Social Non-Science

After watching a series of fascinating videos in the filmed documentary that led to The Nordic Council of Ministers (a regional inter-governmental co-operation consisting of Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Iceland) closing Norway’s Gender Studies Institute (NIKK),  I was inspired to make some associations with something else I was reading in another browser tab about bullshit.

Harry Frankfurt wrote of bullshit and bullshitters:

Someone who lies and someone who tells the truth are playing on opposite sides, so to speak, in the same game. Each responds to the facts as he understands them, although the response of the one is guided by the authority of the truth, while the response of the other defies that authority and refuses to meet its demands. The bullshitter ignores these demands altogether. He does not reject the authority of the truth, as the liar does, and oppose himself to it. He pays no attentionto it at all. By virtue of this, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are.

In this paradigm of truth, there are truth tellers, liars and bullshitters.

If you watch the videos (that have subtitles in English, btw),  social scientists responsible for  social policy based on Scandinavia’s flagship “Gender Theory” were confronted on several politically controversial subjects with actual scientific data from bona fide scientists (you know, the ones that use something called the scientific method).

images (2)You can start with this one about gender equality.

Almost each and every one of them, when asked why the scientific data contradicted the key tenets of their answers about race, gender identity, gender roles and sex, the response, almost verbatim was “the science isn’t interesting” or “science isn’t important to consider”.

The height of intellectual dishonesty and refusal to even allow scientific findings in to the conversation is, frankly, stunning. I highly recommend watching them, yourself, because I sincerely doubt I can do them the justice they deserve when I attempt to describe just how inane the “social scientists” rationalized their work to suppress any conflicting knowledge from biologists, evolutionary geneticists, and medical doctors. In their world view, the public cannot handle the truth and it is better to not to know what isn’t helpful to society *as they have determined is or is not helpful, obviously.

So, that makes them the perfect example of Franfurter’s bullshitters: people that don’t bother even acknowledging the truth when it’s available, but makes up stories in their head they tell society because it is closer to what their vision of utopia looks like.

Instead of scientific standards, they follow political standards. This should be justification enough to change the name from social science to social theory, as a very generous compromise. Personally, I would opt for social sycophants.

And a great example of the hypocrisy of ‘sexism’ in Finland can be found right here.

2 thoughts on “Social Non-Science

  1. As a practicing PhD scientist, I can honestly say that much of what passes for “science” these days is embarrassing. Poor on methodology, poor on rigor. Way too much confirmation bias of pre-existing beliefs, rather than honest testing of objective hypotheses.

    To quote the great biologist Theodosius Dobzhansky: “There are many people these days who do ‘science’ … but very few actual scientists”


Speak your mind

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s