Summary of Yonatan Dubi: Biases in the Knowledge System | Tom Nelson Pod #167

This is an AI generated summary. There may be inaccuracies.
Summarize another video · Purchase summarize.tech Premium

00:00:00 - 01:00:00

In this section, Yonatan Dubi discusses biases in the knowledge system, particularly in relation to how scientific papers are rated. He points out that many skeptic papers are rated as either supporting the consensus or uncertain, indicating a flaw in the rating system. Dubi suggests that researchers may avoid writing things that could annoy the referees in order to increase their chances of getting published. He also uses a fictional story about walking bare feet and heart attacks to illustrate how committees and the media's summarization of reports can contribute to biases. Dubi emphasizes the importance of transparency and thoroughness in scientific consensus studies to ensure their validity and reliability. Lastly, he highlights a report by UNESCO which advocates for higher education institutions to use their knowledge and education to help solve global problems, marking a shift in the goal of these institutions towards problem-solving.

00:00:00 In this section of the transcript excerpt, Professor Jonathan Dubi discusses the current situation in Israel following the attack on civilians by the terrorist group Hamas. He calls for Hamas to lay down their arms and surrender, citing the Israeli Defense Force's proven record in preventing civilian casualties and President Biden's acknowledgement that there are casualties of wars among civilians. Hamas took over 200 people hostage, and their status remains unknown, with the Red Cross not allowed to visit them. He then moves on to the main topic of the presentation, which is biases in the knowledge system from Academia to the public.
00:05:00 In this section of the transcript excerpt, a scientist named Yonatan Dubi discusses his research in sociology and epistemology and how it challenges common narratives in the science community. Dubi, who has a history at Benares University in Tel Aviv, Israel, argues that universities play a role in accumulating knowledge through the process of critical thinking and scientific progress. He also highlights the ethical code of Benares University, which emphasizes the importance of knowledge and the role of the university in acquiring it. Dubi's work challenges traditional notions of what makes a good scientist and what boundaries exist when it comes to critical thinking.
00:10:00 In this section, Yonatan Dubi discusses the concept of truth and how it relates to knowledge in various fields of study. He explains that truth can be defined differently in different disciplines but is generally considered to be a statement that reflects observations, rather than a theoretical statement. He identifies the scientific method as a useful way of gaining knowledge about the natural world and emphasizes the importance of knowledge through observation. Dubi also discusses two ways of knowing that are considered to be useful in science: knowledge through observation and knowledge through experimentation. He explains that the scientific method prioritizes these ways of knowing as they allow scientists to test and falsify their hypotheses and theories through empirical evidence, which is central to the scientific process. He also acknowledges the importance of peer review, which ensures that findings are reproducible and validated by other scientists in the field.
00:15:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the scientific method as a continuous cycle of observation followed by logic and more observation to either corroborate or disprove the original statement. He explains how mathematics is useful in scientific inquiry because it provides a clear definition of logical statements. The speaker also introduces the concept of a "poi ladder," in which the sciences are ranked according to how easy or difficult it is to falsify arguments. He argues that disciplines such as biology and psychology present more challenging obstacles for falsifying statements, while history is even more difficult due to the subjective nature of events. The speaker emphasizes that all disciplines are important, but some are just more difficult to picture.
00:20:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the "knowledge system" and how it occurs in the public's understanding of scientific knowledge. The framework comprises four main components: researchers, synthesizers, disseminators, and evaluators. Researchers learn through scientific methodology in their specific fields, synthesizers summarize knowledge in a subject area, disseminators bring this knowledge to the public via news outlets or spokespersons, and evaluators decide how to apply the knowledge. However, all these steps are flawed due to various incentives that may harm the purity of the knowledge that eventually reaches the
00:25:00 In this section, Yonatan Dubi discusses the biases that arise from funding, status, and incentives in the knowledge system. Synthesizers, for example, are limited by the knowledge accumulated by researchers and want public attention. The IPCC report is used as a clear example where the preservation of smers is a huge bias. Disseminators also have their own set of biases, politics, and agenda. Politicians are incentivized to be re-elected, which leads to various biases and incentives, such as populism. Dubi provides examples from Israeli media to illustrate these biases.
00:30:00 In this section of the interview, Yonatan Dubi discusses the Nitification of Winter Minid Latitude Stone Packs in the Southern Hemisphere, specifically the reduction of mid-latitude winter storms in the Northern Hemisphere and an increase in the same in the Southern Hemisphere. Dubi points out that research conducted by Dr. R. Shen has found that climate models are unable to accurately capture the storm track intensification, which delays the detection and questions the skills of climate models. Dubi uses the example of the New York Times' coverage of the flood in Pakistan to illustrate how writers can easily obtain the real data and miss important details. Dubi argues that blaming the climate crisis solely on the reduction in mid-latitude winter storms is not accurate and does not take into account other factors affecting the climate.
