Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Politics version 7.0 more politics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-07-2017, 05:23 PM   #51
sputnik3000
Pooh-Bah
 
sputnik3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Odi club member
Posts: 3,771
Re: Gender studies

The issue with gender science(politics) is that its so heavily left biased. In Sweden you get grants based on certain "strong" fields such and gender equality, women rights, trans studies etc. No matter what you are researching if you add those keywords you have a much larger chance of receiving funds.

We have a universities that are churning out "humanitarians" that have read all of those fields and have no real education outside of the made up fields and all wants to research it from the flawed information that they have recieved during their own studies.
Does anyone believe that their results will be anything other than biased from their own perceived version of reality?

If your results lean left and confirm what you have been taught you get further grants, if not you dissapear or get called racist/sexist/etc untill you are forced out of the limelight...
sputnik3000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 05:29 PM   #52
Abbaddabba
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,993
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
I disagree. There are a LOT of people who take Intro to Psych. It's required at most universities in the core requirements. The link above shows that many Intro to Psych books are deeply flawed.
For example, there are a lot of widespread beliefs in the general public about priming, yet over half the priming studies in the past 5 years did not replicate.
Even more importantly, much of this nonsense spills over into the clinical fields, where therapists are using techniques that do not replicate under scrutiny.
That there're bodies that recognize credentials for the sake of selling their services to the general public is kind of a separate issue than the institutions having the ability to grant the degrees in the first place. Both are important but we should be clear about what we're critiquing.

Quote:
Most reasonable academics will NOT scrutinize the works. Here is why:
1) You don't need a journal to publish results. If you have a recognized credential and are willing to put yourself out there you can get attention....

2) I don't agree. Plenty of people are eager to make a name for themselves, especially in the name of something they believe in. You see this in people like jordan peterson that everyone keeps posting videos of - he's pushing a fairly inconsequential issue on a matter that's outside his discipline with respect to a bill that's intended to include gender identity as a protected group in canadian law with some aspects that he disagrees with.

3) This isn't a problem unless policy makers are using studies from unknown academics that haven't been replicated to shape policy. In a properly functioning system the work of PHDs is a starting point that policy makers can use to guide their own research.
Abbaddabba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 05:34 PM   #53
Black Peter
veteran
 
Black Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Pass
Posts: 2,586
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abbaddabba View Post
That there're bodies that recognize credentials for the sake of selling their services to the general public is kind of a separate issue than the institutions having the ability to grant the degrees in the first place. Both are important but we should be clear about what we're critiquing.



1) You don't need a journal to publish results. If you have a recognized credential and are willing to put yourself out there you can get attention....
This applies to few people (note that i said "most" and not "all" in my original post). Most academics need to be published in peer-reviewed journals. Most Promotion and Tenure committees will not count other outlets as equivalent.

Quote:
2) I don't agree. Plenty of people are eager to make a name for themselves, especially in the name of something they believe in. You see this in people like jordan peterson that everyone keeps posting videos of - he's pushing a fairly inconsequential issue on a matter that's outside his discipline with respect to a bill that's intended to include gender identity as a protected group in canadian law with some aspects that he disagrees with.
Again, a few can do this. But most need to go the traditional route in academia to get tenure.

Quote:
3) This isn't a problem unless policy makers are using studies from unknown academics that haven't been replicated to shape policy. In a properly functioning system the work of PHDs is a starting point that policy makers can use to guide their own research.
The system is far from properly functioning. It's a giant mess in academia.
Black Peter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 06:22 PM   #54
Abbaddabba
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,993
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
This applies to few people (note that i said "most" and not "all" in my original post). Most academics need to be published in peer-reviewed journals. Most Promotion and Tenure committees will not count other outlets as equivalent.
The original position seemed to be that PHDs are unable to scrutinize the work of their peers. Whether they can do it (especially in a way that'll be impactful) is separate from whether they'll get tenure for it. Most studies themselves are a waste of time and effort... what sense is there in incentivizing their replication? It's only when the paper has the potential to lead to changes in policy that it's worth looking into, and when that happens plenty of people do take a closer look.
Abbaddabba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 06:41 PM   #55
Black Peter
veteran
 
Black Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Pass
Posts: 2,586
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abbaddabba View Post
The original position seemed to be that PHDs are unable to scrutinize the work of their peers. Whether they can do it (especially in a way that'll be impactful) is separate from whether they'll get tenure for it.
My apologies. I did not mean to imply that they CAN NOT do it. They certainly can and have the skills. I meant to state that they [generally] WILL NOT do it for the reasons i outlined (and more).

