This article is just fucking great.
"Many laboratory researchers perceive this, I fear, to be someone else’s problem. But it isn’t. If the West is really in its decline-and-fall stage, its Caligula stage, its Donald Trump stage, then this isn’t just an issue for political and financial elites. It’s also a problem for the ‘experts’ who crawl around after these elites, massaging their egos and defending their interests."
" And too many ordinary scientists hold politicians in utter intellectual contempt — even though it is the scientists who have chosen a career that allows them to pursue relatively simple problems (such as building a machine to detect gravitational waves) rather than genuinely difficult ones (such as running a social-care programme in a small town)."
http://www.nature.com/news/the-elephant-in-the-room-we-can-t-ignore-1.19561
>>7936260
>even though it is the scientists who have chosen a career that allows them to pursue relatively simple problems (such as building a machine to detect gravitational waves) rather than genuinely difficult ones (such as running a social-care programme in a small town)
That's such a conceited statement it's unreal.
>>7936270
Take it as it is, slightly ironically, but still. I'm a Phycisist, I'm doing my Ph. D. in High Energy Physics phenomenology, I have a slight impression of what the author means.
>>7936260
Good article and partly true. Indeed the scientists choose to pursue simpler problems that directly interest them more like scientific mysteries, a theory of everything, the origin of life.
The reason we don't have more scientists or would-be scientists in politics is because a lot of scientists are autistic, and don't care for the public image or boring social contract that needs to be followed in politics. Politicians don't succeed because they are autistically smart. Most politicians succeed because they are great con artists. Look at Trump, so much evidence that he has been scamming people, coverage of him insulting everyone rather than addressing actual problems, and he gets the nomination from a good part of the U.S. population.
This is what scientists can't, or don't want to become. Maybe if the public cared more for honesty and good arguments rather than public image, or stumping your opponents, or insulting others to feel superior, maybe then scientists would succeed.
>>7936284
/thread
Most humans haven't evolved that much in the past 2 million years
>>7936292
Uhhh AMH have only existed for 800000 years
>>7936260
>relatively simple problems
>building a machine to detect gravitational waves
>genuinely difficult
>running a social care program in a small town
Obviously you know very little about either physics or economics. Constructing an economically efficient model for social care in a small town is actually easy as shit, and involves only a small amount of simple algebra and basic understanding of a graph. Don't mistake people's inability to agree as an inability to solve a problem
>>7936323
He's OBVIOUSLY not refering to the mathematical or economical aspect of dealing with social problems. Precisely since you're dealing with people, the problem is fucking complicated, so "the inability to agree" is precisely the whole point: it's an extremely difficult issue.
And as I said, I'm a Phycisist myself.
>>7936260
OP are you genuinely questioning THE AUTHORITATIVE WORD on science?
pic fucking related.
>>7936360
I don't get your point. You don't like the guy, so you disagree with the article because it agrees with him, or you're not being ironic and think that the article disagrees with him?
>>7936260
Why does China have so many STEM graduates in power?
Why does US have so many lawyers in power?
>>7936284
this. Despite being smart i am just too autistically honest for politics
>>7936347
Then all you're saying "scientists would rather deal with scientific problems than non-scientific problems". Yeah, because scientific problems have objectively correct answers so stupidity can be ignored, unlike with social problems where stupidity is actually the majority force
>>7936260
are you being facetious?
A gravity wave detector has very low tolerance for error. social programs have very large tolerances for success, which is exactly why the terrible programs instituted in the Great Society and the New Deal haven't cause societal collapse yet.
AI FOR PRSEIDENT!
>>7936402
good job anon, you got the point
except it's not necessarily stupidty, but irrationality and people are not necessarily right OR wrong in a given matter, it's just a difference in way of thinking.
>>7936451
>AI for president
>ayyyy for president
borack abama confirmed alien lizard
>>7936451
Strong AI is not possible.
>>7936260
This is what happens when you don't lynch your left.
All the retards end up in the media and some fuckwitted Nature editors end up politicizing what should be a completely apolitical journal.
>>7936531
NORVIG
O
R
V
I
G
>>7936540
I don't know what the argument/discussion is about, but I don't need to in order to correct this statement you've made.
Just as there is no such thing as an objective human, there is also no such thing as an apolitical body, administered by humans. If you've convinced yourself that such a thing can or does exist, then you've deluded yourself.
>>7936284
There are some quite notable exceptions: Thatcher and Merkel, both leading politicians with a background in sciences. Both have made lasting impressions.
And yes, "many ordinary scientists hold politicians in utter intellectual contempt" because they EARNED it.
>>7936260
It's quite funny that this guy assumes Trump winning would cause the current Enlightenment informed society to fall. Actually, Trump and Trump like figures in Europe not winning is what will cause said society to fall.
