Free speech.

[pritch]

those that go for real science.

Sometimes LOL just doesn't cover it. That is fucking hilarious coming from a guy who posts links to Alex Jones. Pure gold.

[Blackbird]

Explains what?
Illuminate me what is self evident, please!
Different mind set? Perhaps, a good social scientist is no less of a scientist, they are simply interested in understanding different things. Science is not a particular discipline, science is a way to gain understanding of the world around us so I am not sure what you mean by "real" science in this context.

True Science: the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

Kiwi Biker opinion: a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge

[Ocean1]

HR and admin? Ok, I will bite, what evidence do you have to substantiate this claim?

Ah come on now, how can you be unaware that academia has been largely socialist/liberal leaning for generations? And continues to head further in that direction wrt the gen pop all the time.

I notice this the other day: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/educ...ural-diversity

But you're presumably capable of a little research yourself...

[Ulsterkiwi]

For those who persist with the idea that Universities are the seat of leftist-nanny state-protectionism just a wee note about a work email I have just received.

Its interesting that the vaccination issue has been brought up in this thread. Andrew Wakefield was former doctor who published a study in the Lancet a few years ago presenting evidence that the MMR vaccine was linked to the incidence of autism. The publication of the study in a high impact journal like The Lancet, was in itself testament to the principles of free speech which science, medicine and academia aspire to; as what was presented in the study clearly went contrary to accepted knowledge at that time, i.e. vaccines or at least the MMR vaccine was not safe.
Subsequent to the publication of the study and the huge controversy it created, it was discovered that Mr Wakefield had in fact fabricated the data which were presented in his published paper and there was actually no substance to the claims made in it. Mr Wakefield was struck off the medical register as a consequence and his paper was withdrawn. I am the Deputy Editor of a small scientific journal and I can tell you that is not an action which is taken lightly.

Fast forward to 2017 and Mr Wakefield has made a movie called "Vaxxed" which continues to uphold the idea that MMR vaccine leads to autism. Remember the study has been debunked and no new data has emerged to support Mr Wakefield's assertions.

A room has been booked at the University of Otago in Dunedin to screen the movie and there has been some concern expressed about this indicating the University endorses Mr Wakefield's assertions.
My PVC has written to explain that is not the case, in fact there are both scientific and moral objections to the content of the movie.
BUT and its a big BUT, the University:

"..... firmly upholds the right to free speech as one of its core values.

The screening here is able to go ahead simply to uphold the principle of free speech, but the University does not condone the movie or its contents. Therefore, the screening should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the views and opinions expressed in the movie."

I am not sure how that sits with those who think the perceived erosion of free speech is the responsibility of Universities but I hope before perpetuating that myth you consider what I am relating above as a piece of actual evidence rather than "something I heard at the pub"
Freedom of speech is giving space and voice to views that you neither agree with nor can support because its evidence not vitriol and hearsay which should persuade individuals what they determine to be correct.

[Katman]

A room has been booked at the University of Otago in Dunedin to screen the movie

I'm pleased to hear it.

One can only hope that other universities around the country will be equally obliging.

[Ulsterkiwi]

Ah come on now, how can you be unaware that academia has been largely socialist/liberal leaning for generations? And continues to head further in that direction wrt the gen pop all the time.

I notice this the other day: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/educ...ural-diversity

But you're presumably capable of a little research yourself...

That was an interesting read, written by an academic.

I am not unaware that academia is about pushing the boundaries, change, expansion of knowledge and trying to improve the lot of humanity, be that through developing new medicine or technology, rethinking how we live in our societies or writing new literature or producing other works of art. It so happens that in the context of politics those aspirations are categorised as leftist or liberal while those who want things to remain as they are, without change or challenge are right leaning or conservative. The article you linked to alludes to just that.

Academia is neither right nor wrong, it is what it is, questioning why things are the way they are. To bring the judgment of something's value or place in society back to whether it is left or right is a bit reductionist for my liking.

I guess the thing which sets academia apart is the constant call for critique, argue for whatever you want but does the evidence support it? Stereotypically (and again the article alludes to that idea) conservatives want things to remain as they are because "that's how its always been done". Where does that get us? Someone on here had the story of the five monkeys in their signature. While a bit of a giggle, the story also has a very real point to make.

As I referred to earlier in the thread without "leftie" thinking/freedom of speech, we would still have slavery, women could not vote, there would be no birth control, rape within marriage would be ok, education would only ever be available to the wealthy and government agencies would have no accountability to the public/taxpayers who make their existence possible, to name but a few things.

Also remember that its not academia or even a conservative line of thinking that is at fault here. These are ideas and ideas are held by people and people are flawed so any system of thinking will be limited by the people who operationalise that thinking. Communism has its pluses. Under communist thinking we are all equal. I like that idea. Certainly in terms of our worth to society. We all have our roles, skills, talents and abilities so in that respect we are of course all different but noone is more important than the other. The USSR however clearly demonstrated that some were more equal than others and the limits of any equality were very constrained. So the fault was not in the idea but with the people who were in power.
The counter to that is of course the good ol US of A, the land of the free, defender of liberty. Ever been to Jackson? Queens? LA? Lots of people there who would say the right has not done too much good for them. Does that make all conservative ideology "bad", I don't think so.

So yes, lots of academics have ideas that are classed as being leftist. So what?

[swbarnett]

To me free speech is the ability to put ones views without fear of ridicule or being otherwise abused. Don't expect everyone to agree with you or indeed even listen.

