←back to thread

Scientific American's departing editor and the politicization of science

(reason.com)
473 points Bostonian | 1 comments | 18 Nov 24 22:04 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
tlogan ◴[19 Nov 24 13:33 UTC] No.42183230[source]▶
The issue isn’t that Scientific American leans “pro-Democrat” and it is political. It always has, and that’s understandable.

The real problem is that the modern Democratic Party increasingly aligns with postmodernism, which is inherently anti-science (Postmodernism challenges the objectivity and universality of scientific knowledge, framing it as a social construct shaped by culture, power, and historical context, rather than an evidence-based pursuit of truth).

replies(13): >>42183266 #>>42183318 #>>42183333 #>>42183377 #>>42183402 #>>42183412 #>>42183417 #>>42183454 #>>42183640 #>>42183959 #>>42184074 #>>42184903 #>>42186543 #
1. miltonlost ◴[19 Nov 24 14:55 UTC] No.42184074[source]▶
??? Postmodernism does not deny the Germ Theory of Disease or Newtonian physics. You have some very flawed, Jordan Peterson-tainted ideas of what Postmodern theory is, especially in regard to physical sciences.

Sure, social sciences like anthropology and economics in which human actors are in play will have their "objectivity" challenged.