Tom Levenson responds to the articles by John Tierney and Megan McCardle which ask why conservatives are so rare in academia (in science, anyway, creationism might have something to do with it. Just saying). Anyway, Levenson makes a good point, although I think he misses one thing:
…the only other Haidt evidence Tierney references comes from an email from an allegedly victimized student:
“I consider myself very middle-of-the-road politically: a social liberal but fiscal conservative. Nonetheless, I avoid the topic of politics around work,” one student wrote. “Given what I’ve read of the literature, I am certain any research I conducted in political psychology would provide contrary findings and, therefore, go unpublished. Although I think I could make a substantial contribution to the knowledge base, and would be excited to do so, I will not.”
O. K. class. What does this complainant get wrong?
I’ll give you a hint. Look again at this sentence:
Given what I’ve read of the literature, I am certain any research I conducted in political psychology would provide contrary findings and, therefore, go unpublished.
That is: this student says that he or she is “certain” that her/his results would break consensus, and hence, inevitably, would languish in conspiratorially enforced obscurity.
Uh, kid. Listen up: When you already know what your research will reveal, what does that tell you?
It ain’t research.
You have no knowledge to “contribute to the knowledge base” if the conclusions you propose to add to our collective store of human wisdom is what you already know by some process other than the “research” you propose….
[This] is another way of saying that this student found it impossible to do the actual hard work of science: construct testable hypotheses, and experiments in which the results may in fact confound your expectations. If you won’t do that, you can’t make it science … and Hey, Presto! another conservative is discriminated against.
The other point to be made is that, in science, if you have the data to support your claims, and your claims overturn a key concept, that’s a great way to launch a career (or get tenure, etc.). Initially, it might be hard: as Levenson notes, you’ll have to do a lot of heavy lifting, some (or much) of it political. But revolutionary findings will out.
Or you can take your ball and go home (and work for a faith tank).
mikethemadbiologist
I have some sympathy with the student.
Student: “Given what I’ve read of the literature, I am certain any research I conducted in political psychology would provide contrary findings and, therefore, go unpublished.”
Now, one thing that she has probably read about is that political conservatism is associated with an authoritarian personality. Furthermore, she has observed her professors, and feels that they have a political bias.
Moi, I think that, indeed, there is such an association now in the U.S. and Europe, but I know enough history to think that it will not hold up over time. History has produced too many authoritarian left-wingers, it seems to me.
I also think that she does not think of herself as having an authoritarian personality, nor does she believe that of the conservatives that she knows. Given the political bias that she attributes to her profs and researchers, she doubts the research findings and is confident that, if she did her own research, she could refute them. (OK, she is inexperienced and ignorant.) But then what? Could she even get a hearing? We know that if she did good research, that she could, but she has no experience to go on. The game in school is to please your teachers, not to prove them wrong.
And after all, she has a point, as witnessed by the saying, “Science marches on, funeral by funeral.” Is social science research biased? What a surprise!
Hi, Min.
It sounds like you and the student have much in common. Neither of you need actual data to reach the correct conclusions. How would someone like me, constrained by reality, determine that this student was thinking about authoritarian personalities?
Just curious – are you, like me, old enough to remember when quitting was not considered a conservative virtue?
Hi, kermit!
Quitting is a conservative virtue. Ask Sarah Palin.
Student: “Given what I’ve read of the literature, I am certain any research I conducted in political psychology would provide contrary findings and, therefore, go unpublished.”
Granted that there are a few levels of indirection here (Levenson is quoting Tierney who is quoting somebody who is quoting the student), but if this quote is even the least bit accurate, it is only a small step away from, “They laughed at Galileo. They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at Bozo the clown.” Levenson is entirely right to be critical of that point of view.
“They laughed at Galileo. They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at Bozo the clown.”
Don’t forget Semmelweiss. 🙂