Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
I Can’t Even: Wokism in Science Podcasts
I like to learn about genetics, so I listen to some podcasts about genetics as one does. I quite appreciate how these podcasts can include more up-to-date information about things like “junk” DNA and epigenetics than books.
I was listening to the second episode of season three of “Genetics Unzipped” by the Genetics Society of the UK, and the lady talked about how we inherit mitochondrial DNA from our Mom and how we use it to study populations and other interesting nerd stuff. Then she mentioned, “If you are someone who becomes pregnant, then…” I was so flabbergasted I pulled out my earbud.
These are big-brained people subsidized by a mix of public and private money to educate people about science. How dare such a noble pursuit be tainted by anti-science Wokeness. She could have at least said, “If you are a biological woman who becomes pregnant,” which would have been obnoxious but bearable.
I have always viewed the scientific pursuit of Truth as among the highest endeavours in all of human achievement, if the not very pinnacle of what makes humanity beautiful and worthwhile. Apparently, the legacy of Darwin, Popper, and Aristotle can all be chucked aside because Woke activists have hurt feelings.Published in General
I do not think that it is even possible to use the scientific method to prove that something is true. Isn’t this correct?
You may be able to prove that something is false, though even then, it’s possible that the underlying model is correct but you haven’t accounted for something. An example might be the theory of gravitation being disproven by experiments on the surface of the earth, if those experiments don’t account for air resistance.
Just because something has never happened doesn’t mean it won’t.
Science is not the pursuit of truth. The true nature of the universe is beyond our comprehension. Science is the pursuit of utility. Science develops predictive models that can be used to manipulate the natural world. This is an enormously powerful instrument of human advancement. But it cannot give us meaning.
Indiana Jones made that very clear.
That was archeology. Does that count as science?
The main point was that science – including archaeology – is a search for Facts, not Truth.
Again, CAGW was the wedge that broke their minds. If a podcast so much as mentions the planet Venus, one must be prepared for several minutes of runaway greenhouse emissions. They’ve been taught to prioritize the lie, and maybe slip in some science if it doesn’t distract too much. (They call it “content.”)
I respectfully disagree. A lack of meaning and a respect for human dignity broke their minds. And CAWG appealed to their empty souls yearning to believe in anything. But we can disagree.
That last sentence you said is incorrect for a minority of the human population. Now for the vast majority of humanity, science does not give science meaning -science is merely quicker internet, better cancer drugs or a safer car. And making the physical world, easier, healthier and safer is a good thing but usually not a great source of meaning.
But for me, my Dad, Boss Mongo, Newton, Pascal, and I would say Darwin, the majesty of physical universe and the pursuit of understanding the physical universe is a source of great meaning. The nature of the carbon atom is sublime and beautiful. However, the nature of a nucleus in the most primitive bacteria cannot by understood by a lifetime of contemplation by the most brilliant mind. This gives me meaning. One of the reasons I continue to live is to see the advancement of genetic science in making steps in understanding how amazing carbon based lifeforms are.
For a significant minority of people. The pursuit of knowledge is like a sincere prayer.
I dunno, man.
It’s sus to be sure, but I’m not sure that the Science Person in question was going out of xir way to de-gender moms. It may be that she grabbed the nearest word without any particular intent. Did she do it more than once?
I had the same thought, but I have become so sensitized to their shoving gender ideology down our throats, that I think I would have reacted the same way Henry did.
In fact, I know I would because of what happened to me when I went to the opera on Saturday night. I react to opera like Henry reacts to genetics; there is an element of the spiritual in it. I read in the program that a woman – a mezzo soprano – was going to sing the baritone role. I became incensed and almost walked out. I have pretty much stopped going to the theater because I know they are going to try to be edgy (aka completely predictable), particularly in bending gender roles, as I wrote a few years ago.
It turned out it was an opera “first” where a woman sang as a baritone and not the typical trouser role where women play young boys. She was dressed as a man, and looked reasonably like a man, so she clearly was not meant to be trans. Unlike the guy with a beard in an evening dress I saw in the lobby. Much to my surprise, she sounded like a man and not a woman trying to sing like a man. If I hadn’t read the program, I would have thought it was a pleasant lightweight baritone. It was amazing that she had such a range, but she did not have the full chested power of the male voice that I love so much. I could hardly hear her at some points, particularly at the lower part of the range. Of course the critics raved, but I’m pretty sure that ChatGPT could have written the same review without ever having seen the performance. It was foreordained. So I didn’t really see the point from an artistic point of view. But I was seething so much through the opera that it kept me from fully enjoying it. I wondered on the way home, if this had happened 10 years ago whether I would have reacted the same way, or just put it down to an unusual artistic choice. So “wokeness” ended up ruining the opera for me even when I’m not sure this was a woke thing.
You can listen to the podcast to double-check me but Professor Katani is always woke about everything.
Love God with all your mind…yup.
It is not that wokism intrudes into science; it’s that it completely and irrationally over rules science, as this case illustrates. One of the unbridgeable aspects of dimorphic human reproduction is that female gametes have mitochondrial DNA and male gametes do not. One is female, the other male, irrevocably, no matter that someone claims otherwise.
Yes I was in a work-related board meeting last night where a physician talked about programs for pregnant persons. Personally I’ve know a lot of pregnant persons. They were all women, 100% of them. If I was ever introduced to a pregnant man, I’d be highly suspicious that either the adjective or the object was incorrect.
One of the nice things about English and German is that they are relatively exact languages that help engender science by their specificity.
But that can be fixed.
From the Director of the National Institutes on Drug Abuse: Pregnant people with substance use disorders need treatment not criminalization
This is from an Institute Director at the National Institutes of Health. A scientist. Unlike a podcast where people are speaking and one can use a word without thinking, this piece was carefully crafted to make a point. But I won’t read the piece because I know from the title that it is untethered from reality.
Also, what they need is to be stopped.
To say nothing of what the society around them needs in order to continue to be a society.
Thanks for everybody commenting. When I wrote this essay two days ago I was complaining about Wokism just to vent because I was grumpy that I had to find a new podcast. Now I realize, thanks to the Ricochet community, that this a serious issue.
Scientists are obligated to be as honest as they possibly can when it comes to the physical nature of the universe. We need high I.Q. people with science degrees to explain why we are sick and how to be healthier. We need different science nerds to build buildings and safer cars.
The regular working class who pays for all this is obligated to say to these big-brain science nerds that they can’t lie about what they figure out. Most people can’t scientific experiments or complex engineering.
Then the big brain science nerds says, “People can get pregnant.” He abandons his duty to the pursuit of Truth. Why shouldn’t the people who work very hard go to the Doctors and say, ” Hey. You ain’t speaking honestly.”
I mean, what’s the point of a high I.Q. and an opportunity to pursue serious education if you just lie because it’s popular.
You are correct. Lack of purpose and rewards for narcissism encouraged the habits of fear and sloth in their minds. CAGW excused and encouraged their behavior, teaching them to be openly stupid in the world.
But if one is a little connected and with a middling bright mind, a front row kid, then lying to fit in is a way to a comfortable life.
Confucius first wanted to get into politics to improve things. He applied for a job as an administrator to a powerful Nobleman how he could get his administrators to be honest. Confucius said immediately, “First, you must be honest yourself.” Then after encouraging honesty, Confucius never worked in politics again and had to fix wheels. I am not surprised. The Nobleman assuredly had a comfortable life but a billion Asians pray to Confucius to get good test scores and be honest.