Quote:
Most studies themselves are a waste of time and effort... what sense is there in incentivizing their replication? It's only when the paper has the potential to lead to changes in policy that it's worth looking into, and when that happens plenty of people do take a closer look.
I used to think this as well, until i spent 20 years in academia and found that even when it affects policy (and real lives), most academics simply don't have the desire to scrutinize anything. Keep in mind that we're generally very busy during the school year, and have our own research interests and goals. It takes time to read a paper and think it through. We don't get paid extra for that time, so most just don't bother. I do it personally bc i teach Stats and Methods, so it's my job to know how ****ed up things are.

Most academics are not well-versed enough in others' research to know what to question. A cognitive psychologist who reads a social psych paper and wants to question it, doesn't have the time it takes to get up to speed on the literature and methodology used. Much easier to ignore it.

I'm not the first person to point this out. It's been covered widely in the recent literature (the problem, not the solution), but still the problem persists because no good solutions have been posited.
Black Peter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 06:58 PM   #56
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 71,853
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Peter View Post
Psychology and its related fields (psychiatry, sociology, etc) is so full of fraud and poorly conducted research that it's become almost useless to try to parse out the good studies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Peter View Post
Here is the post where i outline some of the fraud cases and failures to replicate.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=335

Btw, i did NOT say that the majority are fraudulent.
I think your statement in the first post goes well beyond the evidence you've presented, and I'm going to disagree with abba and 13ball and say that your cited evidence doesn't provide any justification for extrapolating beyond psychology, although I think there are valid complaints to be made about academic publishing across many fields, and methodological challenges in the social sciences that go beyond psychology.

First, your wording is obviously misleading with regard to fraud. You don't have any evidence of a widespread problem with fraud. You just have a few isolated examples with no attempt to establish a general problem, whether within psychology or more generally.

Secondly, with regard to replicability, the reason these replication studies don't generalize well to other social sciences (I'm thinking of sociology and anthropology specifically) is that the other disciplines very rarely use the same methods as psychology, which emphasizes certain kinds of experimental designs which are generally not even possible in other social sciences. Nor are sociological studies always interpreted (or intended to be interpreted) with the expectation of universal generalizability in the same way as psychological studies often are.

Note that I think it's reasonable to expect that the way in which publishing is tied to tenure, the desire for novelty and positive results, and other problems related to the culture of peer review have consequences across disciplines, but you can't prove a replicability problem in sociology or anthropology by referring to these studies of replicability in psychology given the differences in methodology. It might be reasonable to expect similar problems with statistical competency, but not all social science research is quantitative either, and you certainly aren't demonstrating a general problem when your evidence is limited to one field.

I think it's useful to understand the epistemological limits of these disciplines, which are quite real and pressing, the necessity for triangulating results across studies, and the need for skepticism about methods. In some ways I think other social sciences tend to be less prone to over-interpretation in the media and pop-culture than psychology as well (for various reasons I can try to elaborate if necessary), but in any case you haven't presented an argument that justifies dismissing the social sciences in general. You've presented an argument for skepticism about the certainty of conclusions drawn from psychological experiments, which I think is entirely warranted.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 07:02 PM   #57
spanktehbadwookie
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
spanktehbadwookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Water Is Life #nodapl
Posts: 16,083
Re: Gender studies

Psychology is still growwing right before our eyes, along with the rest of developing knowledge.
spanktehbadwookie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 07:15 PM   #58
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 71,853
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball View Post
When? I watched part of your youtoob and I have no idea what argument you're trying to make here.
From the youtube, I'd guess the point is supposed to be that Gender Studies courses deny that there are important biological differences between people determined by sex. What is not in the video is any evidence that Gender Studies courses (as a general rule) deny this. It's not even clear that the woman in the video denies this in general, she mostly seems to be denying that biological differences are meaningful in discussions about social policy, although she seems to deny a biological basis for gendered differences in aggression.

