> The sentence quoted in the Listener letter as proof of the need to ‘defend’ science was from a section I largely wrote about the strand of the Pūtaiao curriculum that did not have a direct equivalent in the NZC Science learning area, on the history and philosophy of science. The sentence quoted was part of a description of the possible scope of studies of socioscientific issues, from a Māori perspective, by senior secondary students of Pūtaiao.
It does not, it's about history. If you want to link it to science, its ethic and epistemology, or philosophy? Not STEM at least. That's why the comment is interesting, it is the same stuff than "woke people against classic letters at Princeton!!!1!". I seem to fall for it each time, then research (or in this case, read comments!) about context, and then i'm disappointed in myself, two years ago this would've tingled my bullshit senses, nowaday i fall almost every time. I should stop working for a bank