[Taxacom] [EXT] Re: NZ Royal Society fails to object to suppression and censorship of science

igor pavlinov ipvl2008 at mail.ru
Thu Aug 12 10:25:54 CDT 2021 

John,
 
this is just to remind you that any professional scientific activity is full of such suppression. The most illustrative example most close to me due to my current activity is provided by the Nomenclature Codes. For instance, all traditional codes suppress taxa not allocated to any officially recognized rank categories, and in particular,  zoological code suppress infrasubspecific taxa. Besides, it suppresses hypothetical taxa, which looks especially funny, providing that all scientific (non-dogmatic) knowledge is hypothetical.
 
The thing is that all the codes, with all their suppressive rulings, have been approved officially by respective societies evidently agreeing with such clauses.
 
Cheers,
 
Igor
 
 
- - -
Igor Ya. Pavlinov, DrS
Zoological Museum of Lomonosov Moscow State University
ul. Bol'shaya Nikitskaya 6
125009 Moscow
Russia
http://zmmu.msu.ru/personal/pavlinov/pavlinov1.htm  
http://zmmu.msu.ru/personal/pavlinov/pavlinov_eng1.htm
 
  
>Четверг, 12 августа 2021, 13:01 +03:00 от John Grehan via Taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>:
> 
>Jason - of course it's a point of view - a point of view that it is OK to
>call for suppression or censorship as an acceptable practice in science.
>Nothing new in that of course. This history of science is replete with such
>attitudes (that opposing perspectives should not be published) and there is
>a long history of this against panbiogeography (which is why Croizat
>resorted to publishing privately for some of his works). As for the NZ
>Royal Society - it does have power - the power to at least denounce such
>views as being antithetical to its ethics principles (otherwise why have
>such principles in the first place?) or its avowed goal to "support New
>Zealanders to explore, discover and share knowledge." Waters et al darned
>well do not believe in the goal, unless it is their view of what this
>'knowledge' is, and the Society has since endorsed that perspective as
>making a mockery of the Society's purported stance on science and
>knowledge. And in this instance the Society is not supporting New
>Zealanders to explore, discover and share knowledge if they are
>panbiogeographers.
>
>As for power, yes the Society does have the power to admonish its members,
>or decline to include members who do not follow the ethics principles of
>the Society (otherwise why have any ethics at all, and why even go through
>the charade of addressing a complaint concerning the lack of adherence to
>those principles?). As for a 'dig', I am not aware of any such. I will
>repeat my original notice - that the Society's support for its members
>declaration of censorship and suppression is a truly astonishing policial
>decision, and one that stands out as perhaps the first public
>declaration by a scientific society - at least within 'modern times
>(although I would not be surprised to find other instances in the past - I
>wonder if there are examples of scientific societies opposing publication
>of evolutionary theory in the early days?).
>
>Cheers, John
>
>On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 5:34 AM JF Mate via Taxacom <
>taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu > wrote:
> 
>> But John, the RSNZ has no power over them and they sure as hell can't
>> punish them. Do you think the solution is a punitive scientific society? We
>> have already talked about this before in situations regarding taxonomic
>> malpractice and the powers of the ICZN. In both cases they are not cops nor
>> judges and you don't want them to either. The article is a POV, write a
>> counterargument which is the proper way to address this. Or ignore them,
>> which is what I did with your ending dig ;)
>>
>> J
>>
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2021 at 13:01, John Grehan < calabar.john at gmail.com > wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Jason,
>> >
>> > Sure they are free to do so. Point is that they do so. Their paper is
>> > historically significant as an open admission that they would like to see
>> > suppression or censorship of an opposing research program and the NZ
>> Royal
>> > Society has subsequently accepted that approach to science as
>> > compatible with their ethics principles. Of course anyone is free to call
>> > for suppression and censorship in science, but it's not something I find
>> > acceptable, whether or not directed to a research field with which I have
>> > sympathy. Even though I think most of the dispersalist biogeography is a
>> > load of junk I would never engage in efforts to suppress or censor
>> > opportunities for supporters to publish.
>> >
>> > Cheers, John
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 9:29 PM JF Mate via Taxacom <
>> >  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu > wrote:
>> >
>> >> The authors (Water et al 2013) are free to call for rejection of
>> >> panbiogeography papers but since its publication panbiogeography papers
>> >> have continued to be published. I don't understand what you want the
>> panel
>> >> to do, punish the author's? Sure, calling for banning raises an eyebrow
>> >> but
>> >> you can't suppress them. You can argue against them.
>> >>
>> >> J
>> >>
>> >> On Tue., 10 Aug. 2021, 09:17 John Grehan via Taxacom, <
>> >>  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Mary,
>> >> >
>> >> > this is not about rejection of a paper. This was about the Society
>> >> > establishing a Panel to respond to a complaint that some of their
>> >> members
>> >> > acted in ways contrary to their ethics by calling for suppression and
>> >> > censorship of a research program they opposed (that research program
>> >> being
>> >> > panbiogeography). That panel found nothing wrong with their members
>> >> calling
>> >> > for suppression or censorship and the Society leadership did not
>> contest
>> >> > that finding and has taken no further action. Thus, I am correct that
>> >> the
>> >> > Royal Society of New Zealand has failed to object to calls by some of
>> >> its
>> >> > members for censorship and suppression of panbiogeography. Thus the
>> >> Royal
>> >> > Society of NZ effectively endorsed that view no matter how anyone may
>> >> wish
>> >> > to parse that.
>> >> >
>> >> > On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 6:46 PM Mary Barkworth via Taxacom <
>> >> >  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > A panel to evaluate a complaint is a far cry from "[endorsing] calls
>> >> for
>> >> > > suppression and censorship as being compatible with the Society's
>> >> ethics
>> >> > > policy. It simply means that if someone wants to complain about
>> >> rejection
>> >> > > of their manuscript or whatever, their complaint will be reviewed
>> by a
>> >> > > panel rather than being automatically accepted, dismissed, or
>> >> referred to
>> >> > > the same individual who made the decision that is being appealed.
>> >> > > Mary
>> >> > >
>> >> > > -----Original Message-----
>> >> > > From: Taxacom < taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu > On Behalf Of
>> John
>> >> > > Grehan via Taxacom
>> >> > > Sent: Monday, August 9, 2021 4:33 PM
>> >> > > To: Peter A Rauch < peterar at berkeley.edu >
>> >> > > Cc: taxacom < taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu >
