/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9822054
Because /pol/tards are unironically low IQ.

>>9822054
Reality has a liberal bias

>>9822065
>>9822091

>>9822054
They aren't satisfied with sound bites, and actually think things through.
Duh.

>>9822054
It is not known as the logical left for no reason.

>>9822054
Lrn2élitist fgt pls

>>9822091
This

You can only be conservative by confirmation bias

>>9822054
>>9822016
bloody Peasant

>>9822054
Liberalism strives for progress in most areas, including scientific research.

Conservatives try their best to hold that research back, especially if it hurts their interests.

>>9822054
What you need to realise is for the most part politics is mainly a set on beliefs and does not operate on factual information since surveys can be biased and political opinions can easily change, the human condition is too fluid and too chaotic to pinpoint an actual correct solution so in short no one is ever right regardless of your political alignment and we mostly just delude ourselves that we are right when we don't actually know.

Now as for scientists mainly holding liberal views, it mainly comes down to classism: Since most children who become scientists will probably come from middleclass to upperclass families who will be encouraged to study and will be indoctrinated by their parents to hold liberal views. Now compare that to children of working class and poor families who will most likely not become scientists since they will not be encouraged to study and be indoctrinated to hold more conservative views. Go back 150 years and scientists had a different political bias since most sciences back then was a rich mans club.

>>9822229
>Middle class
Doesn't exist. I come from a working class background and was incouraged to study whatever I wanted as a baby. I'm by no means a liberal as I am not a capitalist. That being said I will always vote for the Democrats for simple reasons, they don't go out of their way to privatize life and subsidize fisheries and drill on public land, acknowledge the existence of climate change, they even pretend to give a shit about workers and the right to unionize, this all makes for policy that is demonstratably better than the more exterme conservative liberals.

>>9822229
>pile of claims
>they are just indoctrinated
>pile of claims
Aha okay bud.

>>9822054
Scientists will be awful at their job if they take things at face value. A lot of conservatives take things at face value.
Connect the dots.

>>9822242
>they don't go out of their way to privatize life and subsidize fisheries and drill on public land
the oilfields should be nationalized tho

>>9822249
>A lot of conservatives take things at face value.
>implying liberals don't

Have you watched CNN lately?

>>9822054
its pretty easy to be optimistic about human behavior when everyone around you is smart and rich.

>>9822242
>the right to unionize
unions are parasites. They have the highest political influence out of any organization, their political contributions dwarf anything contributed by big bad meanie ebul corporations. The amount some high ranking union bureaucrat can receive in benefits and wages is absolutely infuriating considering the amount of work they actually put in which is fuck all.

Nepotism, just like any other business or industry oversaturated with cultists.

I'm confused, are you arguing that scientists are pro-lassiez faire, or pro-socialism? Because they're definitely pro-anyone-who-will-fund-them.

Scientists may be experts in their field but they shouldn't be looked at for economic advice.

>>9822272
I don't agree. It's pretty easy to become pessimistic about human behaviour when you realize how sociopathic, egoistic and scruple-
less the smartest and richest can be.

>>9822277
This only true to this extent in America because you guys forgot that you need to legislate the interface between unions and the government. Everywhere else in the western democratic world its illegal for private interest groups to lobby, pay off, or directly fund public offices.

>>9822242
>middle class doesnt exist
What do you even mean by this? Demonstrably there is a whole strata of American society who are not getting kickbacks either for being too poor or too rich.

>>9822316
Obviously pro-laissez-faire if he's talking of liberals. Do you really think someone would just go on 4chan and use words wrong?

>>9822054
>*is
Because unlike you, we don't latch on to personality cults.

