Aug 16, 2025 07:57 PM
Heh, heh. Nope, science journals and magazines haven't stopped catering to the decolonization of knowledge, even during the Trump era.
- - - - - - - - - -
The journal Nature calls for “decolonization” of modern science (Jerry Coyne)
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2025/08/1...n-science/
INTRO: That Nature published this long comment, written by eight indigenous authors from five countries, is a sure sign of its surrender to “progressive” views that aim to change science from an endeavor finding truth about nature to an endeavor that’s a lever for social justice. Surprisingly, though, Nature allowed the authors to use the “progressive” term of “decolonization,” arguing explicitly that the science is the result of colonization of knowledge by white men from the Global North—a situation that must be recitified, pronto.
The authors give eight ways to rectify the “colonization”, all of them involving sacrificing merit for ethnicity, replacing modern science with “other ways of knowing,” and demanding both professional, monetary, and territorial reparations, even from those who never oppressed anybody. There must be equity in everything, they say: all ethnic groups must be represented in science jobs and funding in exact proportion (indeed, sometimes in higher proportion) than their presence in the population.
Further, the authors demand that indigenous science be taken on intellectual par with modern science (or, as they say, “Western science”), despite the local nature of indigenous knowledge and its lack of tools used by modern science (hypothesis testing, controls, and so on) that severely limits the ambit and value of indigenous knowledge.
The article also suffers from severe distortion of claims... (MORE - details)
- - - - - - - - - -
The journal Nature calls for “decolonization” of modern science (Jerry Coyne)
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2025/08/1...n-science/
INTRO: That Nature published this long comment, written by eight indigenous authors from five countries, is a sure sign of its surrender to “progressive” views that aim to change science from an endeavor finding truth about nature to an endeavor that’s a lever for social justice. Surprisingly, though, Nature allowed the authors to use the “progressive” term of “decolonization,” arguing explicitly that the science is the result of colonization of knowledge by white men from the Global North—a situation that must be recitified, pronto.
The authors give eight ways to rectify the “colonization”, all of them involving sacrificing merit for ethnicity, replacing modern science with “other ways of knowing,” and demanding both professional, monetary, and territorial reparations, even from those who never oppressed anybody. There must be equity in everything, they say: all ethnic groups must be represented in science jobs and funding in exact proportion (indeed, sometimes in higher proportion) than their presence in the population.
Further, the authors demand that indigenous science be taken on intellectual par with modern science (or, as they say, “Western science”), despite the local nature of indigenous knowledge and its lack of tools used by modern science (hypothesis testing, controls, and so on) that severely limits the ambit and value of indigenous knowledge.
The article also suffers from severe distortion of claims... (MORE - details)
