Politicians and populists pushed out false information, and then squashed anyone that tried to argue against the state as "radical", "harmful" and "against progress and science" at the point of a gun, refused to let people ask questions or have dissenting views which led them to the next step of being allowed to exterminate undesirables because no one was allowed to argue because "The Science was settled"
We could of course also talk about how the centralized control of the science of genetics in the Soviet Union led to mass famines that killed millions and anyone who disagreed was put to death.
It seems to me the problem isn't and never has been science, it is when a single institution, society, or government gets to dictate what "truth" is and "the science is settled" at the point of a gun, not that science gives us answers we don't like.
>Politicians and populists pushed out false information, and then squashed anyone that tried to argue against the state as "radical", "harmful" and "against progress and science"
I agree. This was a political problem which the article is actually trying to address.
> It seems to me the problem isn't and never has been science, it is when a single institution, society, or government gets to dictate what "truth" is...
This is not what the article is advocating.
This seems very rational to me, for example:
"Authors should use the terms sex (biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances) carefully in order to avoid confusing both terms. "
We could of course also talk about how the centralized control of the science of genetics in the Soviet Union led to mass famines that killed millions and anyone who disagreed was put to death.
It seems to me the problem isn't and never has been science, it is when a single institution, society, or government gets to dictate what "truth" is and "the science is settled" at the point of a gun, not that science gives us answers we don't like.