>>9822229
>be me
>family makes shit money
>rather conservative
>"anon, you must go to school. you do not want to live a life paycheck to paycheck."
>go to school
>remain politically unaffiliated
The political parties are simply ways to keep you distracted from what's really happening desu. If they really cared, they would take out the middle man and have people conduct surveys on high-security computers at designated locations where they submit votes on what they believe is the most important issue right now, then next they propose solutions to said issue, then next they vote on the most popular solutions, and then whatever gets voted as the most accepted solution to be implemented should go into effect (in a nutshell). Votes would be public, containing information on what type of person made what vote (not their name or identity. for example, it would say an experienced doctor at xyz company believes blah blah blah).

>>9822054
you generally need an open mind if you're dealing with science. ie. if you make a discovery you can't just close your mind and say "nu uh this isn't true" because of a bias you have.

>>9822054
Most serious scientists don't actually waste their time thinking about politics very much.

I would say that they are rather libertarians than liberals. Where there are politics, there are also hordes of stupid people and unneeded emotions. Why bother with all of that? It's better to stay as an individualist and focus on gaining better understanding of the world

>>9822619
lol so ironic

>>9822456
Middle class be shrinking year after year

>>9822789
For something to shrink, it must exist.

>>9822054
Science requires an above average IQ. Liberalism is associated with higher IQ.
You're confusing actual eliteness with the mere attitude of elitism.

>>9822091
this tbqh

>>9822054
Because scientists have to go to university and universities have required electives which are the breeding grounds for leftist rhetoric therefore most scientists these days were exposed to leftist propaganda for years.
>>9822091
It doesn't however have a leftist one.
>>9822142
Most modern leftist dogma also requires a confirmation bias for example the wage gap, privilege, the idea that the police are racist...

>>9822146
How do you define liberal and conservative?

>>9822065
Sure, that may be the case for conservatives, but why isn't science filled with libertarians?
http://righteousmind.com/largest-study-of-libertarian-psych/
https://reason.com/archives/2014/06/13/are-conservatives-dumber-than-liberals

>>9822054
It isn't, it's just that lobby owned conservatives in the anglosphere have made science a partisan issue.

>>9822146
explain Space X then, retard

>>9822065
That was an incomplete sentence. See me after class.

>>9822054
>>9822091
>>9822105
>>9822142
there's quite a few major objective facts that both sides ignore to fit an emotional desire
liberals
>fetuses are human
>the wage gap doesn't exist
>higher taxation doesn't lead to a more lucrative nation
>everything related to the term "assault weapon"
conservatives
>evolution is real
>global warming is real
>racism is real
>it's not OK to be an asshole

the average liberal nowadays believes that Trump is actually unintelligent and bumbled his way to the White House by accident and/or is a genuinely evil person hell bent on a fascist dictatorship. The average conservative is basically the same as they were 10 years ago except nobody gives a shit about the gays anymore. Which means there's still plenty of dumb hicks who still can't do algebra.

Both mainstream ways of thought are retarded and filled with retards from top to bottom.

>>9822054
Science is about progress, so the values of progressivism and humanism are closely tied to it.
Leftists skew more toward these values, hence the association

>>9823665
>conservatives
>>evolution is real

Liberals are the ones that pay lip service to "evolution" (just to shit on fundies) but think it stops at the neck.

>>9822054
To be interested in academia you have to have an open mind in the first place
It turns out liberals score higher on opennes in the big five than conservatives

>>9823665
No one argues that a fetus is human, they argue if its conscious and/or if the potential for consciousness is valid. The wage gap demonstrably exists, the argument is how much of it is malicious and how much is a product of the difference in psychology and behaviour.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap#United_States

>>9823800
Liberals flip the fuck out when you mention anything having to do with evolution applying to humans, not just cognition. The problem with trying to lump conservatives into one bag, though, is that there really is no such thing. The only thing uniting the "right" is the opposition to the left. There are degenerate gay lolbergs, evangelical christcucks, stormfags, paleoconservative monarchists, etc etc. Some of them are very empirical and embrace things like natural selection, genetics, etc while others are guided entirely by religious doctrine.

Funding obviously.

