The Radicalization of the American Academy

In Defense of Merit in Science

“…129 That the absurd comparison of the COVID19 crisis to genocide made it into print is consistent with a growing body of evidence suggesting that, in the "right" circles, one can make almost any ridiculous claim, as long as one frames it as advancing "Social Justice." 130 The American Medical Association has produced a guide to language, asking practitioners to avoid using adjectives such as "vulnerable" and "highrisk" and to avoid saying "target," "combat," or other "terms with violent connotation" because they reinforce "narratives that constantly shift and adapt as conditions change and serve to rationalize the privileges of racism that sustain white supremacy." 35 These recommendations and similar DEI guidelines issued by the American Association of Medical Colleges 34 are set to be implemented in medical schools' curricula.…”

“…47 Putting aside separate objections that the use of DEI statements to screen applicants constitutes a political litmus test and a form of (possibly illegal) compelled speech, by reducing the viable applicant pool, it likely undermines the quality of science. 130 Thus, a brilliant mathematician (or physicist or cognitive scientist) may be filtered out by virtue of having expressed insufficient enthusiasm or familiarity with the particular version of DEI that the institution supports.…”

Toward a Psychology of Ideas Rather Than Demographics: Commentary on Hommel (2024)

“…Recently there have been many discussions about ideological bias in psychology impeding necessary scientific checks and balances (Campbell & Manning, 2018; Ceci & Williams, 2018; Crawford & Jussim, 2018; Duarte et al, 2015; Jussim, 2018, 2022). Roberts et al (2020) and Hommel (this issue) focus on the issue of race as a factor in the intellectual composition of psychology.…”

“…Ratios of 10 liberals to 1 conservative are common in psychology, whereas the population ratio is closer to 1:1 (Buss & von Hippel, 2018; Duarte et al, 2015; Jussim, 2022). However, a well-trained psychologist would be the first to point out that even discrepancies this large do not automatically mean that bias or discrimination is at work.…”

“…However, a well-trained psychologist would be the first to point out that even discrepancies this large do not automatically mean that bias or discrimination is at work. Gross (2013) explored the many alternative hypotheses for the ideological disparity in academia and concluded that self-selection was the dominant factor, and it was a much more important contributor than bias or discrimination (but see Inbar & Lammers, 2012; Jussim, 2021, 2022).…”