I want to begin this essay by congratulating the editors of Nature Human Behaviour. On 18 August, they published an editorial specifying that they “reserve the right” to reject articles which are not sufficiently PC. In particular, they object to content that is “premised upon the assumption of inherent biological, social, or cultural superiority or inferiority of one human group over another”, or that “could reasonably be perceived to undermine” the “rights and dignities of an individual or human group”. In other words: don’t bother submitting any work on biological group differences.
Agree with everything here Noah, except one tiny thing: not sure what relevance the Darwin point has. Seems like an appeal to authority to me. I think I get what you're going for though, a point of rhetoric?
One other thing: I'm not sure the distinction between ontological statements derived using the scientific method and moral ones is a clearcut as either side makes out, but that's one for another day.
Cargo cult of science
Agree with everything here Noah, except one tiny thing: not sure what relevance the Darwin point has. Seems like an appeal to authority to me. I think I get what you're going for though, a point of rhetoric?
One other thing: I'm not sure the distinction between ontological statements derived using the scientific method and moral ones is a clearcut as either side makes out, but that's one for another day.