>> >> > > Subject: [EXT] Re: [Taxacom] NZ Royal Society fails to object to
>> >> > > suppression and censorship of science
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I mentioned earlier that I would provide the R Soc Panel document to
>> >> > > anyone who asks (and will send to Peter next). Point is that the
>> >> Society
>> >> > > set up the panel to 'evaluate' a complaint. The Panel denied any
>> >> conflict
>> >> > > with the Society's ethics and recommended no further action. That is
>> >> the
>> >> > > Society conclusion. Thus the Society, through its Panel, has
>> >> effectively
>> >> > > endorsed calls for suppression and censorship as being compatible
>> with
>> >> > the
>> >> > > Society's ethics policy.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > John Grehan
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 6:18 PM Peter A Rauch < peterar at berkeley.edu >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > John pointed to the published paper by Waters et al., Syst. Biol.,
>> >> as
>> >> > > > the stimulus for his comments, and states [*emphasis* mine]:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > "... now the Royal Society Te Apārangi (New Zealand) has trashed
>> its
>> >> > > > slogan "We support New Zealanders to explore, discover and share
>> >> > > > knowledge" *by providing endorsement of suppression and censorship
>> >> by
>> >> > > > their members through a Panel that concluded that there was
>> nothing
>> >> > > > wrong for their members to do this*.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > I'm still missing the point he apparently wants to make (about the
>> >> > > > RSTA's
>> >> > > > Panel) because I don't know (John didn't provide?) what that Panel
>> >> > > > actually wrote ("concluded"), nor what the RSTA wrote (to
>> "endorse"
>> >> > > > the Panel's "conclusions").
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Peter R
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Sun, Aug 8, 2021 at 3:06 PM John Grehan via Taxacom <
>> >> > > >  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu > wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >> Some of you may recall that some years ago several researchers
>> >> > > >> published a paper in Systematic Biology in which they called for
>> >> the
>> >> > > >> suppression and censorship of a research program they opposed.
>> That
>> >> > > >> they felt it was OK for scientists to openly admit to such
>> >> practices
>> >> > > >> is shocking enough, but now the Royal Society Te Apārangi (New
>> >> > > >> Zealand) has trashed its slogan "We support New Zealanders to
>> >> > > >> explore, discover and share knowledge" by providing endorsement
>> of
>> >> > > >> suppression and censorship by their members through a Panel that
>> >> > > >> concluded that there was nothing wrong for their members to do
>> >> this.
>> >> > > >> Perhaps others on Taxacome feel the same way, that it is OK for
>> >> > > >> scientists to actively engage in suppression. To me it is
>> >> horrifying,
>> >> > > >> but perhaps I am in an ethical minority. Boggles the mind.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> John Grehan
>> >> > > >> _______________________________________________
>> >> > > >> Taxacom Mailing List
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:
>> >>  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >> > > >> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>> >> > > >>  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> >> > > >> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>> >> > > >>  taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >> > > >> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>> >> > > >>  http://taxacom.markmail.org
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
>> >> > > 1987-2021.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > _______________________________________________
>> >> > > Taxacom Mailing List
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:
>>  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >> For
>> >> > > list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>> >> > >  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> >> > > You can reach the person managing the list at:
>> >> > >  taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu The Taxacom email archive back to
>> >> 1992
>> >> > > can be searched at:  http://taxacom.markmail.org
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
>> >> 1987-2021.
>> >> > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of USU. If this appears
>> >> to be
>> >> > > a USU employee, beware of impersonators. Do not click links, reply,
>> >> > > download images, or open attachments unless you verify the sender’s
>> >> > > identity and know the content is safe.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > _______________________________________________
>> >> > > Taxacom Mailing List
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:
>>  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >> > > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>> >> > >  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> >> > > You can reach the person managing the list at:
>> >> > >  taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >> > > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>> >> > >  http://taxacom.markmail.org
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
>> >> 1987-2021.
>> >> > >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Taxacom Mailing List
>> >> >
>> >> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >> > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>> >> >  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> >> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
>> >> >  taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >> > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>> >> >  http://taxacom.markmail.org
>> >> >
>> >> > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
>> >> 1987-2021.
>> >> >
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Taxacom Mailing List
>> >>
>> >> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>> >>  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> >> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>> >>  taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> >> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>> >>  http://taxacom.markmail.org
>> >>
>> >> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
>> 1987-2021.
>> >>
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>
>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>>  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>>  taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>  http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>
>> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years, 1987-2021.
>> _______________________________________________
>Taxacom Mailing List
>
>Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:  taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>You can reach the person managing the list at:  taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:  http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
>Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years, 1987-2021.
 

More information about the Taxacom mailing list