The scientists in nazi germany were mostly not racist nor authoritarian either, but they knew what's going to happen when they publicly tell their opinion. Politicians are paid to have an opinion in that field - scientists stating their opinion leads to unnecessary shitstorms.

>>9822091
What does this statement actually mean? Reality is the most unequal unfair existence we know of so liberalism cannot be applied to the real world at all.

>>9822733
>Why bother?

Politics directly leads to the suffering and or death of living souls. Not necessarily a moral imperative for a scientist but it is a legitimate reason.

>Majority of scientists come from middle/upper class families. (Sheltered livelihood, lack of real struggles)
>Go on to high end/elite colleges and universities (left-wing bias)

I imagine that these two are the defining factors as to why. Also worth mentioning that it's quite the fallacy to assume that because someone holds an intellectual occupation such as a scientist that they have this general superior wisdom that can be applied to all fields of life such as politics.

>>9822850
>Because scientists have to go to university and universities have required electives which are the breeding grounds for leftist rhetoric therefore most scientists these days were exposed to leftist propaganda for years.
You have it backwards. Unis are breeding grounds for leftist rhetoric because higher IQ people collect there.
If anyone is being "programmed" it's almost certainly the right wing, particularly the religious right. Suggestibility is associated with lower IQ, so their leaders have little problem inculcating them with contradictory belief systems.

>>9822054
>Why are science full of liberal elitist?
I think that most scientists couldn't give a fuck about politics and spew fourth whatever politics is currently mainstream.

>>9824427
Why can't you vote 'liberal' if you're racist and homophobe and they're offering financial incentives?

>>9824596
You certainly can

>>9824601
I was about to make a snide comment about Muslims but then I remembered that yes, chavs are retarded.

>>9822813
>High cognitive ability leads to lower prejudice, net a large set of confounds
>net a large set of confounds
Is my cognitive ability just too low to write a sentence like this?

>>9823883
>muh openness
What a fucking disaster the name "openness" turned out to be. No, it isn't the opposite of being closed-minded.

>>9824251
>The wage gap demonstrably exists
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap#United_States

>>9824810
Not an argument.

The gender pay gap is real and cannot be explained away by "durr women don't like STEM". Even when accounting for possible explanations, there is still pay disparity.

>>9824814
>Even when accounting for possible explanations, there is still pay disparity.
false. When it comes to same experience, same age, same job, women generally outperform their male peers

almost all wage gap statistics compare the total money made by women comparing full time and part time together, focusing on specifics fields with less woman in them, or ignoring factors such as leaving and returning to the work force to raise children.

If a woman does the exact same thing as a man in terms of their career, they will get the same pay. It's illegal to pay a woman less for the same job as a man, end of story.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqZPMfxFj5M

>>9824825
>The raw wage gap data shows that a woman would earn roughly 73.7% to 77% of what a man would earn over their lifetime. More precisely, data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics indicates the median earnings of female workers working full-time to be roughly 77% of the median earnings of their male counterparts.[107] However, when controllable variables are accounted for, such as job position, total hours worked, number of children, and the frequency at which unpaid leave is taken, in addition to other factors, a United States Department of Labor study, conducted by the CONSAD Research Group, found in 2008 that the gap can be brought down from 23% to between 4.8% and 7.1%. Noting that the raw wage gap is the result of a number of factors, the report said that the raw gap should not be used to justify corrective action, adding that "Indeed, there may be nothing to correct. The differences in raw wages may be almost entirely the result of the individual choices being made by both male and female workers."[108]

There's still a gap, it's just not a large as people say it is.

>>9824832
>However, when controllable variables are accounted for, such as job position, total hours worked, number of children, and the frequency at which unpaid leave is taken, in addition to other factors, a United States Department of Labor study, conducted by the CONSAD Research Group, found in 2008 that the gap can be brought down from 23% to between 4.8% and 7.1%.
so the 77% figure is an outright falshood

>>9824835
Correct.

