[armatav]

I don’t think physics operates on anything resembling a social-justice system - nothing like the parent comment is going to send us backwards any amount of time in the field, but an attitude that bars commentary might stagnate us for a long time.

[wallace_f]

>I don’t think physics operates on anything resembling a social-justice system

Physicists are chosen within the Academic-Governmental Complex, and as such physicists are chosen according to its preferences. Maybe this is a big problem? It's not just with respect to selection based on gender, race or socioeconomics. Have you read Paul Graham's Lesson to Unlearn, about the adverse incentives and maligned merits which academia chooses for: http://www.paulgraham.com/lesson.html

Personally, I just hate it when people praise Academia (I see it often with Wall Steeet, too) as being a shining example of social justice like its some gift-wrapped paper around a rotten core.

>an attitude that bars commentary might stagnate us for a long time.

I agree. Now watch comments such as these incite downvotes and inflammatory responses because they question assumptions and make people feel uncomfortable.

[armatav]

You aren’t getting my position - results drive the field, whether those results come from a tenured professor and his team of PhD students, or some kid in his garage with no formal training.

Physicists are not “chosen”. They are built and trained.

There’s no conspiracy here.

[wallace_f]

These argumentative tactics are of poor conduct, and seem to be clearly made in bad faith.

Someone who disagrees with you is just someone who has a different opinion, and that does not make it appropriate for you to attack them.

In other words, what you are doing is wrapping your argument in argumentative tactics. Instead of acknowledging another user has a different conclusion than you, you assert that they "don't get your position." In this context, all you did was reiterate your disagreement, and so the personal attack comes across as either a put down or an statement of arrogance.

At the end of your statement about physics being a meritocracy, you again use argumentative tactics, suggesting that any disagreement is a conspiracy.

First of all, the poor results of physics as a field is not a conspiracy. And you do not need to be a conspiracy theorist to criticize the field of physics. That is just ridiculous. Did you even take a moment to look at the Paul Graham post I referenced? Something tells me you are more interested in broadcasting and arguing about your world view than you are in engaging in though-provoking discussion.

But finally, social justice in academia is blatantly obvious. For example, affirmative action awards up to a few standaDs deviations of promotion in rank alone in just undergraduate admissions. Also, the author of the OP has written about social justice in the field herself. It is just both dishonorable and disingenuous for you to ignore the truth and be so argumentative.