A proposal: Social Matter for the sciences.

A user on reddit posted a link in which he lamented that there is not a neoreactionary magazine devoted specifically to science and technology news. Frankly, I think this is a very good idea. I have published things related to this several times before. You can see two of these articles here and here.

My book on gender differences in intelligence, and the biological basis thereof, is actually finished and loosely qualifies for what he wants. So that is science, which is just science, coupled with neoreactionary interpretations. I am still negotiating with a potential publisher, otherwise it would already be available. I hope to have it out by the end of the year, but this process takes a long time I understand. If that doesn’t work out, I will put it out on amazon instead. As important as I feel that is, it isn’t a science magazine which has regularly published short articles. It would be quite beneficial to start such an institution.

If there was going to be a neoreactionary science magazine I think that it would mostly be the regular critiquing of various published articles and pointing out the liberal bias in them. You can see a good template in Steve McIntyres Climate Audit website. Imagine this, but with broader topics and an explicitly neoreactionary position. Academia is a left dominated institution after all and I don’t see reactionary scientists getting funding or being published anytime soon. So really that is all we could do with the occasional exception. Before I started my current blog, I considered doing just this kind of content. Specifically, I had in mind a blog which took a published article from psychology every week or two and went through it to find bad or missing interpretations of the findings. Social psychology especially provides a wealth of material to be ripped apart by critique, but plenty of other branches do as well. Basically, what I have found in reading these articles is that often the data collection and number crunching is about as decent as could be expected, but the interpretations of the findings are often just way off; or certain conclusions are conspicuously absent. We don’t necessarily have to analyze papers as a statistician would to critique these papers. In fact, we can often just assume that all the data and math was done superbly (even if that probably isn’t true) and still find major problems with the paper. By conceding that part and focusing on interpretations it should make it so many more of us could participate in writing content for this magazine. Of course, we could also include pieces which simply analyses new advances in technology as well. I believe I could make a commitment to creating content at least once every two weeks and maybe once a week when time permits. Would anyone else in the neoreactosphere be willing to start working on this sort of thing with me such that we have something similar to social matter but for science and technology specifically? Please email me at Atavisionary@gmail.com or comment on this blog so we can start to make a plan.

Also, pretty much any paper should be freely accessible if we use libgen.in and /r/scholar to get them, so no one should go out of pocket to get papers for thrashing.

Share Button

7 thoughts on “A proposal: Social Matter for the sciences.

  1. […] A proposal: Social Matter for the sciences. […]

  2. There used to be a not so well known, and now defunct Neoreactionary e-zine before “Social Matter”, and it’s name was “Dark Matter”. These were all the articles that were ever published in “Dark Matter”. But, since it’s defunct that name can now be used again, and TBH it’s a fitting name for your great idea. If I may propose that you contact Empedocles and William M. Briggs (there are probably some other guys too, like AnomalyUK, Alrenous and maybe even wasenlightened and Erebus) with your idea. I may even be able to contribute something myself, though my degree is Electronics, and I don’t know what exactly did you have in mind besides reinterpretation of the data and analyses of new advances in technology.

    • Atavisionary says:

      Dark matter probably is a good name. I suppose it could also be a game review website as well since that is the kind of thing normal people are most upset over SJWs about. I don’t think it needs to be anything to restrictive so long as it focuses on technology and science. The critique is just what I am most inclined towards.

      • There is already anti-SJW gaming web site (its owners are the same guys that own RoK). I’ll mail you.

        • tteclod says:

          There are enough of us in various engineering fields to launch this as a tech ezine tomorrow. That topic has the advantage of being immediately applicable.

          Esoteric works discussing the limitations of the science underlying the engineering would be natural developments. Folks with social science degrees could contribute from those fields.

          My field is structural engineering for building construction. You’ll need a list of names and expertise, and preferably a editorial crew.

  3. […] Proposal: Social Matter for the sciences. […]

  4. […] has a proposal: Social Matter for the sciences. Not just the “social” ones. Also, our neoreactionary reditor discusses “You are […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *