[1] https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/stefan-molyneux https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/indi...
- threatofrain 6y agoNoam Chomsky also interviewed the same man. Should Noam Chomsky have known better?
- bloaf 6y agoYes. To be fair to Noam Chomsky, he very directly attacked Stefan's ideas, so I don't think there can be quite as much perception of support.
- karaterobot 6y agoGuilt by association is wrong in a logical sense, as well as in a moral one, and even if it's so commonly practiced that we forget that, we shouldn't go the extra step and enshrine it into our laws or culture.
- bloaf 6y agoGood thing I am not accusing Hsu of being guilty of the same crimes as the people who he has lent his name to. Those people are racist, Hsu is academically irresponsible.
- karaterobot 6y agoBut he was accused of being racist, due to his association with someone else, and this is why he was forced to resign. I think you're saying the following: Even though you do not necessarily consider him guilty of racism by association with Molyneux, the fact that some people consider him guilty of racism by association is enough for him to have committed an act worthy of public shame. If that's true, then call it guilt through association, but to my mind it's a distinction without a practical difference.
- bloaf 6y agoThe practical difference is that the association was in Hsu's professional capacity. That is to say, he didn't decide to join the same bowling league as Molyneux as a random guy, he went on Molyneux's show as an academic authority on the science of race and said what Molyneux wanted to hear. I have heard Molyneux's fans say to me that they were drawn to Molyneux's racist ideas "because he just applies science" and pointed to Hsu's interviews (and others) as evidence of this. Hsu enabled that not by association in general, but in this specific form of association which some people have interpreted as endorsement. There are plenty of other professions with ethics rules prohibiting certain associations due to how those associations may be perceived, e.g. large companies have antitrust guidelines that prohibit associations that may cause the perception of anti-competitive behavior.