There IS something outrageous about stamping out dissenting speech

A recent article, by Osita Nwanevu, published in Slate magazine, makes the, superficially, appealing claim that we should stamp out bigoted speech. However, in doing so, he makes a number of logical fallacies and sets up poor standards which we should hope to not find in widespread use.

Before we start, I will say that I am very much on the free speech side of things. I strongly believe free speech is the most important human right there is and that there can be as, without the ability to freely discuss and debate ideas, we can not even begin to entertain the notion of any other human right. The very existence of a right to life or freedom from discrimination is dependent upon one being able to express those thoughts in the first place. Continue reading

Working hours: A shared delusion

Scientists are supposed to be trained to examine and make conclusions based on evidence, however, this is widely ignored when it comes to themselves rather than their object of study. A 2016 poll on the Nature website showed that about 70% of academics work more than 50 hours per week. The lack of a work-life balance was chosen as the biggest challenge for early career scientists by 19% of respondents and almost two thirds have considered leaving research. This is similar to previous results in a 2011 Nature poll where 65% of post-docs said that they worked over 50 hours a week.

In contrast to this behaviour, current research does not support the idea that longer working hours are more productive. One study, based on factory workers during WWI, showed that productivity is proportional to hours worked only to a certain point. Above 48 hours worked per week, productivity per hour sharply decreases. Because of the decreased productivity per hour over longer work weeks it can be that working fewer hours will cause an increase in productivity. Continue reading