About the author...

MWhere I’ll be:M

Birch Bay Public Market

Friday, May 10 through the end of summer, Cathy and I will be selling her hand-made soaps, lotions, and toiletries, along with my photography, note cards, calenders, books, etc.

Come see us!

Across the street from the C Shop

4825 Alderson Road, Birch Bay, Washington 98230

----------

I had an automated blogroll here, powered by Google Reader, but Google, in its near-infinite lack of wisdom, killed Google Reader. Prior to this murder, all I had to do to put a blog on my blogroll (or to take it off) was to place it in a Reader folder called, appropriately enough, "blogroll" (or, of course, to remove it). I use The Old Reader now for following blogs, but it seems to have no way to something similar regarding the blogroll. If you know of a way to do this, please let me know.

Illogical logic

I followed a link in a blog I read to a blog I don’t read, and found an article by Martin Robbins that starts out by claiming that "Jenny Rohn noted last September that most prominent science bloggers on the main networks are male." (I haven’t followed that link.) It goes on to say that "Casual inspection of e.g. the Wikio rankings of top science blogs shows them to be similarly man-heavy."
Ok, so far, so good, although I’m not certain that either of those are true, or whether it matters. Then the following paragraph:

So we don’t really know why women aren’t more prominent, but whatever the reason, it’s concerning. It’s an ethical concern, and it’s also potentially a pragmatic concern – a community dominated by a particular type of people may not be so good at reaching out to others on issues like science funding or climate change.

We have no idea why this is so, and yet it’s concerning? There are no conceivable reasons at all why women might not be blogging about science as much as men that aren’t reasons for concern? In any fair and just world, this ration would approach 1:1, and since it does not, we’re in trouble? Moving on without addressing that issue or stating any of his assumptions, the writer goes on to his next leap: men who blog about science are a "particular type of people." And then to leap three: women who would blog about science (if only they would) would not be a "particular type of people."

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, and I’ll keep saying it until the day I die: The day they stopped teaching logic in junior high was the day society died.

(And to all of you who just said “Oh, they never taught logic in junior high,” let me just say “Oh, yes they did!” I had set theory and truth tables and syllogisms and the classical fallacies and what to do about them from sixth grade through the end of my high school career. And yes, that was a very long time ago, and while I’m fairly certain there are still schools that do that, I know for a fact that most public schools no longer even teach grammar, much less logic. RIP, society.)


Read the first chapter for free!

2 comments to Illogical logic