Leftist Pseudo-Intellectuals Peer-Review and Publish Hoax Study

[bernie14]

No. Mental illness does exist and it's not a "social construct." Schizophrenia, for example isn't a social construct.

The left is now doing with science, what they have done to ethics with their "moral relativism." There are such a thing as right and wrong, just as much as there's science and pseudo-science.

I apologize if I was unclear in my previous post....of course I believe that schizophrenia/mental illness is biologically based, perhaps even more so than many medical conditions such as cardiac disease, diabetes maybe even cancer...…but we don't have blood tests or scans that can confirm a mental illness (yet). it is done via criteria and as far back as I can remember (DSM 3), not all, but most major psychiatric disorders (thought, mood, anxiety and personailty disorders) have "social" criteria, such as

...."Impairment in function in one or more major areas: work, interpersonal relations or self care (markedly below the level prior to onset)---> for a child or adolescent there is failure to achieve expected level of interpersonal, academic, or occupational functioning"....

you wont find me defending anything marxist, in fact, i think marxism is totally based on faulty premises BECAUSE marx obviously knew less about biology than a modern third grader....

A really sickening and bizarre example where these two leftists thoughts converge is the left's postmodernist view of pedophilia. Due to their relativist debasement of both science and morals, radical leftists claim that pedophilia is not only a genuine sexual orientation, but they go further, to assert that pedophiles should not be discriminated against for their sexual urges. This is utterly and completely disgusting.

It's called pseudo-science and it's Cultural Marxism.

pedophiles...Nazis....I am much more concerned with what people DO than with what they think

 

[RomanKing]

I was also noting with those posts the vast numbers of highly rigorous academic publishing journals; highlighting how your assertion that intellectual dishonesty in one deplorable pay-to-publish online "journal" is in any way applicable to the wider realm of academic publishing runs into some pretty severe empirical brick walls.

Evidently, the problem I am pointing out is a discussion that is already taking place in liberal academia. Feel free to read the draft paper below:

...to read this very enlightening draft paper written by a number of social psychologists on precisely this topic, attacking the lack of political diversity in their profession and calling for reform.

 

[RomanKing]

you wont find me defending anything marxist, in fact, i think marxism is totally based on faulty premises BECAUSE marx obviously knew less about biology than a modern third grader....

And it appears that many liberal academics still adhere to that same standard.

 

[Commodore]

I am much more concerned with what people DO than with what they think

What people think has a huge influence on what they do though.

 

[mrt144]

What people think has a huge influence on what they do though.

What people project has a huge influence on what they do both publicly and privately.

 

[Ajidica]

Evidently, the problem I am pointing out is a discussion that is already taking place in liberal academia. Feel free to read the draft paper below:

You edited that in after I posted. Bad form mate.

 

[bernie14]

What people think has a huge influence on what they do though.

absolutely...but thought does not necessarily translate into action and i am very uncomfortable establishing a "thought police" mentality

EDIT:...I am even uncomfortable with a "speech police" mentality for that matter....

 

[RomanKing]

You edited that in after I posted. Bad form mate.

My post is time stamped 11 minutes before yours... Do you have anything at all to contribute to the discussion besides spam?

I have posted several of academic sources just now for discussion, so there should be no excuses for any spam if you have a serious intention in having a discussion.

 

[Lexicus]

My post is time stamped 11 minutes before yours... Do you have anything at all to contribute to the discussion besides spam?

According to my view, you finished editing it 3 minutes after he posted his reply.

 

[Ajidica]

My post is time stamped 11 minutes before yours... Do you have anything at all to contribute to the discussion besides spam?

I have posted several of academic sources just now for discussion, so there should be no excuses for any spam if you have a serious intention to have a discussion.

You posted it 28 minutes ago.
I responded 24 minutes ago.
You edited in the article 21 minutes ago.

As far as several academic sources, could you please refresh my memories as to which ones? I may have gotten distracted when you became really interested in pedos for a while. All I can recall you posting is a Breitbart article, some youtube videos I can't be bothered to watch, and what appears to be a blog post. If you think those comprise academic sources, I think I have found the source of your confusion regarding how peer reviewed academic publishing works.

you wont find me defending anything marxist, in fact, i think marxism is totally based on faulty premises BECAUSE marx obviously knew less about biology than a modern third grader....

What does biology have to do with Marx's comments on industrial society, social changes, and his observations on the relation between labor and capital?

 

[Commodore]

absolutely...but thought does not necessarily translate into action and i am very uncomfortable establishing a "thought police" mentality

Of course. No one should be punished for their thoughts. However, there are certain thoughts that, when expressed, act as "suspicion indicators" which means the person expressing those thoughts needs to be watched a little more closely than others.

 

[RomanKing]

As far as several academic sources, could you please refresh my memories as to which ones?