The truth of the matter is that only white people are capable of sustaining the societies that give rise to modern science. East Asians see science as merely a tool to rectify problems, a means to acquire technology - you would never see a Chinese institution dropping any sort of money on theoretical physics or abstract mathematics, to them, there is no tangible benefit. Similar case with Indians. South Americans care little for science, Middle Eastern populations are insane and their religion would put an end to all science, and Africans are barely above animals.
Yet, without Trump and Trump like figures, all those groups above would be free to come in and swamp Europe and European nations. It would be the death of Europe, and consequently, the death of science. It would hold out in little pockets like Israel and Japan, but fundamentally the course of modern scientific achievement would end then.
>>7936373
Because the way China views STEM is the same way we view law - "If you want to have money and power (in contrast to an alturistic endeavor to further human knowledge married to a selfish desire to acquire knowledge over other riches), go into [insert STEM if Chinese, law or finance if European]".
In these societies, the image of having some sort of arcane knowledge bestows an aura of wisdom and power. No one there cares for progressing science at all. They see it as a brute tool to acquire technology.
>>7936863
So you have no argument. OK then.
I live in the UK. Our demographics predict that by 2050, 1 in 6 people will be Muslim. It's worse in France, Germany and Sweden. Can you explain to me why you think the current apparatus that exists in Western societies which gives rise to the modus of scientific endeavor we see today would exist under such a scenario of Muslim majority population? We only have to look to our neighbours in the Middle East to see what happens.
Do you think Mexican migrants care about NASA, or the AAAS? Do you think Black voters want more money for research into future technologies, or more welfare?
Past history has given me a solid precedent on which to base my views. Either debate and argue like, you know, a fucking scientist, or fuck off to your hugbox.
>>7936895
Except I'm clearly not when the topic is about what Trump's influence would be on science, considering that's what the fucking thread is about.
Oh hold on, let me revise my post for you -
"Oh yeah fuck Trump, what an evil guy, scientists like me are above such populist demagoguery, I'm so fucking smart, let me just smell my own farts here for a moment awwwwwww yes vote Bernie". Better?
>>7936847
The quality of this bait started off high, then quickly fell as you became racist. 4/10
>>7936883
>Can you explain to me why you think the current apparatus that exists in Western societies which gives rise to the modus of scientific endeavor we see today would exist under such a scenario of Muslim majority population? We only have to look to our neighbours in the Middle East to see what happens.
>muslims cause science to fall apart
>correlation, therefore causation
you fell victim to one of the classic blunders!
>>>/pol/
>>7936954
How is it bait? Look at every non European society in the world and it's views towards science and scientists - the Middle East is in chaos due to religion, they don't even have a fucking infrastructure; South America produces no science of any note whatsoever; same with Africa, even though when South Africa was a European state, it was at the forefront in medical science.
China and India approximate a glib imitation of European science, but they do so in an attempt to accrue "soft power". They view knowledge as a tool, nothing more, which is why their journals are really, really shit. Filled to the brim with shit - but that doesn't matter, see, what matters is that they produce MORE "science" than the West, that means power.
The only non European states that have any sort of comparison with Europe... are states which wholeheartedly embraced European values, namely, Japan and Israel.
Do you have any argument that "no u wrong"?
>>7936961
You don't even know what you're spouting anymore. Radical Islam, subscribed to - based on surveys that ask Muslims questions regarding apostasy and Sharia law- the majority of Muslims, is incredibly hostile to science. Yet, you're here, trying to argue against the proposition that a state with a majority population of said radical Muslims would not be antagonistic towards science.
I don't quite follow YOUR logic.
>>7936983
I'm not trying to argue with you. I'm telling you I know that you're opinion is retarded and that I'm not willing to have a real discussion about it because you're entire opinion is 'white people are the only smart people'. Retard.
>>7936815
(You)
>>7936284
Dealing with people is something worth practicing and learning to do.
I don't know anything about psychology, I only have personal experience through which I have found that people are, for the most part, surprisingly pliable.
Take advantage of and/or accommodate for the fact that most people have faulty decision making and critical thinking skills. People seem think with their feelings and are far more attracted to conviction than concrete evidence.
>>7936990
"I-I'll just SAY his opinion is stupid and that means I've won".
I can see you'd be quite at home in a state run along the lines of Islam - appeals to authority, an aversion to any sort of debate, anger when orthodoxy challenged.
Perhaps you are a Muslim? One of those students who runs around at University studying engineering or computer science because dad says that's where the money and honour is. What's that? A PhD Mohammed? No, unless you want to show off your Dr. title and impress the tribe.
>>7936983
These places have not gone through an enlightenment age like the west has.
We have a respect for individual liberties and for empiricism that hasn't completely taken hold in other societies. In fact, we, ourselves, are still struggling to uphold these principles.
The way to fix this is to strive for better and more accessible education.
>>7937029
>These places have not gone through an enlightenment age like the west has.
