Scientific American and Political Endorsements

  • Thread starter Thread starter bhobba
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Science
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the endorsement of Kamala Harris by Scientific American and whether a science magazine should engage in political endorsements. Participants explore the implications of such endorsements on the magazine's purpose and the relationship between science and politics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether a science magazine should involve itself in political endorsements, suggesting it may not align with its charter and purpose.
  • Others express skepticism about the integrity of science being intertwined with political agendas, arguing that this could undermine the credibility of scientific pursuits.
  • One participant notes that Scientific American has only endorsed candidates twice in its 180-year history, implying that such actions are rare and potentially significant.
  • Several comments reflect on the perceived decline in the quality of articles in Scientific American over the years, with some longing for a return to more substantive content rather than political involvement.
  • There are humorous and tangential remarks about cats, which some participants use to illustrate points about captivity and independence, though these do not directly relate to the main topic.
  • One participant expresses a belief that the scientific community may be swayed by political parties that advocate for "following the science," suggesting a potential conflict of interest.
  • Another participant raises concerns about the historical shortcomings of science, indicating a lack of trust in its claims.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether Scientific American should engage in political endorsements. There are multiple competing views regarding the relationship between science and politics, as well as differing opinions on the quality and focus of the magazine's content.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the motivations behind the magazine's endorsement and the implications for its credibility. There are references to historical changes in the magazine's content and quality, which remain unresolved in the discussion.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in the intersection of science communication and politics, as well as those concerned about the evolution of scientific publications and their societal roles.

Messages
10,983
Reaction score
3,844
From this week's digital edition of Scientific American:

'This week, Scientific American endorses Kamala Harris. That's in part due to the Biden-Harris administration’s approach to AI safety and the White House’s support for the chipmaking industry.'

Do people think a science magazine, admittedly at a more populist than professional level, should become involved in this? I don't mean their choice of a political candidate - that's what democracy is all about, and we all can form our views (in fact, that is how democracies work, or should work anyway). Should it be part of its charter and purpose?

Correctly, IMHO, our forum rules do not allow it. There are political forums galore where this can be discussed.

Thanks
Bill

mod edited
https://civicswatch.com/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mcastillo356
Physics news on Phys.org
Facts are undoubtedless, opinions are not. Science pursues facts
Best wishes
Marcos
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba, dextercioby and fresh_42
"I don't mean their choice of a political candidate"- well... who are "they". Was it a unanimous companywide decision to support a particular political party within the organization?

Otherwise, I'm a good bit conflicted in sharing my opinion because you are asking what is thought and then also saying our forum correctly doesn't allow it. I guess I'll ask pity from administration under the claim of entrapment and dare to answer. If I'm meant to be the sacrificial lamb (hanging at 8 inexorable demerits), so be it.

IMO Science is becoming the new religion of the masses. "Follow the science"...even though you really don't have any personal understanding... just believe. Better yet, pretend you get it...like everyone else. I think its natural (greed) that any political party that proclaims, "follow the science", is going to be accepted and pushed by the scientific community so power/money are shifted to the science community from the electorate. I have my doubts science can survive it...I predict it to be a poisoned chalice.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Haborix and Bystander
mcastillo356 said:
Facts are undoubtedless, opinions are not. Science pursues facts
Best wishes
Marcos
It pursue's "facts", but lets be honest...it continuously falls short. We know this to be historically true...and everyone always thinks..."oh, we've got it this time" it's a lock... I don't think science is something to be worshiped. I like some of it, but I don't believe a billionth of it (conservatively large estimate - based on what I don't currently know about it).
 
bhobba said:
Do people think a science magazine, admittedly at a more populist than professional level, should become involved in this? I don't mean their choice of a political candidate - that's what democracy is all about, and we all can form our own views (in fact, that is how democracies work, or should work anyway). Should it be part of its charter and purpose?
If they feel that one party is more friendly towards fact-based science, wouldn't that be in their best interests?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dwarde and BillTre
Borg said:
If they feel that one party is more friendly towards fact-based science, wouldn't that be in their best interests?
I have some cats that I feed. I don't think they realize that they are basically my captives.
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: bhobba and dextercioby
erobz said:
I have some cats that I feed. I don't think they realize that they are basically my captives.
Whatever works for you

