tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post6196613709479611309..comments2024-03-14T09:50:44.315+00:00Comments on Psychological comments: My letter to Scientific Dishonesty MinisterAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09320614837348759094noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-2899341344019840442013-11-16T15:16:49.558+00:002013-11-16T15:16:49.558+00:00thanks for your letter supporting Helmuth. If you ...thanks for your letter supporting Helmuth. If you can help me on a Wechsler factor matter, drop me a line on james.thompson at ucl.ac.ukAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09320614837348759094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-64127761681771953712013-11-15T15:16:31.071+00:002013-11-15T15:16:31.071+00:00Letter in Support of Dr. H. Nyborg, 15 November, 2...Letter in Support of Dr. H. Nyborg, 15 November, 2013<br />To whom it may concern: <br />I am familiar with Dr. Nyborg’s research. Personality and Individual Differences is a peer-reviewed journal. Science has no need of a superfluous higher court (which may or may not contain members with a conflict of interest). The latter is how people were found guilty of being a witch. As you know, that is not the role of science.<br /><br />One wonders if the court is familiar with Jonathan Haidt’s research on the potential for bad science if certain hypotheses are too taboo to be considered. Indeed, one wonders if the court is familiar with Occam’s Razor.<br /><br />I was a tenured Associate Professor & before that a Project Director in psychological measurement in test publishing. I published research in psychometric areas. I left academia in part because of the chilling climate created in the mainly liberal field’s eternal quest to enforce beliefs on others. I became simply a psychologist in private practice trying to understand & help others – I did not have the heart for such a fray as Dr. Nyborg finds himself in.<br /><br />Psychology needs all the science it can get – it does not benefit from interference with the scientific process – or an added layer of bureaucracy (though I feel for you for the extra work that must have been for you - while I also feel for Dr. Nyborg & what he is going through). Science has its process, which works best, as Dr. Haidt points out, when all hypotheses are allowed to be considered.<br /><br />Thank you (real name, etc.) PhD, Licensed Psych, etc.<br /><br />L'homme n'est pas ni ange ni bête, et le malheur veut que qui veut faire l'ange fait la bête — PascalAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4624586630299165335.post-14233078988924762992013-11-14T11:40:53.051+00:002013-11-14T11:40:53.051+00:00My version read as follows:
Dear Minister Østerg...My version read as follows: <br /><br />Dear Minister Østergaard<br /><br />I am writing to protest the treatment of Dr Helmuth Nyborg by one of your department's committees for scientific dishonesty. It is abundantly clear that Dr Nyborg is being repeatedly raked over the coals not for any scientific dishonesty or even any serious unwitting errors - he is patently guilty of neither - but for his right-wing political views and research into unpopular topics such as dysgenics. <br /><br />Academics should be free to sort out their disputes in the relevant forums, such the renowned journals in which Dr Nyborg frequently publishes. If he is demonstrably mistaken about the empirical questions that he addresses in his research, the scientific community will swiftly make this known. State committees reminiscent of the Inquisition should play no part in this process. Such disgraceful nonsense leaves Denmark's reputation as a nation of liberty severely damaged and casts a shadow over ever-threatened academic freedom worldwide. <br /><br />I ask that the condemnation of Dr Nyborg be published in English and promptly reconsidered by your department. I also ask that in future such fraudulent investigations of researchers cease, and that the scientific process be allowed to function as it normally does. State direction of research is sure precursor of intellectual sterility and death, if history is anything to go by. <br /><br />Yours sincerely,<br /><br />Andrew SabiskyAndrew Sabiskynoreply@blogger.com