I don't have any first-hand experience of what is taught in Gender Studies programs, and since they are (I believe) mostly inter-disciplinary, it might vary a lot by program, i.e some might be more humanities-based and others lean more on sociology or anthropology.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 07:51 PM   #59
Black Peter
veteran
 
Black Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Pass
Posts: 2,586
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
I think your statement in the first post goes well beyond the evidence you've presented, and I'm going to disagree with abba and 13ball and say that your cited evidence doesn't provide any justification for extrapolating beyond psychology,
Here, you appear to be criticizing me for not providing enough citations to back up my point.

Quote:
although I think there are valid complaints to be made about academic publishing across many fields, and methodological challenges in the social sciences that go beyond psychology.
Here, you make a strong claim (pretty much in line with what i said) without any citations.


The irony.
Black Peter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 08:12 PM   #60
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 71,853
Re: Gender studies

That's not a strong claim (it's not even specific), and it's my opinion. I'm not sure what you expect me to cite. In any case, I only offered my opinion for the purposes of clarifying that I don't think social sciences are perfect, but that your apparently absolute dismissal seems unjustified.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 08:22 PM   #61
kioshk
Nixonian
 
kioshk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: now Watergate does not bother me
Posts: 89,718
Re: Gender studies

well named, you're so scrupulously even-handed and open-minded that you pretty much stand for nothing, as far as I can tell. But you do it very amiably, props.
kioshk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 11:18 PM   #62
juan valdez
Pooh-Bah
 
juan valdez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,791
Re: Gender studies

proff peter, just to get you back on track i'll highlight the op and where things went

Quote:
Originally Posted by juan valdez View Post
As someone who was recently banned for sexism by claiming the classrooms on campuses are teaching material in contradiction with mainstream science and using unscientific methodology, I think it would be a good idea to discuss gender studies. Women and trans studies are basically political nonsense making scientific claims. They are left operate because any opposition gets shouted down as a bigot or phobe. This also applies to ethnic studies

I will provide citation but its breakfast time now
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Peter View Post
Find an empirical research article from a women's studies journal (e.g. Sex Roles). Illustrate how the chosen methodology and design are incorrectly aligned with the research questions and hypotheses. Or show us how the statistical analyses are incorrectly conducted based on the hypotheses or data.

Then show us how this article is indicative of the field of women's studies as a whole, and how that differs significantly from general mainstream scientific journals. If you conduct a meta-analysis to show inflated effect sizes in women's studies journals compared to mainstream journals, then extra points.
im talking about what is being taught on campuses. you want to shift the discussion to suit yourself. as we will see, you aren't even familiar with what is being taught at a large number of respected universities or the consequences
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Peter View Post
Psychology and its related fields (psychiatry, sociology, etc) is so full of fraud and poorly conducted research that it's become almost useless to try to parse out the good studies. Perhaps this is what you're referring to, Juan? However, to say that women's studies is particularly bad needs some evidence. I have found that their journals are fairly rigorous, albeit biased in a way that only certain groups try to publish there. This does not necessarily mean that their findings are corrupted.
ok so would you believe that womens and trans studies are as bad or worse? i never compared the two. for example womens studies don't need to contradict mainstream psychology, it contradicts biology. on top of that, what do you think is more biased, scientists conducting science (with biases and flaws) or womens and trans studies with political and personal biases conducting studies and cherry picking supporting nonsense as course material?
Quote:
Originally Posted by juan valdez View Post
i think its a clever move to state at the beginning how and what you demand out of me. steer the conversation in the direction you want. unfortunately this is my thread. its an effective tactic in being "right" but its not an effective way to discover truth or areas of contradiction. im not going to search through journals if i can listen to professors or "experts" on womens studies and see the contradiction with actual science that appears to be sound. if you don't find the science i believe to be accurate then you are free to express how and why
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Peter View Post
Just as i thought. You have no clue how to back up your empty statements. You likely don't even understand what i was asking for. Oh well, i should have known, given your inability to do so in any previous threads.
maybe steer the conversation towards what you want in your own thread. this isnt the medical journal thread. this is about what is being taught in womens and gender classes on many respected campuses
Quote:
Originally Posted by juan valdez View Post
priceless is having your undivided attention. thanks

as i said its a nice tactic to shift the arguement to suit yourself but thats not happening here. i am talking about what is being taught by professors at universities. information that gets transfered to the students/sjw's. not journals. we will look at how unscientific their claims are and also look at how they contradict actual science and research
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Peter View Post
Ok, but how do they contradict actual science? What exactly are they teaching that's incorrect?

