"When Reason Goes on Holiday" delves into this topic. The author's focus is on philosophy professors and departments around WWII and how many refused to let go of their beliefs in Stalin and of Stalinism/Marxism even after many of his and it's atrocities were revealed.
In general, he poses the question of how can a group with the purpose of finding truth be so blinded by political beliefs, and makes the argument that there has been an anti-conservative bias in academia and specifically philosophy departments in this country for at least 100+ years.
I bring all of the biases of a consultant for Juul Labs to this topic, but you may be interested as to how at least some of these issues are playing out in the field of nicotine and tobacco research.
Here's a commentary in the house journal, Nicotine & Tobacco Research, of the main professional society (the Society for Research on Nicotine & Tobacco--yes, this field is creative!), from early May:
Commercial Tobacco and Nicotine Industry-Funded Research Has No Place in SRNT and Nicotine & Tobacco Research - Rose & Tan et al calling for exclusion of research and participation in the society from those with commercial, non-medicinal, ties - https://academic.oup.com/ntr/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ntr/ntae109/7664584
There have been two letters responding to the commentary:
If you have questions, Steve, feel free to reach out. I have a lot of history/context in this field I've committed my career to, and I sure want it to improve.
"When Reason Goes on Holiday" delves into this topic. The author's focus is on philosophy professors and departments around WWII and how many refused to let go of their beliefs in Stalin and of Stalinism/Marxism even after many of his and it's atrocities were revealed.
In general, he poses the question of how can a group with the purpose of finding truth be so blinded by political beliefs, and makes the argument that there has been an anti-conservative bias in academia and specifically philosophy departments in this country for at least 100+ years.
Interesting - will have to check that out! Here's the link for anyone else who's interested: https://www.amazon.com/When-Reason-Goes-Holiday-Philosophers/dp/1594038791
The interesting problem is that academia self-discredits more or less constantly now by using the “G” word (gender) in any scientific setting.
It will be soon called the lost decades because any research with uses nonsensical undefined terminology in calculations will be useless.
I bring all of the biases of a consultant for Juul Labs to this topic, but you may be interested as to how at least some of these issues are playing out in the field of nicotine and tobacco research.
Here's a commentary in the house journal, Nicotine & Tobacco Research, of the main professional society (the Society for Research on Nicotine & Tobacco--yes, this field is creative!), from early May:
Commercial Tobacco and Nicotine Industry-Funded Research Has No Place in SRNT and Nicotine & Tobacco Research - Rose & Tan et al calling for exclusion of research and participation in the society from those with commercial, non-medicinal, ties - https://academic.oup.com/ntr/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ntr/ntae109/7664584
There have been two letters responding to the commentary:
Open Science, Transparency, and Disclosure of Data is What the Society for Research on Nicotine & Tobacco Should be About - Cummings et al - https://academic.oup.com/ntr/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ntr/ntae147/7691579; and
Proposed Redefinition of “Tobacco and Nicotine Industry”: An Industry Perspective - Weiss - https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntae160
This is a complex and fraught arena, loaded with painful history.
Comments and advice from those not so close to it are welcomed! Thank you.
Hi Joe, thanks for this. It's all new to me. Will check it out!
If you have questions, Steve, feel free to reach out. I have a lot of history/context in this field I've committed my career to, and I sure want it to improve.
Will do - thanks very much, Joe!