This is actually an opinion piece and it notes at the end that author is promoting a book seemingly related to the subject.
Angela Saini is the author of Inferior, and is researching a book on science and race to be published in 2019
Her case is also built on 1 paper and 2 studies (which are social science based and not necessarily empirical in their methods).
She also references a magazine and book that are obviously not peer reviewed papers and psychological study from 1969
But in practice the system does fail. Poor papers do get published, weak research can pass through the net, and people’s prejudices can sometimes taint the process. This is what those at the disreputable edges of academia are counting on.
Her claim that "racism is creeping back into main stream science" has been presented in a rather weak manner (which is the sort of thing scientifically ignorant eat right up, the types of folks that are always looking for something to grab on to so they can feel intellectually superior with out actually having to do any intellectual work).
Of course it is important to understand that the purpose of this article is to sell books, and I think the author has been successful in garnering attention, so marketing wise it's not a bad article.
This is actually an opinion piece and it notes at the end that author is promoting a book seemingly related to the subject.
>Angela Saini is the author of Inferior, and is researching a book on science and race to be published in 2019
Her case is also built on 1 paper and 2 studies (which are social science based and not necessarily empirical in their methods).
She also references a magazine and book that are obviously not peer reviewed papers and psychological study from 1969
>But in practice the system does fail. Poor papers do get published, weak research can pass through the net, and people’s prejudices can sometimes taint the process. This is what those at the disreputable edges of academia are counting on.
Her claim that "racism is creeping back into main stream science" has been presented in a rather weak manner (which is the sort of thing scientifically ignorant eat right up, the types of folks that are always looking for something to grab on to so they can feel intellectually superior with out actually having to do any intellectual work).
Of course it is important to understand that the purpose of this article is to sell books, and I think the author has been successful in garnering attention, so marketing wise it's not a bad article.
This is actually an opinion piece and it notes at the end that author is promoting a book seemingly related to the subject.
Her case is also built on 1 paper and 2 studies (which are social science based and not necessarily empirical in their methods).
She also references a magazine and book that are obviously not peer reviewed papers and psychological study from 1969
Her claim that "racism is creeping back into main stream science" has been presented in a rather weak manner (which is the sort of thing scientifically ignorant eat right up, the types of folks that are always looking for something to grab on to so they can feel intellectually superior with out actually having to do any intellectual work).
Of course it is important to understand that the purpose of this article is to sell books, and I think the author has been successful in garnering attention, so marketing wise it's not a bad article.