You have the ability to re-read like everyone else. I've posted it twice for you already.

All I can recall you posting is a Breitbart article, some youtube videos I can't be bothered to watch, and what appears to be a blog post.

By your own admission you haven't bothered to read any of the thread, or it's sources, and you continue to post spam, which leads one to believe that you have no intention to discuss anything.

Anyhow here's some new links as well, which reference academic studies on the matter and even link to some of these studies in the articles. They're also sourced in liberal papers I might add, so you no longer have any excuses.

Liberal bias in academia is destroying the integrity of research
"How reliable is academic research? Not very, it seems, after noting that the Journal of Vibration and Control, a reputable academic publication, had to retract 60 different papers over the summer.

The article, whose lead author is New York University’s Jonathan Haidt, finds that academic psychology has lost nearly all of its political diversity in the last 50 years and that the validity of the discipline has been “undermined” as a result. And while the authors note that greater political diversity would improve things, nonliberals face a “hostile climate and discrimination.”
http://nypost.com/2014/10/12/liberal-bias-in-academia-is-destroying-the-integrity-of-research/

How Not to Address Liberal Bias in Academia
"Politically, academia is about as unbalanced as Norman Bates. Attempts to justify it contain eerie echoes of a 1950s CEO explaining why blacks and women simply weren’t qualified to ever do anything more taxing than make coffee and sweep floors.

For a while now, Jonathan Haidt and the rest of the fine folks at Heterodox Academy have been patiently arguing that academia’s bias does matter. For one thing, it skews how research is done, and gets bias-tainted results."
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-02-22/how-not-to-address-liberal-bias-in-academia

A Confession of Liberal Intolerance
"WE progressives believe in diversity, and we want women, blacks, Latinos, gays and Muslims at the table — er, so long as they aren’t conservatives.

Universities are the bedrock of progressive values, but the one kind of diversity that universities disregard is ideological and religious. We’re fine with people who don’t look like us, as long as they think like us."
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/opinion/sunday/a-confession-of-liberal-intolerance.html?_r=0

 

[Ajidica]

Can't access the NYT article, apparently I've used up my monthly allotment of free articles.

The other two articles are both opinion pieces (the NY Post author has as her credentials for this subject such illuminating scholarly research as "Why Millennial Sex Sucks") and rely almost exclusively on one person, Jonathan Haidt, for the research. The Bloomberg article title is a bit clickbait-y but doesn't seem to say what you think it said. There is a bit of a liberal bias is some fields of academia, nobody is denying that (at the very least I am not). There is also a conservative bias among gun shop owners and owners of hunting good stores but I don't see you complaining about that. The NY Post article devolves quite quickly into the sort of trash traditionally found among the poorer articles put out by The Sun and decides cherry pick individual words in order to manufacture outrage.

HOWEVER, you said that you had posted academic sources.

I have posted several of academic sources just now for discussion, so there should be no excuses for any spam if you have a serious intention to have a discussion.

Two short opinion articles (one being a bit lazy in the reporting, the other working to manufacture faux outrage) and NYT opinion article I can't access due to paywall emphatically DO NOT constitute the academic sources you said you would provide.

 

[RomanKing]

If you were unable to find anything to discuss among the plethora of information that's been posted then It appears you have no intention to discuss anything and for that reason I will no longer be responding to your spam.

 

[Ajidica]

It appears you have no intentions in discussing anything and for that reason I will no longer respond to you.

So, you won't be providing the academic sources you said you would?
Not sure why you thought opinion pieces -poorly sourced ones at that- would constitute academic sources unless you are really unfamiliar with the concept of academic writing.

 

[bernie14]

What does biology have to do with Marx's comments on industrial society, social changes, and his observations on the relation between labor and capital?

"the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles"....i think the drive for reproductive success is much more likely to underlie human motives, as it does for the other life forms on this planet

 

[Ajidica]

"the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles"....i think the drive for reproductive success is much more likely to underlie human motives, as it does for the other life forms on this planet

Well, you see, that's what is known as an opinion. You believe the desire to bring some more little germ volcanoes into the world is what defines social structure, Marx believed it came out of relations between capital and labor. I feel that if forced to choose between the two Marx provides a better explanation for the transfer of political and economic power toward capitalists away from the aristocracy than sex drive.

 

[Lexicus]

"the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles"....i think the drive for reproductive success is much more likely to underlie human motives, as it does for the other life forms on this planet

It can be both, and I don't think it's clear that the issue of reproductive success is easily separable from the issue of class anyway.

 

[Perfection]

I think it's fair to note that academia has a liberal bias, and that liberal bias can at times hurt academia. However, I think extension to dismiss liberals or academics because of it is unfair.

 

[Arwon]

Acceptance of hoax article filled with gibberish presumably proves the field of nuclear physics is fake leftist pseudo intellectual garbage