There's a gap, but it's nowhere near as significant as the left would have you believe. 4% is still pretty large given the scale of the workforce, but nowhere near the 77% figure.

>finally agreeing with /sci/ users on something

>>9824842
>4% is still pretty large given the scale of the workforce
not really
but otherwise yes I agree with you mostly

>>9822054
They aren't breh. The most math-heavy university departments are usually the most conservative.

>>9824427
Assuming that correlation=causation.

smugface.pepe.jpeg.png

No. Has it occurred to you that low-IQ whites are actually forced to be around the average black person, rather than a middle class black person, and that's what made them racist?

>>9824835
The 77% is before being controlled and also wasnt the anons point, he simply claimed there is no wage gap which is demonstrably false.
>>9824825
> It's illegal to pay a woman less for the same job as a man, end of story.
You need to be 18+ to post on 4 chan
>>9824842
this
>>9824843
>not really
Its nice being a man

>>9822054
Conservatism is tribalism, which involves rejecting every other tribe's point of view for the one favorable to you. Science, OTOH, specifically implements peer review to get away from narrowminded biases.
Conservatism is unscientific by its very nature.

>>9826365
Conservatism is, at it's core, the principle of resisting changing the way in which human civilization operates if that change lacks sufficient merit. That same sentiment is also a core component in science and is the reason why we have a peer review process instead of just accepting any new experiment results that are released.

>>9826365
>Rejecting every other tribe's point of view for the one favorable to you

Or it could just be that my way of living is objectively superior to yours and you have nothing of value to offer and even if you do you will not be willing to give up the harmful portions of what you believe. People who embrace any change just to break the monotony of order and reason are the worst of the worst.

>>9826376
>lacks sufficient merit
That's a rather empty statement as the difference lies in the determination of sufficiency. A conservative considers the default position as being the one most in his personal favor and won't move from that until you punch through every layer of his biases. The practitioners of science specifically work to undermine their biases. They understand that truth doesn't care what they believe, while conservatives think it does its damnedest to follow them.

>>9826387
You really don't belong here.

>>9826365
liberal tend to be as biased if not more biased than conservatives.
For example, if conservatives read an article that supposedly shows that one race is genetically more intelligent than another, they're equally likely to believe it to be true, regardless of which race (black, white) is supposed to be smarter.
Liberals on the other hand are only likely to believe it to be true if the article says blacks are genetically superior.

As for conservatism being unscientific by its very nature, again, no more or no less than progrssivism, which for example could be represented by unscientific beliefs like universal equalitarianism or an aversion for pattern recognition.

>>9826394
You literally just said that conservatives were unscientific with that. Science is tentative, while conservatives will snatch up what they want to believe.

>>9824312
>cutting taxes for the rich leads to jobs/better investment
>consumer protection is red tape
>earned benefits are entitlements, that money is for weapons contractors!
>estate tax is a 'death tax' that will effect anyone that doesn't have a literal estate
>union busting laws are 'right to work' laws
>socialized medicine is bad (meanwhile demonstrably cheaper, with better health outcomes)
I am all for guns and better controls on immigration but where it counts, reality has a liberal bias.

>>9822065
>>9822142
Based

>>9824276
The left and the right are most easily identified as IQ pincer movements and producer/producer parasite/parasite alliances
Intelligence and political affiliation (at least in the US) goes:
Right - libertarians who want to be left alone, can take care of themselves, don’t want taxes, don’t like encouraging inefficiency
Left - rick and Morty viewing dunning Kruger effects in the 90-115 range who hate rednecks and love blacks (being somewhere else)
Right - rural and suburban retards/workers who don’t like globalisation - Around 90 iq
Left - the n-words 85 and below. The mestizo underclass, program dependent people hoping for gibs

The top rank of oligarchs is another parasite class who are atm left, although only currently because the left are the most open border pro-military industrial complex and other complexes and they don’t want off the gravy train/are cosmopolitans who view DRUMF and his nascent, kind-of national socialism as a threat

