Excellent article, pointing very much in the right direction.
It is true that the social sciences and the humanities in general skew left -- it is the inevitable result of what right and left have been, culturally and statistically, in the last 100 years; the same reason why one finds very few evolutionary biologists that embrace religious fundamentalism. But the skew was once one to the left-of-centre. Discourse was unobstructed. The taking over of far left activists that hold hostage entire academic sectors is a very recent phenomenon, suppurated exponentially in the last 10 years in parallel with a similar radicalisation of the right in other sectors of society. How this all happened and why had been examined in depth by people much smarter than I am. I still have the perception that a large part of people, both in society at large and in academia, remain reasonable moderates simply afraid to be mobbed, hurt or damaged if they do not go with the flow in their particular sector. This, disheartening though it is as concerns the moral fibre of people, is also somewhat uplifting, because the following will stop as the pressure decreases.
And the pressure will hopefully decrease as more and more people become fed up with the perennial militant ideology that lines the pockets or strokes the egoes of a limited number of people while making the existence of so many others palpably miserable. The few courageous ones who keep opposing the mainstream narratives have, after all, opened the way, and will increase in numbers.
And for the rest, one can but sit and wait for the situation to reset, pushing as much as possible in the sensible direction and avoiding to fall into the mirrored opposite bias (it is why I support, for example, SOIBS).
This although my education and knowledge of history tell me that the eventual triumph of reason is not a given, especially not in the short term. There may still be a pendulum swinging back to produce as much damage as the fore-swing. There may even be more awful outcomes, like civil war broad or limited, from which a society may take decades to recover.
I cannot avoid contemplating the worst possible outcomes, as I have been here for 79 days watching this tragedy that unfolds in the land "from the river to the sea", with very personal stakes in it in the form of the lives of loved ones, and at the same time unable to deny the enormity of the conundrums that we face. Nothing of which is helped by being seized as symbols of abstract notions of justice, on one side or the other, and inevitably so de-humanised, by a surrounding world which should be helping to find a solution where murderers can be swept away, innocents spared, hatred diminished, peace crafted -- and instead fails, driven by diverging interests, biases, blindness.
At times, bad situations slip into worse, and at times the cost of mistakes, of complacency and of cowardice becomes unspeakably high. I do hope that in this battle of Western institutions against unreason, sense will prevail and hatred subside, without too much destruction. We must hold on to hope, because otherwise everything is lost.
Outside psychology, we are mortified. Leaders of psychoanalytic societies routinely accuse each other of racism and sexism, declaring "Whiteness is a condition" and rampant "toxic masculinity". Among themselves! For us outside, what chance do we have?
The politicization of psychotherapy is a disgraceful development. It is not only morally repugnant it is also at variance with every empirical finding on effective therapies and therapists. This is one, among many, of the reasons I am no longer a member of APA after almost 20 years of membership. The institutional rot goes deep, and as long as ideologues like Prinstein, run the show, it is highly unlikely that anything will change.
Excellent article, pointing very much in the right direction.
It is true that the social sciences and the humanities in general skew left -- it is the inevitable result of what right and left have been, culturally and statistically, in the last 100 years; the same reason why one finds very few evolutionary biologists that embrace religious fundamentalism. But the skew was once one to the left-of-centre. Discourse was unobstructed. The taking over of far left activists that hold hostage entire academic sectors is a very recent phenomenon, suppurated exponentially in the last 10 years in parallel with a similar radicalisation of the right in other sectors of society. How this all happened and why had been examined in depth by people much smarter than I am. I still have the perception that a large part of people, both in society at large and in academia, remain reasonable moderates simply afraid to be mobbed, hurt or damaged if they do not go with the flow in their particular sector. This, disheartening though it is as concerns the moral fibre of people, is also somewhat uplifting, because the following will stop as the pressure decreases.
And the pressure will hopefully decrease as more and more people become fed up with the perennial militant ideology that lines the pockets or strokes the egoes of a limited number of people while making the existence of so many others palpably miserable. The few courageous ones who keep opposing the mainstream narratives have, after all, opened the way, and will increase in numbers.
And for the rest, one can but sit and wait for the situation to reset, pushing as much as possible in the sensible direction and avoiding to fall into the mirrored opposite bias (it is why I support, for example, SOIBS).
This although my education and knowledge of history tell me that the eventual triumph of reason is not a given, especially not in the short term. There may still be a pendulum swinging back to produce as much damage as the fore-swing. There may even be more awful outcomes, like civil war broad or limited, from which a society may take decades to recover.
I cannot avoid contemplating the worst possible outcomes, as I have been here for 79 days watching this tragedy that unfolds in the land "from the river to the sea", with very personal stakes in it in the form of the lives of loved ones, and at the same time unable to deny the enormity of the conundrums that we face. Nothing of which is helped by being seized as symbols of abstract notions of justice, on one side or the other, and inevitably so de-humanised, by a surrounding world which should be helping to find a solution where murderers can be swept away, innocents spared, hatred diminished, peace crafted -- and instead fails, driven by diverging interests, biases, blindness.
At times, bad situations slip into worse, and at times the cost of mistakes, of complacency and of cowardice becomes unspeakably high. I do hope that in this battle of Western institutions against unreason, sense will prevail and hatred subside, without too much destruction. We must hold on to hope, because otherwise everything is lost.
Sorry for the ramble. Have a nice Christmas.
Oh, and even under the wind I remain a stickler:
"Young Girl in the Garden at Giverny, Money."
Monet. Claude Monet
Outside psychology, we are mortified. Leaders of psychoanalytic societies routinely accuse each other of racism and sexism, declaring "Whiteness is a condition" and rampant "toxic masculinity". Among themselves! For us outside, what chance do we have?
The politicization of psychotherapy is a disgraceful development. It is not only morally repugnant it is also at variance with every empirical finding on effective therapies and therapists. This is one, among many, of the reasons I am no longer a member of APA after almost 20 years of membership. The institutional rot goes deep, and as long as ideologues like Prinstein, run the show, it is highly unlikely that anything will change.