3 ms·

Either this is not political or everything is.

• candiodari 3y ago
  These are the authors of this paper: https://wilkinsonpickett.com/ https://wilkinsonpickett.com/ 1) This is not a peer-reviewed research paper. This is commentary, maskerading as a peer-reviewed research paper. This article is not science, and the authors have explicitly chosen this, they don't claim it's science (yes, nature has a commentary section), or at least they don't claim it's even their intention to satisfy the standards demanded of papers in Nature. They're not even attempting that. Presumably, that means this publication does not in fact satisfy the normal requirements to be published in Nature. Nature, the (now many) magazines have a bunch of sections that only have to do with Nature, the company, and not with science or peer-review. The editorial, the commentary, the Q&A and I'm sure that's not all of it. 2) These people are sociologists. Sociology makes no claim to be politically neutral, and therefore the criticism that it's political is quite justified, even against the entire field. Of course, also doesn't mean it's wrong, but sociology is a science that, if you put it very directly, "isn't about being correct". To be fair, both authors are academics boasting credentials outside of sociology. Medicine, economics, ... very impressive careers. Which is probably why this was published.
• novariation 3y ago
  This article pretty openly embraces degrowth through citing Jason Hickel > Many commentators have drawn attention to the environmental need to limit economic growth and instead prioritize sustainability and well-being[6,7] If you think saying degrowth is the only solution to climate change is not political, I have a bridge to sell you.