Drumpth makes a big display of Kanye West’s support to try and shrink one side of the left wing claw by getting the negros to vote for him

>>9824427
Good lord that’s arrogant
Left wing opinions are a cargo cult for intelligence or a status signal to show that one can suffer social decay with no repurcusions
Not that it’s all invalid, but c’mon man
I’ve gotten HDs in gender studies and cultural anthropology and I hate those people

Scientist here. I don't care to speak for all scientists, but I can offer my reasoning:

1) Creationism. Republicans favor creationism much more than Democrats. They think scientists all over the world are conspiring against them. Same with climate science. What kind of cuck scientist would hang out with these fools?
2) War on Christmas? That is grade A retardation.
3) These people are supposed to be Christians, when they reserve so much hatred for anyone that looks different from them? If there is a sociopathic stance on an issue bereft of all empathy, nowadays I mostly expect the Republicans to take it, e.g. when fascists run cars over protesters, the protesters are the ones in the wrong.
4) Over 60% of Trump supporters believe Obama is Muslim. The Republican base, as a whole, is filled with stupid bigots who can't even fact check the most basic things. Embracing them equals social death within polite society.
5) Far-right losers. You know how Peterson spends a lot of time having to deal with the losers who scream about Jews and blood and soil? They are far worse than the worst of SJWs.
6) The Republican party is filled with spineless cowards who have no principles, sacrificing all ideals regarding the free market because they are too afraid to piss off the retarded Trumpbase.

Remember that liberals being "scientific" is what gave us the March for Science

>>9826494
>Right - libertarians
Wrong.

>>9826569
James “Meals On Wheels” Fields has a good chance of being much more nuanced than vehicular terrorism
He’d just been “waved off” with a gun after his people had been physically attacked for hours and not simply abandoned by police but shoved into a baying mob. His car was seen being struck once just before he floored it. The situation is murky.
Look at all those people with sticks who chased him 2 seconds after the impact, hitting the car (from memory smashing out the windows).
It may have been vehicular terrorism after looking for an excuse or it may have been a scared kid panicking, or it may have been a boiling over of frustration, or a combination of some of the above. Neither of us can know.

>>9826614
Democrats have a higher IQ than repubs but libertarians have a higher IQ than democrats

>>9826569
>Scientist here.
ya right

>>9822054
bc they are not real science

>>9822054
Easiest way to tell if some is real science or leftist pseudoscience are the results. Real science must result in new products for the marketplace. Leftist pseudoscience must result in nothing substantial.

>>9826679
products? The goal of science is to spur capitalistic or materialistic progress? Maybe for some fields but this is pretty crazy if you start going subject by subject or discipline by discipline.

>>9826352
4.8% is literally statistically insignificant.

>>9824427
If anything the overbearing "elite club" mentality of universities turned me off of progressive smuggery. I highly doubt there is any real quantifiable connection between intelligence and political leanings. Primarily because most political issues are subjective consequences of an individual, and arbitrary, moral framework. It seems more reasonable to me that a correlation between lower intelligence and the right wing, for instance, is easily explainable by the capitalization of the working class by right wing groups. While left wing demographics have shifted towards the more fashionable creative class which includes academics.

>>9824427
>psychology is a meme-tier field unless I can cherry-pick studies that support my political agenda,

you faggots are just as bad as the poltards you lambast. If I could only nuke one board, I'd spare the ponyfuckers and erase this brainlet circlejerk.

>>9824427
the religious right doesnt exist anymore
millenials, regardless of religion, accept evolution and gay marriage as here to stay. They don't give a shit about politics or they're liberal

>>9827521
>Nazis don't exist
Uhhh... did you miss who got elected President?

>>9822054
>/
to be a scientist is to be an elite.

