Emil O W Kirkegaard

Some behavior geneticists are deeply discomfited by genetic influence on human behavioral differences. It's strange. It's like if someone who's afraid of blood became a surgeon.

It’s ok when it’s individuals, but when protected groups are involved, then the sacred value trumps the science.

But there's such a short distance from individual differences to many group differences. If you accept genetic influence on socially valued traits, how can you deny what it implies about the causes of social stratification? Yet this implication is a bridge too far for some.

Sometimes I wonder if we aren’t headed for a society (Brave New World esque) in which certain science is conducted and discussed only within a certain social strata... perhaps benevolently as a means to protect against public misuse and misunderstanding.

This is their vision. Anything that might suggest nonleft politics is Bad and we need to suppress it so the public isn't 'misled'.

Well, I mean there *is* a pretty non-trivial possibility of misuse and misunderstanding by the general public. In my mind that doesn't ever justify hindering science, but I could imagine it justifying the shut down of public discussion (say under a more totalitarian gov't).

There's been plenty of bad things happen because of denial. I'd say it's a threat to people and institutions that depend on people believing in certain falsehoods.

Yeah I don't see much point playing the which-is-worse game as both directions can be very bad. But suppose what you are pretty sure is true was pretty publicly discovered to definitively be true. How confident are you that society could handle it? Without tearing itself apart?