00:35:00 In this section, Yonatan Dubi discusses two inherent flaws in the knowledge system that are not discussed in Alex Epstein's chain of H knowledge system. The first flaw is that biases accumulate exponentially through the dissemination of research, which is reinforced by evaluators who rely on disseminators for funding. An example of this is seen in the funding for climate change research, where there is an exponential rise in the number of scientific papers and journals devoted to climate change due to government funding. This creates a feedback loop where more funding leads to more research, which is then published in journals for more citations, leading to more funding and more research. The second flaw is that the knowledge system is a nonlinear feedback system with internal interplay between different elements, such as researchers, funders, disseminators, and evaluators. This creates a complex system that is influenced by bias, which can affect what we know and how we perceive the world.
00:40:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the idea that funding for research, particularly in fields such as physics, chemistry, and artificial intelligence, is mainly provided by big tech companies such as Google and Amazon, who also employ researchers as professors at universities. The speaker also mentions that there is a strong correlation between funding for scientific research and the number of journal papers published. In particular, there has been a significant increase in both funding and the number of papers published in the field of climate change since the release of reports by organizations such as IPCC. The speaker then goes on to discuss the concept of consensus in science, particularly in the field of medicine, and how it is used to assess the value of treatments. The speaker argues that while consensus opinions can be useful in determining the effectiveness of treatments, they can also be biased and have limitations. The speaker then turns to the field of climate science, discussing two famous consensus studies that have been widely accepted as truth - one by John CET Al and another by L from Cornell. The speaker points out that these consensus statements come from biased papers and are an example of knowledge from authority. Finally, the speaker goes on to discuss the role of biased disseminators of information in shaping public perceptions of scientific truth.
00:45:00 In this section of the video, Yonatan Dubi discusses a paper he co-authored that was published in the journal "Climate Change" and argued that climate change is a fact. The paper went through three rounds of referee reports with four different reviewers, all from physics, chemistry, and computer science departments in Israel. Dubi emphasizes that the paper makes three basic statements: firstly, the hypothesis must be very specific and quantitative, such as "manmade CO2 emissions cause more than half of the global warming observed since the 1950s". Secondly, the consensus studies should not make the hypothesis blurry or vague. Thirdly, the paper should explicitly state whether the authors agree or disagree with the consensual statement. Dubi argues that the paper made a false argument by assuming that papers with no position or uncertain endorse the hypothesis because that's the consensus, without knowing what these authors are thinking. Despite the clarity of these statements, Dubi notes that the paper was not written in a clear or straightforward manner, which could lead to confusion and misinterpretation. Dubi also points out that the paper took a subset of papers, specifically those written by well-known skeptic scientists, to arrive at a conclusion. He raises the question of whether this selection was representative of the broader scientific community and whether the conclusions were valid based on a limited sample size. In addition, Dubi suggests that the paper's argument would be stronger if it explicitly states its criteria for evaluating the papers and provides more detail on why only 50 skeptical papers were used. Overall, Dubi cautions that while climate change is a fact, scientific consensus studies must be conducted in a transparent, rigorous, and thorough manner to ensure their validity and reliability.
00:50:00 In this section of the video, Yonatan Dubi discusses the issue of biases in the knowledge system, specifically in relation to the rating of scientific papers. Dubi and others have found that more than 50 out of 100 skeptic papers are rated as either supporting the consensus or uncertain, indicating that the rating system is flawed. Dubi argues that this happens because researchers want their papers to be published, so they may avoid writing things that could annoy the referees. Dubi then proceeds to tell a fictional story about walking bare feet and heart attacks to illustrate the point about the formation of committees and the media's summarization of reports. Dubi argues that if a majority of a committee is within the consensus, even if it's only 70%, it's closer to 100% than if the committee was entirely made up of non-consensus members. Finally, Dubi notes that the journalist's summary of the report may also be flawed because they only call the head of the department and the committee, and may not have direct access to all the evidence.
00:55:00 In this section of the excerpt, it is being discussed how the UNESCO has written a paper stating what higher education institutions should do to contribute to global sustainability. The report titled "Knowledge-Driven Actions Transforming Higher Education for Global Sustainability" advocates that universities should use their knowledge production and education of new professionals to help solve some of the world's greatest problems as addressed by the SDG goals set out by the UN. The change in perspective from being agents of truth to agents of solving problems is an important shift in the goal of higher education institutions that has been highlighted by this report.