And never will. They don't have to, the impetus and conditions that led to our Enlightenment do not exist any longer - those societies have been able to escape those conditions by taken technology developed in the West and using it to resolve the problems that required an Enlightenment in the West to fix. They can now happily continue with their cultures which are either apathetic towards science or downright hostile.
>that hasn't completely taken hold in other societies
And never will. It's actually quite surprising that people who will tell you that cultures are relative, that there's no correct culture, will at the same time speak without batting an eyelid that "human rights" - personal freedom, individual liberty, and free speech - are universal and that everyone is bound to sign up to them given enough time. It's rather hilarious.
>The way to fix this is to strive for better and more accessible education
Oh? Saudi Arabia has a gross enrollment rate of near 100% in primary education, 91.2% in secondary education, and 30.2% for tertiary education (36.8% for women, 28.6% for men, in case anyone scream "B-but what we need is education for girls!"). And what has mass education for the last three generations, most of it three, done for Saudi Arabia? Nothing. Oh, sorry - over educated men with masters degrees who flew planes into the WTC.
Clearly, education does not change a society's outlook. Saudi Arabia is still as backward, intolerant and hostile to free inquiry as it was prior to education reform. We could do this whole spiel with Pakistan, South Africa, North African nations, Latin America and on and on, to prove this point.
>>7936990
It is rare to see people misunderstand so much in just one sentence, on a background of strawmen set ablaze.
You were the first and probably the only one here uttering anything about white supremacy. Had you been a real scientist you would have noted the names in the journals. Hint: Chinese names.
What is relevant here is culture. And you missed it.
>>7937078
>the impetus and conditions that led to our Enlightenment do not exist any longer
Oh? The impetus was the power of religion over civil society. And you know, had you read news you would have seen that a great many countries are controlled by clerics with a limited understanding of and interest in democracy.
>>7937107
>The impetus was the power of religion over civil society
People like to bring this up, but it really wasn't. Spain, where society was governed along religious rather than secular precepts, did not have an Enlightenment. It was in the Netherlands, Britain, the German and Italian city states. What existed here, in terms of impetus, was a mixture of factors - conflicts within the traditional feudal system of governance towards urban dwelling populations, growing populations that required feeding (hence demand on agricultural land that required improvement), a tolerant (at least, other Christian denominations and Judaism) religious atmosphere, and economic concerns.
None of those conditions exist anymore. The issue over land and economy have been sorted in these nations due to technology taken from the West. The power systems in place which allow a state to function are again modeled on Western lines. There is therefore no impetus for an Enlightenment or change in culture or values. Our findings and systems have merely been co-opted to be used to maintain the very societies that are fundamentally incapable of arriving independently at those same systems and technologies. They, and their people, can not and will never see science as we do - an endeavor attempting to make sense of the Universe. All they care about is what technologies will keep the food supply going and what technologies will keep computers going.
>>7937148
And to hammer this home, this is why you should be worried. Because if these European nations go under the tide of the civilizations around it, that's it. Human understanding and progress stops. Think back - there must have been a time when you thought, optimistically, "One day, we'll go to the stars and truly understand ourselves and the Universe"? Well that's gone - that's never going to be achieved if the current demographic shift happens.
Only by White people understanding that it's beholden on them to maintain the torch of collective human sentience can the rest of humanity be stopped from descending into pathetic insularity. I know damn well that personally I don't want to see that torch we're carrying be all for nothing because we were too damn scared to state the obvious in fear of offending the very people out to stamp that torch into dust.
>glib imitation
>>>/tv/
What the fuck happened to Nature? And all these cucks who are willing to be the backbone of civilization and still tolerate to be told what we do is simple. Maybe you are simple-minded.
>>7937637
>and still tolerate to be told what we do is simple. Maybe you are simple-minded.
Yeah, no. You stay in science because you interesting set problems that you can work towards solving directly. It means you will have to be smart to get to the level of helping design large experiments or work on new theories. But do you think that being a world leader is easy in comparison? (Because the article said science is simple COMPARED to political manipulation) You don't get to just chill out about your life, you have a multitude of problems that don't necessarily have defined answers like in mathematics, and you can't fuck up because there is a lot more on the line. It takes something special to get to the top, a combination of skills and features not commonly found in scientists.
Two more things:
Autism =/= intelligence
Sociology majors =/= representatives of the kind of grasp leaders have on very complicated social phenomena.
>>7937165
delusional monkey carrying a torch into the dark for nothing, thinking its superior to the other monkeys because they wont waste their lives carrying the stupid obsolete useless torch
>>7936901
>http://www.nature.com/news/the-elephant-in-the-room-we-can-t-ignore-1.19561
Preach brother!
>>7936853
>They see it as a brute tool to acquire technology.
No, the Chinese view society as an optimisation problem and more importantly one that can be tamed with science.
So why is nature publishing political Op Ed's now?
I thought it was a science journal
>>7937745
Some science articles do it to get some attention.
