Comments on: Does social psychology have a prejudice problem?

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 19:18:56 +0000

Maybe not a UK thing, unless a UK thing is “being out of date”:
http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/GeneWatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=384

By: Petrossa

Petrossa — Sun, 30 Sep 2012 15:51:33 +0000

>Reality, of course, is bipartisan and will smack you in the nose regardless of how you vote.

True. As true as the fact that social psychology and reality are not the best partners to put it very mildly.

By: schoolpsychscholar

schoolpsychscholar — Sun, 30 Sep 2012 15:34:22 +0000

Great post. Ferguson’s criticism of Haidt’s approach is interesting. But I do appreciate Haidt’s ability to talk about discrimination in the social sciences in an accessible manner. See: Tierney’s NY Times piece last year. Haidt’s quote about the “statistically impossible lack of diversity” in psychology is direct, simple and easy to understand.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/08/science/08tier.html

By: Liz, LICSW

Liz, LICSW — Sun, 30 Sep 2012 13:44:37 +0000

You are working on the apples and oranges comparison of liberal and conservative in the US today, The apple part is that it is no longer about fiscal policy but class struggle for the maintenance of infrastructure through the wealthy paying appropriate taxes. The oranges is comparing disbelief in evident physical science with the liberal support for modifying the use of fossil fuel and “conserving” environment. The author then actually contradicts himself by maintaining that liberals deny that the poor are the poor because they don’t do anything about being poor. Many liberals believe that it’s not about WHO the poor are but that they exist and the responsibility is an ethical one. Try again, this time get it right.

By: counseling

counseling — Sun, 30 Sep 2012 11:26:21 +0000

For me, a political ideology does not necessarily correspond to an academic’s scientific and philosophical views and, in particular, their epistemological perspectives. For example, one can hold conservative views yet at the same time follow what some might consider to be a “liberal” epistemology (e.g., postmodernism, constructivism, social constructionism). People are surprised when I suggest that postmodernism is not an exclusive doctrine of liberals. Postmodernism deserves a full claim of the epistemological territory. It does not proscribe nor prescribe ideas but, rather, it sets forth a theory of the nature and limits of knowledge. Hence, postmodernism is compatible with any political views.

By: Wiles

Wiles — Sun, 30 Sep 2012 09:28:21 +0000

left wingers tend to ignore genetic influence on behavior & IQ? Is this a U.K. thing? Honestly never encountered that on this side of the pond.

By: Todd S

Todd S — Sun, 30 Sep 2012 04:28:40 +0000

In the US at least, I wouldn’t say that reality is bipartisan as bipartisan in the US just means that everyone in charge is in agreement on how to stick it to the rest of us.

By: asehelene

asehelene — Sat, 29 Sep 2012 18:00:23 +0000

>Reality, of course, is bipartisan and will smack you in the nose regardless of how you vote.

Love you for that one – and I think I’ll adopt that way of expressing this.

(I usually thought of it as, if your science never pisses off your political sensibilities, you are doing it wrong).