More importantly, why do you care? Are transgenders hiding under your bed and scaring you?
again, these things have consequences. thats why i care. i got banned for being critical and people are being silenced for their own self interest because challenging these professors doesnt end well with the viscous pc crowd. its a problem

what happens when nobody challenges the wage gap nonsense? well we hear obama and clinton parroting it for political gain. its a problem if the political strategists think its a valuable message, right? if its a "problem" that effects half the population then surely its worth fixing, right? i'm sure you can see the problem with bad ideas going unchallenged now right? fixing a fake problem affecting half the population that now feels slighted. yeah thats worth caring about probably

maybe if you haven't thought about it yet, think through the consequences of falsely telling people that things like gender and identity are just a social construct. think it through. what road can or will this go down? what are the consequences? do these scientific claims hold up to any sort of scrutiny? why arent they being challenged?

you have people teaching and arming students with nonsense that leads to political activism. the video i posted shows a study that demonstrates that freedom results in greater gender disparity. if you are being taught the opposite and your goal is to remove disparity politically, can you see the problem yet? you are now educating students that women are being slighted and screwed in places they aren't. the consequences are going to be political action to "fix" these things. this is real

a starting point to all of this is they are after free speech to the point of compelled speech and the opposition displaying any sort of sanity has their career at risk. imagine a world where the number of identities people have can and has continued to grow. imagine if they keep inventing words and demand you use them which is enforced by law. well, thats happening. its real. think through the consequences and think outside psychology when looking for contradiction
Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
From the youtube, I'd guess the point is supposed to be that Gender Studies courses deny that there are important biological differences between people determined by sex. What is not in the video is any evidence that Gender Studies courses (as a general rule) deny this. It's not even clear that the woman in the video denies this in general, she mostly seems to be denying that biological differences are meaningful in discussions about social policy, although she seems to deny a biological basis for gendered differences in aggression.

I don't have any first-hand experience of what is taught in Gender Studies programs, and since they are (I believe) mostly inter-disciplinary, it might vary a lot by program, i.e some might be more humanities-based and others lean more on sociology or anthropology.
studies show the opposite effect of what gender studies will tell you. that is because gender studies are full of fallacy. gender is a social construct, the patriarchy, etc. its all made up nonsense that contradicts human nature and what we see in the animal kingdom. if you pay even a little attention to their messages you should start to grasp the absurdity

as you know i believe our physiology affects our behavior. i have already pointed this out in very simple ways showing behavior differences between gender and age. hormone levels. there are actual scientific studies back this up which i have cited in the trump thread. for example i posted a video talking about studies showing that testosterone levels and physical strength even have a statistically relevant impact on your political views and your likelihood to end up in jail or be violent. womens studies make a habit of dismissing things as social construct. sounds familiar right?

Last edited by juan valdez; 01-07-2017 at 11:30 PM.
juan valdez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2017, 11:30 PM   #63
leavesofliberty
Pooh-Bah
 
leavesofliberty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: atlas shreeked
Posts: 4,769
Re: Gender studies

Thanks for your quality posts. People get banned for bad modding. Hidden rule.

My experience, took a psychology of adjustment class, was actually a HUMANISM class, a philosophy void of any true substance, and I dropped it in a week. Lol college subsidies and this liberal dream of college for all. Diarrhoea through the intestinal track of the new K-14 education system.

I do think anecdotes from college students is evidence, and for that reason, I think it'd also make a decent Student Life thread.

Last edited by leavesofliberty; 01-07-2017 at 11:38 PM.
leavesofliberty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2017, 10:45 AM   #64
Black Peter
veteran
 
Black Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Pass
Posts: 2,586
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
That's not a strong claim (it's not even specific), and it's my opinion. I'm not sure what you expect me to cite. In any case, I only offered my opinion for the purposes of clarifying that I don't think social sciences are perfect, but that your apparently absolute dismissal seems unjustified.
Fair enough. My opinion is based off of years of personal experience, and is impossible to "cite" sufficiently on a message board. I respect your opinion, as it is also clearly based off of experience. Good discussion.

