Archive | discrimination RSS for this section

How academia’s liberal bias is killing social science

One of the greatest puzzlers for those who have to live with the end result of liberal & feminist policies is how they get to be justified in the face of the fact that they clearly don’t work. Wouldn’t there be academic research to back up that objective fact? Wouldn’t there be non-liberal academics to point out that the emperor has no clothes, and provide a counter-argument to bad policy?

As it turns out, the social sciences are awash in academics with a liberal bent, who in one survey confessed this little bombshell:

In one survey they conducted of academic social psychologists, “82 percent admitted that they would be at least a little bit prejudiced against a conservative [job] candidate.” Eighty-two percent! It’s often said discrimination works through unconscious bias, but here 82 percent even have conscious bias.

Such overt bias against non-liberal academics can result in some “surprising” study results like that of a (liberal) scientist:

…a study that sought to show that conservatives reach their beliefs only through denying reality achieved that result by describing ideological liberal beliefs as “reality,” surveying people on whether they agreed with them, and then concluding that those who disagree with them are in denial of reality — and lo, people in that group are much more likely to be conservative!

While studies like this have nothing to do with science, in a field with such pervasive groupthink, it can get published in peer-reviewed journals and passed off as “science,” to applause and accolades by the author’s peers.

It doesn’t stop there – one study submitted articles on different test studies to a number of peer-review boards. Each study used the same methodology, the only difference was how the purported findings either went for or against the liberal worldview.

I’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader to conclude which studies got criticized and rejected, and which ones “passed muster.”

What’s the danger to this kind of all-minds-think-alike groupthink? Simply put:

Social sciences and humanities cannot be completely divorced from the philosophy of those who practice it. And groupthink causes some questions not to be asked, and some answers not to be overly scrutinized. It is making our science worse. Anyone who cares about the advancement of knowledge and science should care about this problem.

The original article is here.

The draft academic paper on the over-representation of liberal world-views in social psychology and recommendation for change is here.

Let Me Reach with Kim Saeed

Narcissistic Abuse | Narcissist Abuse Support | Surviving Narcissistic Abuse | Narcissistic Abuse Recovery Program


Truth and Light

Things that We have Heard and Known

Uttering dark sayings from of old.


Childbirth and mothering across ages and cultures

Grace for the road

Seeing God's goodness in the unexpected path.


Vindicate the weak and fatherless; do justice to the afflicted and destitute. Psalm 82:3

The Rational Male

Demystifying intersexual dynamics

Sola Gratia

Sola Fide

Philosophies of a Disenchanted Scholar

Where the truth is served in a bittersweet pill.

Thy Light and Thy Truth

Emítte lucem tuam, et veritáem tuam


...integrating Christian faith and knowledge in the public square

Barefoot Whispers

Medical doctor, book-lover, aspirant adventurer

Henry Dampier

On the outer right side of history

Breaking through illusions

Seeing the world with new eyes

Notes From a Red Pill Girl

A site for women interested in a red pill perspective (where men are welcome too!)