D&D General Old School DND talks if DND is racist.

[Ruin Explorer]

Your studies are pulled not because the science is at question, but the results of the science is politically 'wrong'.

What science?

Jesse Singal is a journalist with no scientific qualifications whatosever, and has never engaged in any kind of scientific research. You criticising people for ignoring him on the basis of science is beyond illegitimate.

 

[Zardnaar]

No.

That's not an accurate representation of the purpose, nature or impact of the firebomb raids I'm describing, nor is it true that "oil facilities" caused the fires. I don't where you're getting this misinformation from, but that's actual misinformation/disinformation/propaganda. It is not historical fact. The areas in Japan were not "empty", they didn't have "oil product" in them at all. This isn't the right thread to discuss this in detail, I but I want to flag for anyone reading this that I dunno why you're saying that, but that's propaganda, not history. If this is from your university library, well I'm scared to think what books they have in there. Sounds like they were last updated in about 1970.

The firebombing was mostly pointless.

Poor choice of words in regard to the oil but when the bombed them they were already critically short of oil and refining very little due to naval blockade and loss of oil producing regions/transports.

Bombing didn't win war in Europe either it did cause shortages so indirectly that's lives saved at the front. They were short in 88mm for example.

Otherwise the bombing was very ineffective for the resources poured into it. It wasn't totally ineffective.

Wars always bad for innocents though. People died in WW2 in countries uninvolved though due to the shortages/shipping etc. They made those decisions to beat fascism faster.

I think in D&D terms tey count as evil yes but what price are you willing to pay to do it?

 

[HJFudge]

What science?

Jesse Singal is a journalist with no scientific qualifications whatosever, and has never engaged in any kind of scientific research. You criticising people for ignoring him on the basis of science is beyond illegitimate.

Yet the other person he mentioned, Ferguson most definitely IS, he is a professor of psychology in fact.

And the studies and issues mentioned in his (Singals) book are, most definitely, scientists and experts in their field. Brian Nosek, Roy Baumeister. (there are more, I merely picked two)

Or are you saying they aren't 'real scientists/scholars' either?

You ask what science, I reply with science, you say 'oh thats not real science' but nod like a bobblehead when some person on twitter makes a claim based in no empirical evidence or data.

C'mon, get outta here with that nonsense.

 

[Maxperson]

Yeah from a strict moral view point there is no good choice. Every one has dead children.

But in only one of them was the U.S. directly responsible for those dead children.

 

[Wicked Woodpecker]

The "savage horde" becomes racist when you start applying liberally to people who aren't the Mongols or the like, but just "people who you don't like". It becomes bonus mode super-racist when you start adding insane nonsense like "and they breed really fast and have a low IQ!!!!".

Sure attributing it to people who are not well invading are not proper. But archetype and symbol are way older than current colonial problems of Anglo-Saxon world, and in quasi-medieval worlds this is quite proper situation.
And as I mentioned even warlike tribal people even though not dangerous at overall level were usually help to build such mythological figures.

In many ways fantasy races are embodiment of symbols, so it kinda free humans within setting from fullfilling this role.
Orcs replaced vikings and Jotvingans as tribal riders, hobgoblins as imperial slavers, elves as poshy artistocrates or whatever you wanna do with them.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yet the other person he mentioned, Ferguson most definitely IS, he is a professor of psychology in fact.

And the studies and issues mentioned in his (Singals) book are, most definitely, scientists and experts in their field. Brian Nosek, Roy Baumeister.

Or are you saying they aren't 'real scientists/scholars' either?

I haven't read Singal's book, but impression was that he misunderstood, misconstrued and misrepresented the ideas of at least some of the people who he purported to be working from - according to some of them even I think, though last I read about it feels like years ago.

Certainly he's a pretty bad journalist from stuff of his I have read, and doesn't seem to be at all scientifically-minded, so I wouldn't trust him for any accurate science reporting or writing.

 

[HJFudge]

I haven't read Singal's book, but impression was that he misunderstood, misconstrued and misrepresented the ideas of at least some of the people who he purported to be working from - according to some of them even I think, though last I read about it feels like years ago.

Certainly he's a pretty bad journalist from stuff of his I have read, and doesn't seem to be at all scientifically-minded, so I wouldn't trust him for any accurate science reporting or writing.

You may think so. Forgive me if I take the opinion of actual scientists, psychologists, and professors as a bit more weighty than your hot take here.

 

[Justice and Rule]

This is a very real concern in the fields of psychology and sociology. In 2011, there was a piece, peer reviewed and published in a leading scientific journal that suggested that humans can foretell the future.

I am not kidding.

It has, since, began to get a bit better in a lot of ways (but worse in others).

This happens, but not at big journals. There are a variety of "Pay-to-play" journals out there that can try and launder bad studies. But that's why reputation matters, in the same way a newspaper's reputation matters for the purposes of reliability and accuracy.

Other recent 'science' that has become part of the social narrative is the concept of Himmicanes. The belief that male named hurricanes caused less damage because people, being effected by systemic misogyny, prepared for them more seriously than female ones.

You illustrate another issue. That people pick studies that agree with their worldview. You've basically self selected so that any study you read will support your theory, because any scientist or doctor who happens to disagree is now engaging in 'bad science'.

So, how are you ever to have your ideas challenged scientifically if anytime anyone does, they are 'not True Science'?

It's a bit of a trap. Impossible to escape from.

You tow the party line or you are engaging in, and there is an actual term for it, 'racist science'. Your studies are pulled not because the science is at question, but the results of the science is politically 'wrong'.

No, I've just seen Singal have "discussions" on race and completely dance around ideas and completely not engage the arguments of the black authors arguing with him. So it's not really his output, but literally that I don't trust him as an honest actor. I know there are certain things I agree with him on, and others that I disagree with him. But I wouldn't use him as a source for the things I agree with him on because it's not about what he's saying, but how he's trying to go about it.

So this is like a specific thing to Singal himself, not necessarily based in any view he holds but how he carries himself and how he conducts himself in arguments. I find him to be a bad-faith actor, and thus don't trust any of his output. I know there are plenty of people I disagree with who I find actual good-faith arguments (or at least less bad faith) like David French, Noah Rothman, Scott Lincicome, and a bunch of others I follow on Twitter to keep out of a bubble.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Orcs replaced vikings and Jotvingans as tribal riders, hobgoblins as imperial slavers, elves as poshy artistocrates or whatever you wanna do with them.

Yeah and he they hadn't got into the weeds with stuff like "fast-breeding" and "low IQ", which unfortunately Volo's decided to go with, that sort of thing would probably not have become an issue.

 

[Justice and Rule]

You may think so. Forgive me if I take the opinion of actual scientists, psychologists, and professors as a bit more weighty than your hot take here.

Did you read what @Ruin Explorer said? He's saying that Singal distorted what they were saying to support his view, rather than using their work as intended. So you're not actually taking the opinions of the scientists, psychologists, and professors, but rather what Singal manipulated them into saying.