CaptiveCat.PNG
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron, BillTre, dextercioby and 3 others
Worth noting: This particular magazine has endorsed a candidate exactly twice in 180 years. I won't get into politics, but there is a piece of (modified) general wisdom which may apply: "If everyone around is losing their mind while you remain calm, you may just not understand the situation."
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Borg
erobz said:
. I don't think they realize that they are basically my captives.
Not a huge domestic cat fan, they kill birds.

Anyway, what I think of them is not the purpose of the post. If you think you are holding your cat captive I think you need to re think.

If you do not let your cat out ever (best case scenario) it will eat you if you died suddenly and left it with no way out and no food.
If you do let it out then it probably has three of four feeding points from neighbours.
If you died suddenly and the cat had a way out? One meal missed it's gone with no tears and never coming back.

If all humanity died in a truly cataclysmic global pandemic, say cold like for transmission but Marburg for survival rate, then cats would simply move out doors, decimate the wild life, have a crack at establishment of apex predator.

Without a thought for owners or humans in general.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron and BillTre
  • #10
I like the old SA with more detailed articles and less flashy but more meaningful graphics but that change was some twenty years ago. That’s what SA should focus on, not politics.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba, erobz and dextercioby
  • #11
pinball1970 said:
Not a huge domestic cat fan, they kill birds.

Anyway, what I think of them is not the purpose of the post. If you think you are holding your cat captive I think you need to re think.

If you do not let your cat out ever (best case scenario) it will eat you if you died suddenly and left it with no way out and no food.
If you do let it out then it probably has three of four feeding points from neighbours.
If you died suddenly and the cat had a way out? One meal missed it's gone with no tears and never coming back.

If all humanity died in a truly cataclysmic global pandemic, say cold like for transmission but Marburg for survival rate, then cats would simply move out doors, decimate the wild life, have a crack at establishment of apex predator.

Without a thought for owners or humans in general.
They are house cats, but I think you could be missing my point.
 
  • #12
erobz said:
I think you could be missing my point.
Which is?
 
  • #13
erobz said:
are house cats
That's good
 
  • #14
pinball1970 said:
Which is?
We tend not to bite the hand that feeds us.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970
  • #15
Did anyone read the editorial that announced this? What was the reason for their endorsement?
 
  • #16
bob012345 said:
I like the old SA with more detailed articles and less flashy but more meaningful graphics but that change was some twenty years ago. That’s what SA should focus on, not politics.
I occasionally stumble across an issue from the ‘60’s or ‘70’s and always end up reading it from cover to cover. It was once a more substantive magazine.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba, dextercioby, bob012345 and 2 others
  • #17
The last time I read Scientific American it was so bad I never read it again. That was maybe twenty years ago. I felt that the articles were written by unpaid interns with pimples.
 
  • #18
Frabjous said:
I occasionally stumble across an issue from the ‘60’s or ‘70’s and always end up reading it from cover to cover. It was once a more substantive magazine.

Indeed it was. As I said, I looked forward to it in my youth.

While the post was about politics in SA, I did mention that such topics are not for discussion here. The thread seems OK and civil so far, but please ensure it stays within our guidelines and civil. If not, I (or another mentor) will have to intervene.

It's disheartening to see a decline in standards, a symptom that's hard to ignore. I'm eager to hear other's thoughts on why this might happen.

Thanks
Bill
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: erobz
  • #19
bhobba said:
I'm eager to hear other's thoughts on why this might happen.
$$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre and bhobba
  • #20
Tom.G said:
$$$
They might be losing readership as reflected in this thread.
 

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
Replies
19
Views
14K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
15K