01:00:00 - 01:15:00

Yonatan Dubi emphasizes the importance of universities to play an active role in addressing global issues. To achieve this, he suggests that universities should prioritize teaching core principles such as gender equality, climate change, and Indigenous knowledge, and that academic freedom should be exercised responsibly. He also stresses the need for the establishment of Chief Sustainability or SVG officers or sustainability committees to ensure that research aligns with these core principles, and that universities should refuse to engage in research related to non-sustainable practices. Dubi also highlights the challenges faced by scientists in navigating the politization of the university and the need to be aware of their own beliefs and science in order to become good scientists. He notes the bias structure present in the knowledge system, which is used to construct theories that enable individuals to feel superior to themselves. Lastly, Dubi emphasizes the need for science literacy at all levels to correct these issues, and invites individuals to contact him if they have any questions.

01:00:00 In this section, Yonatan Dubi discusses the agenda to make universities and higher education institutions play an active part in the call to address global issues. He suggests that universities should not only seek to discover the truth, but also choose which truth to teach, with a focus on core principles such as gender equality, climate change, and Indigenous knowledge. Dubi highlights the importance of academic freedom and the establishment of Chief Sustainability or SVG officers or sustainability committees to decide whether research aligns with these core principles. He also stresses the need for universities to refuse to engage in research that supports non-sustainable practices, such as studies related to the fossil fuel industry. Lastly, Dubi emphasizes the need for awareness of the flaws and biases inherent in the modern knowledge system, and for science literacy at all levels to correct these issues.
01:05:00 In this section, Yonatan Dubi discusses the challenges faced by scientists in navigating the politization of the university and the hardest thing is how to engage in global discussions while participating in funding or political discussions. He also emphasizes the importance of being aware of one's own beliefs and science in order to become a better scientist. Dubi mentions the concept of the Chicago Trifecta and the Cal report, which guide how the University of Chicago treats scientific inquiry and free speech. He also quotes Dwight Eisenhower on the feedback loop that surrounds the way science is conducted and integrated into society, and the dangers of public policy becoming a captive of the scientific and technological elite.
01:10:00 In this section of the video, Yonatan Dubi discusses the challenges of being a climate realist in academia in Israel. Dubi, who studies climate science and the public perception of climate science, acknowledges that Israel is a liberal country and that many scientists who challenge the consensus view on climate change are part of the country's scientific community. Dubi also notes, however, that within the faculty of natural sciences, climate skeptics are considered fans, and there are many prominent figures who challenge the consensus view. Dubi links the need to challenge the consensus view to Israel's place on the global stage, where it is facing increased scrutiny and criticism. Dubi also mentions that he plans to continue giving public talks and speaking out in various forums to become part of the global discussion on climate change.
01:15:00 In this section of the video, the speaker discusses the bias structure present in the knowledge system. According to him, the structure remains the same in every topic and is used to construct a theory that allows individuals to feel superior to themselves, morally or virtuously. This theory does not take into account facts, scientific methology or methodology. The speaker uses the Israel-Gaza conflict, climate science, and any other topic as an example to illustrate his point. He states that it was not a surprise to him to see the same people and construct in these topics. The speaker invites individuals to contact him if they have any questions and expresses his enjoyment of being involved in such discussions.