When someone shows me that (in the top journals in their field):

1) Stats are done incorrectly 50% of the time
2) One in eight journal articles contained a grossly inconsistent p-value that may have affected the statistical conclusion
3) 95% of the findings match the alternative hypothesis (which are almost always unusual findings, as the journals won't publish no-brainers)
4) Dozens of famous people in the field are being caught making up data
5) Textbooks are failing to correct the errors even after the journals retract the studies

Then yes, i tend to view the whole field through a lens of suspicion. Does that mean that ALL studies are flawed? Of course not. But how am i to know which ones are and which ones aren't? So they all come under suspicion until those idiots clean up their field.
Black Peter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2017, 11:25 AM   #65
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 71,853
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Peter View Post
Fair enough. My opinion is based off of years of personal experience, and is impossible to "cite" sufficiently on a message board. I respect your opinion, as it is also clearly based off of experience. Good discussion.

When someone shows me that (in the top journals in their field):

1) Stats are done incorrectly 50% of the time
2) One in eight journal articles contained a grossly inconsistent p-value that may have affected the statistical conclusion
3) 95% of the findings match the alternative hypothesis (which are almost always unusual findings, as the journals won't publish no-brainers)
4) Dozens of famous people in the field are being caught making up data
5) Textbooks are failing to correct the errors even after the journals retract the studies

Then yes, i tend to view the whole field through a lens of suspicion.
My point was not that these results shouldn't make you skeptical about psychology, but that psychology is not sociology, or anthropology, or economics, or poli sci, and so on. They are different fields.

Also fwiw it appears to me that, based on your link (here), you're overstating the significance of the "50% of stats are wrong" claim. Only 13% of the errors affect the conclusions of the papers, which you note in your next bullet point. There's a big difference between an error that changes a conclusion and an error that doesn't, and if you look at the methodology of the StatCheck program the reason so many of the errors don't affect conclusions is that studies also tend to report lots of insignificant correlations. A mistake in the reported p-value there is irrelevant to the findings of the study.

That said, obviously more rigor is needed. It's an embarrassing problem. But when your conclusion is that the research is entirely unreliable, the difference matters. 13% is not 50%. You also haven't demonstrated that "dozens of famous people" in the field have been caught fabricating data.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2017, 11:38 AM   #66
13ball
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
13ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: No Quarter is a Sandy Hook Truther
Posts: 12,005
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by juan valdez View Post
im talking about what is being taught on campuses.
You've made claims about what is taught, but never backed them up.

Quote:
this is about what is being taught in womens and gender classes on many respected campuses
So you say.

Quote:
what happens when nobody challenges the wage gap nonsense? well we hear obama and clinton parroting it for political gain. its a problem if the political strategists think its a valuable message, right? if its a "problem" that effects half the population then surely its worth fixing, right? i'm sure you can see the problem with bad ideas going unchallenged now right? fixing a fake problem affecting half the population that now feels slighted. yeah thats worth caring about probably
The wage gap is around ~5% when accounting for all known variables. Seems like an actual problem. And we know that gender discrimination exists, so it seems reasonable to ascribe at least some of the gap to discrimination.
13ball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2017, 11:49 AM   #67
Black Peter
veteran
 
Black Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Pass
Posts: 2,586
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by well named View Post
My point was not that these results shouldn't make you skeptical about psychology, but that psychology is not sociology, or anthropology, or economics, or poli sci, and so on. They are different fields.

Also fwiw it appears to me that, based on your link (here), you're overstating the significance of the "50% of stats are wrong" claim. Only 13% of the errors affect the conclusions of the papers, which you note in your next bullet point. There's a big difference between an error that changes a conclusion and an error that doesn't, and if you look at the methodology of the StatCheck program the reason so many of the errors don't affect conclusions is that studies also tend to report lots of insignificant correlations. A mistake in the reported p-value there is irrelevant to the findings of the study.

That said, obviously more rigor is needed. It's an embarrassing problem. But when your conclusion is that the research is entirely unreliable, the difference matters. 13% is not 50%. You also haven't demonstrated that "dozens of famous people" in the field have been caught fabricating data.
You seem to be purposely intent on misquoting me and trying to put words in my mouth, so i'm going to bow out now.
Black Peter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2017, 12:32 PM   #68
well named
poorly undertitled
 
well named's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: esse est coesse
Posts: 71,853
Re: Gender studies

If you feel misrepresented I'd like to suggest that you've made a lot of exaggerated claims and then you seem to back away from them when challenged.

