In today’s Australian, Paul Frijters and Tony Beatton take a swipe at my ‘double standards’ in talking about ethnic diversity. Andrew Norton is kind enough to defend me (doing a far better job than I would have done myself).Â In principle, I agree withÂ Frijters and Beatton’s conclusion:
What matters is that social scientists think critically about statements in support of truisms, just as they do about statements at odds with contemporary social norms.
But I’m not sure they live up to their own standards. In the opening paragraph, they say:
One of the most important contributions a scientist can make is to successfully question opinions that seem self-evident and obvious to the public. Once it was commonly accepted in the West that the world was flat and that the heart was the residence of the soul.
Where’s the evidence that the soul does not reside in the heart?