The claim that scientists must resist any suppression of speech, what is the modern 'cancellation culture' of speech suppression?
Nachrichten aus der Chemie, a journal published by the German Research Foundation, has published a paper entitled 'Scientists must resist all media blackouts' regarding a series of online media blackouts. This paper is on the theme of modern speech suppression '
Scientists must resist cancel culture --Krylov --2022 --Nachrichten aus der Chemie --Wiley Online Library
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/nadc.20224120702
From Socrates's defenses and Galileo trials to the Chinese Golden Shield , censorship exists east and west. In totalitarianism , which reached its heyday in the 20th century, such as Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, censorship was predominantly censorship, in which scientific research was restricted based on political views. Censorship called 'cancellation culture' that spreads from the roots of the grass rather than being led is spreading.
A new paper published by Professor Anna Krylov of the University of Southern California states that 'scientists must resist cancel culture.' Cancel culture is a social movement that continues to denounce certain words and actions and eventually loses a job or social status.
Professor Krilov takes up the case of Thomas Hudritzky as a representative example of the weakness of the scientific world against cancel culture. In 2020, Mr. Fudritzky said, '' Organic synthesis—Where now ? 'Is thirty years old. A reflection on the current state of affairs. 'And the current situation)', 'Recruitment of researchers should be done purely on the basis of ability, not on the diversity of races and genders.' 'The quality of scientific journals continues to decline. The papers published in the last 30 years have less experimental parts, and there are a lot of inaccurate / incomplete data and frauds. '
“Organic synthesis—Where now?” Is thirty years old. A reflection on the current state of affairs
https://48bedcf3-b2e1-48d0-89db-c6c99da1e737.filesusr.com/ugd/6b5494_1e44876cf8c44c93b27e76f9b53a9cc4.pdf
However, a few hours after the essay was published, criticisms such as 'discomfort,' 'incitement,' and 'discrimination against foreigners' continued, and Mr. Fudritzky himself was accused of being 'racist' and 'discriminatory against women.' .. As a result of the continued spread of fire, 16 editorial committee members of the publisher who published the essay resigned due to protest, and the essay itself was deleted, and there was no request for a lecture to Mr. Fudritzky, and Mr. Fudritzky's joint research Was asked to break the relationship.
Professor Krollif's view of this case is that 'whether or not we should have a civilized debate, rather than being criticized like an avalanche.' In response to a series of criticisms, the magazine could have posted an apology or counter-argument to Mr. Fudritzky, but simply withdrew in the form of succumbing to the mob. It is Professor Krilov's opinion that this act is essentially an acceptance of censorship, abandoning the mission that scientific journals should fulfill.
Since the case of Mr. Fudritzky, the Royal Society of Chemistry has established new guidelines for its journals and rules for editors to 'consider what content can be offensive.' increase. However, a closer look at this rule is based on 'age, gender, race, sexual orientation, religious and political beliefs, spouse and parental presence, physical characteristics, nationality, social status, disability, etc.' 'Content that may offend someone' or 'content that may be upset, insulting, or offensive to some or most people' is subject to self-regulation, and virtually anything Professor Krilov points out that it could be subject to censorship.
Just as the programming terms 'blacklist' and 'master / slave' are being paraphrased as 'racist' today, if it's not good for some people, then something like 'master password'. Professor Krilov argues that terms and 'normal distribution', which includes the word 'normal', which can be considered meaningful to exclude some minorities, can no longer be used. He reiterates that such self-regulation is an obstacle to high-quality scientific research and scientific development, and that 'we must resist the suppression of speech.'
The programming terms 'blacklist' and 'master / slave' are being paraphrased as 'racist'-GIGAZINE
Related Posts:
in Science, Posted by darkhorse_log