>>9824825
>false
it's only false if women decide not to have children

>>9823603
Because scientists aren't stupid enough to think that a free market works in human society

>>9824251
side note, don't use the term "wage-gap" as "earnings-gap" is a more accurate one

>>9827544
>>9822139

>>9822054
>science
>not humanities

>>9822054
high iq

Only leaders are elites people that follow will NEVER be equals

>>9827526
Fuck off shareblue.

>>9822054
The university intellectuals also play an important role in carrying out the System's trick. Though they like to fancy themselves independent thinkers, the intellectuals are (allowing for individual exceptions) the most oversocialized, the most conformist, the tamest and most domesticated, the most pampered, dependent, and spineless group in America today. As a result, their impulse to rebel is particularly strong. But, because they are incapable of independent thought, real rebellion is impossible for them. Consequently they are suckers for the System's trick, which allows them to irritate people and enjoy the illusion of rebelling without ever having to challenge the System's basic values.

Because they are the teachers of young people, the university intellectuals are in a position to help the System play its trick on the young, which they do by steering young people's rebellious impulses toward the standard, stereotyped targets: racism, colonialism, women's issues, etc. Young people who are not college students learn through the media, or through personal contact, of the "social justice" issues for which students rebel, and they imitate the students. Thus a youth culture develops in which there is a stereotyped mode of rebellion that spreads through imitation of peers—just as hairstyles, clothing styles, and other fads spread through imitation.

>>9829091
Fuck off /pol/

>>9823665
>higher taxation doesn’t lead to a more lucrative nation


very vague, and thus probably false since every nation with higher progressive tax rates from the bottom up are measurably ahead of the US is almost everything that matters minus gdp and even then, per capita the us doesn’t even compare. only thing you can argue is some business statistics and competitiveness due to the tech hub and wall st

>>9822054
Higher education is expensive and Liberals tend to be more wealthy and to live with better access to cities and expensive universities. Liberals are consumers, Conservatives are producers, that's why you see more Liberals in all of the most enviable positions in society.

>>9824842
>4% is still pretty large given the scale of the workforce
Even though your own source said the following?
>The differences in raw wages may be almost entirely the result of the individual choices being made by both male and female workers

>>9823665
mostly based post

>>9829455
I disagree, I think a lot of the very wealthy tend toward conservatism because a lot of conservative practices conserve wealth. Alternatively, liberal additions to government spending on welfare, other public care systems, accessible medicine etc make it appealing to people with less money.

>>9822054
>Why are science full of liberal elitist?
>Why are science full of elitist?
They think their education makes them better than other people. They can't see how their life style or the technology they create is responsible for the unemployment or exploitation of the middle and working class. They can't see how their work powers the military industrial complex. They think they're building a better future for all the "ignorant" people, and their self image is dependent on maintaining that view. They're elitist, because they think their scientific knowledge makes their values truer than others.

If they're more liberal, it's just a manifestation of their elitism. See >>9829104

>>9829513
Agreed. Mostly.

communism is inevitable, scientists tend to think on longer timescales.

>>9829108
(((you)))

>>9829523
The most wealthy tend to be conservative yes, but in general the higher end of the middle class, New Yorkers, San Franciscans etc. are liberals, people wealthy enough to afford all that they need, but poor enough to envy the wealthy. Then there's the countless million and billionaires in Hollywood who lean so hard to the Left that they fall over. Liberal additions to government spending on welfare etc. make it appealing to SOME people with less money, mainly black communities who've been told that they're entitled such payments as white people owe them [these also tend to be the worst places in America for black people to live]. The majority of the actual working class tend toward conservatism from what I've seen.

>>9826444
Checked. Based jew

Are HOMOPOCs /ourguys/?

>>9829543
White conservatives will naturally survive during the upcoming race war. We understand natural order, and understand our biological urge to protect our own alleles, so we will fight. The anti-racist whites will die off.

>>9829557
>the upcoming race war
Do you have any concrete predictions for how/when this will occur.

