Saturday, October 1, 2016

Feminist Proposes to Destroy Science

Feminist PhD Candidate: Science Is Sexist Because It’s Not Subjective
College science classes are hostile to women and minorities because they use the scientific method, which assumes people can find reliable truths about the natural world through careful and sustained experimentation, concludes a recent dissertation by a doctoral candidate at the University of North Dakota.

Laura Parson, a student in the university’s education department, reviewed eight science class syllabi at a “Midwest public university” and said she discovered in them a hidden hostility to women and minorities:
Initial exploration of the STEM syllabi in this study did not reveal overt references to gender, such as through the use of gendered pronouns. However, upon deeper review, language used in the syllabi reflects institutionalized STEM teaching practices and views about knowledge that are inherently discriminatory to women and minorities by promoting a view of knowledge as static and unchanging, a view of teaching that promotes the idea of a passive student, and by promoting a chilly climate that marginalizes women.
Even though the course syllabi contained no “gendered assumptions” about students or other overtly discriminatory implications, Parson writes, they display prejudice against women and minorities because they refuse to entertain the possibility that “scientific knowledge is subjective.”

Throughout her dissertation, Parson assumes and asserts that women and minorities are uniquely challenged by the idea that science can provide objective information about the natural world. This is an unfair assumption, she says, because the concept of objectivity is too hard for women and minorities to understand. “[N]otions of absolute truth and a single reality” are “masculine,” she says, referring to poststructuralist feminist theory.
Yes, the point of science is to find new truths that will stand the test of time. The purpose of feminism is to destroy Western civilization, which they consider to be "the patriarchy". Killing science is just a means to that end. Fortunately few women scientists have drunk that much kool-aid.

Linked at Pirate's Cove above the line in the weekly "Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup" and links.

Wombat-socho has "Rule 5 Tuesday: Birthday Edition" up at The Other McCain.

1 comment:

  1. A dissertation that would be taken seriously only in the alternate universe of a subjective academic discipline.

    This is why hard science and engineering has no use for these areas, and the ignorant dolts they spawn.