One thing that enables free speech to exist is healthy debate - the act of airing ones views with the aim of having them questioned. The expectation is that they are analysed by the other parties with an open mind; while at the same time maintaining an open mind yourself to any counter views that return. In this way the actual truth is arrived at; likely not identical to either party's view but somewhere in the middle. This is the mark of a great scientist or philosopher - one that is only after the truth and cares little if their initial hypothesis is right or not.

[Woodman]

I'm pleased to hear it.

One can only hope that other universities around the country will be equally obliging.

Would you be happy to host a filmwatching at your motorbike shop promoting the practice of riding with worn tyres?
A lot of people ride with worn tyres to save money etc so there will be a captive audience.

[Katman]

Would you be happy to host a filmwatching at your motorbike shop promoting the practice of riding with worn tyres?
A lot of people ride with worn tyres to save money etc so there will be a captive audience.

Sure.

Send me a copy.

[pritch]

A lot of people ride with worn tyres to save money etc so there will be a captive audience.

Problem is those dim enough to ride on worn tyres would likely be too dim to attend. A someone alse pointed out in a long forgotten thread, if you look at the commuters parked down town you will see a lot of sub standard rubber.

One of the tyre manufactureres went to Sturgis and offered free tyre checks, a huge percentage, almost all, were under inflated.

Most of which might tend to suggest the "average" rider doesn't think overmuch about tyres.

[HenryDorsetCase]

For those who persist with the idea that Universities are the seat of leftist-nanny state-protectionism just a wee note about a work email I have just received.

Its interesting that the vaccination issue has been brought up in this thread. Andrew Wakefield was former doctor who published a study in the Lancet a few years ago presenting evidence that the MMR vaccine was linked to the incidence of autism. The publication of the study in a high impact journal like The Lancet, was in itself testament to the principles of free speech which science, medicine and academia aspire to; as what was presented in the study clearly went contrary to accepted knowledge at that time, i.e. vaccines or at least the MMR vaccine was not safe.
Subsequent to the publication of the study and the huge controversy it created, it was discovered that Mr Wakefield had in fact fabricated the data which were presented in his published paper and there was actually no substance to the claims made in it. Mr Wakefield was struck off the medical register as a consequence and his paper was withdrawn. I am the Deputy Editor of a small scientific journal and I can tell you that is not an action which is taken lightly.

Fast forward to 2017 and Mr Wakefield has made a movie called "Vaxxed" which continues to uphold the idea that MMR vaccine leads to autism. Remember the study has been debunked and no new data has emerged to support Mr Wakefield's assertions.

A room has been booked at the University of Otago in Dunedin to screen the movie and there has been some concern expressed about this indicating the University endorses Mr Wakefield's assertions.
My PVC has written to explain that is not the case, in fact there are both scientific and moral objections to the content of the movie.
BUT and its a big BUT, the University:

"..... firmly upholds the right to free speech as one of its core values.

The screening here is able to go ahead simply to uphold the principle of free speech, but the University does not condone the movie or its contents. Therefore, the screening should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the views and opinions expressed in the movie."

I am not sure how that sits with those who think the perceived erosion of free speech is the responsibility of Universities but I hope before perpetuating that myth you consider what I am relating above as a piece of actual evidence rather than "something I heard at the pub"
Freedom of speech is giving space and voice to views that you neither agree with nor can support because its evidence not vitriol and hearsay which should persuade individuals what they determine to be correct.

Thanks. seriously.

By the way, I was lying in bed last night and I have invented a newish device.

I am going to take existing drone technology, and I am going to get some vaccines and I am going to fly the drone into fuckwith anti-vaxxers houses and basically cropdust vaccines over the sleeping children. I will also cropdust contraception over the sleeping adults who are clearly unfit to breed.

When I rule you all (and I will) shit's gonna change, yo.

[pritch]

Gotta share the love. And I'm assuming you are sober now?

[Ulsterkiwi]

Thanks. seriously.

By the way, I was lying in bed last night and I have invented a newish device.

I am going to take existing drone technology, and I am going to get some vaccines and I am going to fly the drone into fuckwith anti-vaxxers houses and basically cropdust vaccines over the sleeping children. I will also cropdust contraception over the sleeping adults who are clearly unfit to breed.

When I rule you all (and I will) shit's gonna change, yo.

I thought they already did that? ;-)

You might like to read the bit of the email that came after the bit I quoted.....

"The group organising the screening does not represent the University or the views of its health experts in any way, shape or form. The messages and "information" in the movie are condemned by me and many other health experts at the University of Otago who have strong moral and scientific objections to the content of the movie. We believe the makers and distributors of this movie are scare-mongering, and behaving in an anti-child manner, showing no regard for the health and well-being of children.

We will, at every possible opportunity, seek to provide the public with relevant scientific evidence showing the benefits of vaccination that are not presented in the movie."

That's free speech right there.

[Swoop]

I am going to take existing drone technology, and I am going to get some vaccines and I am going to fly the drone into fuckwith anti-vaxxers houses and basically cropdust vaccines over the sleeping children. I will also cropdust contraception over the sleeping adults who are clearly unfit to breed.

Surely there is already a chemtrail for that?

[Katman]

I find it interesting that the same people who will happily ridicule the idea that a group of lawyers might represent some villagers in Afghanistan for anything other than the money they can make from it, won't for a second countenance the idea that the pharmaceutical industry is producing an ever increasing array of vaccines for anything other than the good of society.

The naivety of that belief is staggering.