>>9829543
I think the biggest reason a lot of wealthy people are liberal is to appeal to their fanbase. Popular figures that express conservative views (especially strong ones) often lose their popularity, or at least their admiration, in most circles. I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that's because of the left's focus on helping the downtrodden, gay/whatever, and that not associating with views that support them becomes anti-gay/whatever, and then you're evil. I think in this way there's a real back and forth between idols being liberal to appeal to masses, and masses becoming liberal to fit in with their idol. Add legalization of recreational drugs like weed, added support for mental illnesses, and the left is a one-stop catering market to a lot of lower income working class people.

>>9822733
this, exactely

>>9822096
>Jeb Bush is missing

Ahahahaha

>>9826387
>monotony of order and reason

Are you muslim?

>>9822054
Because there's literally no reason to be a 'scientist'. It only attracts people wanting to flaunt their intelligence / ego.

>>9826698
What's the margin of error? If it's smaller than 4.8% then you're wrong.

>>9829543
Social conservatism is a form of economic self defence for the poor
It makes things like stable marriages, intrasex bonding among workers for collective action, a pleasant social environment etc possible

>>9829104
How was he so right? Is this the power of stem?

>>9824251
The wage gap debates systematically discard the differences between the ways women and men work.
Wage gap is a difference between individuals first.

>>9829104
>real rebellion is impossible for them.
What is the point of rebellion when you're among the people who benefit the system the most?

>Muh left right dichotomy
>Haha liberals are so stupid
>Haha conservatives are so stupid

Fuck anyone who promotes this partisan politics which is killing science from all angles. The amount of leftist indoctrination in STEM fields is as disgusting as the conservatives blowing trillions on bombing brown people instead of science. You are all cunts fuck you.

>>9822316
Most scientists don't have the intellectual experience or discipline to have any real opinions outside of their narrow field of training. They just follow along with the crowd on social media and try to seem as nice as possible.

>>9822529
This. I come from a similar background too. Every 4 years, the powers in charge just like to keep people bickering over who's guy wins what is essentially just a nationwide popularity contest.

Meanwhile, the House and Senate are coming up with bills which sound good, but in actuality have "riders" written in at the last moment which fucks over the nation.

How so many people don't realize this boggles my mind.

>>9824842
If it was that large then any rational employer would hire all women.

>>9829968
Most people do realize this, but there's no effective way to do anything about it. The toxic shit on TV and the crazies bickering over minutiae are just flailing out of frustration.

>>9829939
True, and it's even worse now that leftists are also bombing brown people to trial test 1984.

>>9830006
People are not rational therefore the economic system based on people are also not rational.

>>9822054
Perhaps because the current president of the USA has a very strained relationship with facts. I only wish the same disregard for reality that the fringe left exhibits would be scrutinized equally harshly. Not only are they as bad as trump, but they actively pour fuel on the fire propping up the false equivalency narrative that the right expertly pushes

>>9829939
False equivalence, although you are right that fringe leftist lunatics should be purged from academia and shunned

>>9829889
have you never taken statistics? Standard measurement for statistical significance is 5%

>>9829939
>blowing trillions on bombing brown people instead of science
this is honestly the best description of the Obama presidency I ever heard

>>9829108
we could just be friends?

>>9830091
faggot

>>9822813
Have you read the thing? The author implies that the Symbol Digits Modalities Test measures cognitive ability, similarly to an IQ test, when in reality it's intended only to screen for impairment. They also call a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.2 "strong".

Even the title is full of spin. The paper claims to unearth the "root" cause, when the whole thing is just predicated on the assertion that correlation = causation.

Would it surprise anyone to know that the author (pic related) is a social scientist?

>>9830226

>>9830197
Did you seriously reply with more partisan garbage?

>HURR ITS OBUMMERS FAULT

Go jump off a bridge and spare the gene pool from your drone tier intelligence.

>>9822242
What a load of shit, you can tell what class people are just by looking at them

>>9822142
You can only be left wing through confirmation bias too.

