Ideological diversity is our strength.https://twitter.com/NatureHumBehav/status/1102635822082416641 …
-
Ok, details aside -- is it important that there are blank-slaters in the psych depts? Is that valuable "idealogical diversity" or should the university filter for ideas actually supported by logic and evidence?
I don't think blank-slaters add much IMHO, but I wouldn't want to exclude them on ideological grounds. We should just hire the best researchers and teachers based on the best available metrics. Do that, and I think we'll automatically get a decent amount of ideological diversity.
-
-
In other words, if my idea for good research is “aligned with biblical revelation”, and yours is “aligned with logic and evidence”, should the university take an agnostic view and hire us both to promote “ideological diversity”?
-
IMHO, if your biblical-inspired research gets the same citation counts, h-index, etc. as my darwinian-inspired research, then universities should be equally open to us both as candidates. I trust peer review more than I trust explicit diversity initiatives.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
How do you determine who the best are? That determination itself implies an ideological foundation of what constitutes “good research” and what constitutes nonsense... do we need ideological diversity there, too? Should religious creationists have a seat in the biology depts?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.