"Psychology and its related fields (psychiatry, sociology, etc) is so full of fraud and poorly conducted research that it's become almost useless"

"Dozens of famous people in the field are being caught making up data"

Those are direct quotes, and the ones upon which I've based my objections, i.e that psychology is not sociology (quote 1), and that I think you're going too far in rejecting the entire fields ("it's become almost useless"). I'm not sure what words I've put in your mouth that you object to. Certainly it's not my intent to misrepresent you.
well named is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2017, 08:21 PM   #69
juan valdez
Pooh-Bah
 
juan valdez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,791
Re: Gender studies

He came, he derailed, he huffed and puffed, he displayed total ignorance of the subject matter, he complained about his feelings and left

Not surprised. Pretty common exit strategy
juan valdez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2017, 07:33 PM   #70
PyramidScheme
FPS Allstar
 
PyramidScheme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Disabled List Always
Posts: 19,792
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by sputnik3000 View Post
The issue with gender science(politics) is that its so heavily left biased. In Sweden you get grants based on certain "strong" fields such and gender equality, women rights, trans studies etc. No matter what you are researching if you add those keywords you have a much larger chance of receiving funds.

We have a universities that are churning out "humanitarians" that have read all of those fields and have no real education outside of the made up fields and all wants to research it from the flawed information that they have recieved during their own studies.
Does anyone believe that their results will be anything other than biased from their own perceived version of reality?

If your results lean left and confirm what you have been taught you get further grants, if not you dissapear or get called racist/sexist/etc untill you are forced out of the limelight...

This a million times over. It then serves to reinforce itself when those of us who reject this nonsense are asked to back our claims up with data and studies. You might as well ask Galileo to back up a heliocentric orbit using the Bible.
PyramidScheme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2017, 08:00 PM   #71
kioshk
Nixonian
 
kioshk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: now Watergate does not bother me
Posts: 89,718
Re: Gender studies

Who is this Galileo guy anyway? What are his politics?
kioshk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2017, 08:16 PM   #72
PyramidScheme
FPS Allstar
 
PyramidScheme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Disabled List Always
Posts: 19,792
Re: Gender studies

A very unpopular guy in his time. Similar to people who stand up against left-wing tyranny today
PyramidScheme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2017, 09:04 PM   #73
kioshk
Nixonian
 
kioshk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: now Watergate does not bother me
Posts: 89,718
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by PyramidScheme View Post
A very unpopular guy in his time. Similar to people who stand up against left-wing tyranny today
well put! a brave iconoclast. We need more of those right now.
kioshk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2017, 09:23 PM   #74
13ball
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
13ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: No Quarter is a Sandy Hook Truther
Posts: 12,005
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by PyramidScheme View Post
This a million times over. It then serves to reinforce itself when those of us who reject this nonsense are asked to back our claims up with data and studies. You might as well ask Galileo to back up a heliocentric orbit using the Bible.
That post was pretty terrible.

Apparently people are mad at something called "gender studies" but nobody can be bothered to come anywhere close to anything resembling a specific criticism.

OP began with:

Quote:
Women and trans studies are basically political nonsense making scientific claims. They are left operate because any opposition gets shouted down as a bigot or phobe.
But there's nothing to even shout down here. Anyone? Buehler?
13ball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2017, 09:40 PM   #75
leavesofliberty
Pooh-Bah
 
leavesofliberty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: atlas shreeked
Posts: 4,769
Re: Gender studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Peter View Post
Psychology’s Replication Crisis Can’t Be Wished Away:

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/a...d-away/472272/

This dipsh*t didn't even get fired for his fraud:

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/...tion-concludes

This one did:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederik_Stapel

As did this one:

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...d-bad-practice

More bad news for shrinks:



http://science.sciencemag.org/content/349/6251/aac4716

Psychologists apparently can't do stats very well. Screw up 50% of the time:

http://www.nature.com/news/smart-sof...papers-1.18657

One in eight Psych papers contained a grossly inconsistent p-value that may have affected the statistical conclusion:

http://link.springer.com/article/10....428-015-0664-2

systematic bias in favor of significant results:

http://link.springer.com/article/10....428-015-0664-2
Most of these links do not work because the (...) replaces the url linked to.
leavesofliberty is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.33 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online