>>9827526
*snap*

>>9830652
I replied to a partisan post explaining that when Libs had two terms back to back they doubled down on W's mistakes and did jack shit for science so badly that Space X and Tesla even exist

>>9822054
Do you expect voters of Donald "climate change is a hoax created by the Chinese" Trump to be scientists?

>>9830721
Yeah wow the left is just as bad as the right, my point exactly.

People on the right care more about private and individual enterprise.
That's a lot harder to do in academia than it is in the private sector.
Also, people like that make more money, and the rich are also more likely to lean to the right, so it goes both ways.

The only problem with this post is that it's not inflammatory enough, so I probably won't get any (you)s. This is the sad world we live in,

>Thread filled with hundreds of "THIS retarded strawman is a conservative" "well THIS retarded strawman is a LIBERAL" shit for four fucking days
>Thread remains up on /sci/ - Science and Math
>Thread will hit bump limit and then they'll make more and continue this, every post acting like they're the only ones who see the big picture and are definitively laying down why political parties form and why the one they picked is the one True Scientists pick and is objectively correct
Read a goddamn book and stop arguing about politics like Fox and CNN are the source of everything you know you worthless cunts

>>9830744
I'll give you a (you) man. It's sort of an inevitable facet of a positive feedback loop system, since a positive feedback loop can become evolutionary very quickly.

Making money allows you to make more money, etc. etc- which has become synonymous with success in life. This makes behaviors that allow for more money making to be heavily selected for, creating certain societal patterns of sets of behaviors. That's not to say in America the right/left split is necessarily along those lines, but people who do fall into the behavioral set that perpetuates capital gain are likely on the right, and observationally people who don't conflate capital gain to success in life seem more likely to be on the left.

Anyways, thanks for your thoughtful post anon.

>>9830767
Thanks for the (you).
Anyway, I think you rely too much on the second part of my argument.

When you think about it, the whole left-right divide is about the individual (laissez-faire, emphasis on self-reliance, weaker/non-existent safety nets) vs the community (govt. regulation, subsidized healthcare, more safety nets).

Why would someone in the first group take a job where you literally have to beg the govt for funds to do anything, and where almost every paper has 3+ contributors? It just doesn't fit in with the worldview.

>>9830789
Ah, sorry there. I was trying more to give my rationalization to it, but I don't really think I worded myself very well.

You're definitely right about that. Kind of puts into question whether there are really "types of people" like that, and sort of mechanistically how people become one way or the other.

>>9822054
For one, scientists are typically people who come from relatively wealthy households (can afford a lot of education), which tend to be more liberal.

Also, not that being a scientist or doing research isn't good, but conservatives tend to be more pragmatic with their choices in employment, either opting to not go into anything above undergrad studies, or not going into higher education at all.

Also its not fair to say science is full of liberals, there are quite a few independent scientists.

>>9829968
>reddit spacing
Go back now.

>>9829927
notice how I said differences in psychology and behaviour

>>9824427
>low IQ = more likely to be racist
Sure
>racist = more likely to be conservative
Sure
>therefore conservatism promotes racism
This does not follow logically
>therefore conservatism is promoted by those with lower IQ
This does not follow logically.

>>9830197
Best description of almost every US presidency, there have even been presidents elected off of a platform of "we have the capability and I have the will".

>>9830234
that is the best wojak i've ever seen

The fact that /sci/ doesn't believe in racial differences in intelligence and cranial capacities means you definitely should not take this board seriously.

>>9830193
Please don't confuse the estimated difference in percentage vs the actual p-value. It doesn't make you look good. The cited part of the study was:

>a United States Department of Labor study, conducted by the CONSAD Research Group, found in 2008 that the gap can be brought down from 23% to between 4.8% and 7.1%.

This is saying their confidence interval for the percentage difference in wage gap is (4.8%, 7.1%), which indeed shows statistical significance (confidence intervals that are not statistically significant contains 0, this interval doesn't contain 0).

>>9831319
thanks, it's a real gem, one of my personal favorites