Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Science vs. Scruples

Options
135678

Replies

  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 9,979 Member
    Options
    mmapags wrote: »
    richln wrote: »
    A bit of background context... Aragon sells his expert opinion in his research reviews, speaking engagements, and I would also guess he makes some significant advertising money. He has also produced some relatively famous peer-reviewed literature regarding protein timing, bodybuilding contest prep nutrition, and BCAA supplementation. These journal publications contribute to his credentials and therefore his earning potential.

    If his career is now destroyed because of his behavior, we may never get anything new from him.
    His peer-reviewed scientific pubs & credentials will continue to be what they are: science.

    The body of scientific knowledge is full of things learned in ways now considered immoral. Mengele and Tuskeegee are among the most infamous, but there's plenty of other examples out there. The knowledge stands.

    As for research published by people who've done things that some other people have sometimes considered immoral, I think that covers all research ever done by human beings. Look at Galileo vs. the Inquisition.

    If the research is worthwhile, it will be done by somebody. The church stopped Galileo, but it didn't stop others from working out planetary orbits and the physics involved.

    However -

    This guy's expert opinion is his opinion, and if you're paying for that, you're paying him. If you're buying the stuff he advertises, you're paying him.

    IMO, once you know that he's behaved in ways you find unacceptable, whether you can give the guy your money without wanting to vomit is a matter of your own morality.

    Just by way of clarification, as far as I know, he has never advertised or endorsed a product. He's spoken at length about this. He always felt it would compromise his objectivity as a researcher. If I recall correctly, he has a pay site in the past. I think it was called Research Review. I have no problem with his desire to monetize his work efforts. I believe he no longer has that site. But we all have to make a living. He also does personal training to elite athletes and celebrities. I think he was making a fine living prior to this issue coming to light.

    If he moved from a subscription-based website to an advertising-based website, you're still contributing to his revenues if you visit his website. Whether that's something you want to do is up to you.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 9,979 Member
    Options
    ccrdragon wrote: »
    smolmaus wrote: »
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    smolmaus wrote: »
    If I bring my company into disrepute by my actions I lose my job. That could be as small as posting the wrong thing on social media.

    What if those same actions have no impact on the company or their reputation? Will you still lose your job? Should you?

    How would I be bringing the company into disrepute if the company is unaffected???

    The point I was making is that people do, and sometimes should, lose their jobs and income for much much smaller things than repeated sexual assault.

    But to go with that point anyway, if I do not make it known anywhere that I work for my company and someone spots me writing anti-semetic or racists screeds all over the internet then yeah, I think it's okay for me to be fired for that. Because that's hate speech, which is a crime, like sexual assault.

    No, hate speech is not a crime, nor should it be a crime.

    As to the original question, the knowledge that has been shown by Aragon is not tainted so the knowledge still stands. The man on the other hand...

    Depends on where you live. Some types of hate speech, in some countries, is a crime.
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    edited September 2018
    Options
    mmapags wrote: »
    richln wrote: »
    A bit of background context... Aragon sells his expert opinion in his research reviews, speaking engagements, and I would also guess he makes some significant advertising money. He has also produced some relatively famous peer-reviewed literature regarding protein timing, bodybuilding contest prep nutrition, and BCAA supplementation. These journal publications contribute to his credentials and therefore his earning potential.

    If his career is now destroyed because of his behavior, we may never get anything new from him.
    His peer-reviewed scientific pubs & credentials will continue to be what they are: science.

    The body of scientific knowledge is full of things learned in ways now considered immoral. Mengele and Tuskeegee are among the most infamous, but there's plenty of other examples out there. The knowledge stands.

    As for research published by people who've done things that some other people have sometimes considered immoral, I think that covers all research ever done by human beings. Look at Galileo vs. the Inquisition.

    If the research is worthwhile, it will be done by somebody. The church stopped Galileo, but it didn't stop others from working out planetary orbits and the physics involved.

    However -

    This guy's expert opinion is his opinion, and if you're paying for that, you're paying him. If you're buying the stuff he advertises, you're paying him.

    IMO, once you know that he's behaved in ways you find unacceptable, whether you can give the guy your money without wanting to vomit is a matter of your own morality.

    Just by way of clarification, as far as I know, he has never advertised or endorsed a product. He's spoken at length about this. He always felt it would compromise his objectivity as a researcher. If I recall correctly, he has a pay site in the past. I think it was called Research Review. I have no problem with his desire to monetize his work efforts. I believe he no longer has that site. But we all have to make a living. He also does personal training to elite athletes and celebrities. I think he was making a fine living prior to this issue coming to light.

    If he moved from a subscription-based website to an advertising-based website, you're still contributing to his revenues if you visit his website. Whether that's something you want to do is up to you.

    I could be wrong but I don't think he operates a website. He did have a substantial social media presence though so your logic may apply. That presense is gone now.

    BTW, I have no problem with people in fitness and fitness research making a living. AFAIK he refused to endorse products for the reasons I stated. Right now, he obviously has bigger issues that need to be addressed.
    ETA: just checked. His Research Review website is still operational. So, I was mistaken.
  • aokoye
    aokoye Posts: 3,495 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Science and objective reality aren't a person....you can agree with thrm without having that agreement associated with whatever person just happened to point it out to you.

    It is perfect okay to agree that the sky is blue even if it was Hitler who told you that.

    As far as research the person in question actually conducted? Assuming it is unbiased professional research I'm not sure how they gain financially from you agreeing with it. Such research should be in the public domain. If this is "science" that the person sells for a fee on their own website and can't be found anywhere else then I'm not sure how "science" it actually is.

    Science and research is frequently sold. Most reputable academic journals are subscription based and they are expensive. Books sold by academic publishers aren't free, there's the entire pharmaceutical industry, etc. One of the major issues that independent researchers, that is to say researchers that aren't based at an academic institution, is that they don't have access to institutional subscriptions to journals. UCSF's library wrote about the cost of journal subscriptions here, there's another article in Nature about it here, and there's an article in the Guardian about this here.

    Because Aragon appears to run his own journal, if you could call it that, (that is named after him - I'm doing a lot of side eyeing), he will get the profits of people subscribing to that journal - though it is very inexpensive comparatively speaking. He also has articles that are published in other journals. He won't gain any money via those works but he will gain cloute/academic capital.
  • smolmaus
    smolmaus Posts: 442 Member
    Options
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    I'm not real sure where to go from here. It feels like you and I are having parallel conversations. I never meant to downplay what he did. I never meant he didn't hurt people. I never meant people shouldn't be angry. I only meant to separate his behavior from his information/knowledge as they are (for me) different animals.

    Well no, you started by saying that being a bad person doesn't mean you can't be good at your job and that he was maybe not an inherent threat to society. My point was that your behaviour can absolutely affect whether or not it is appropriate that you be allowed to continue in your job. And that yes, he is a threat to others.

    Aaron_K123 wrote: »

    I think the issue is this.

    If something a crime then it should be punished within the criminal justice system. If something is not a crime then is it then the role of the public to exact whatever punishment they see fit through public pressure?

    If we all agree groping is wrong then it should be a crime and if someone gropes someone it should be a criminal offense....the punishment given and enforced by the judicial system. The issue is if the person isnt convicted and therefore is not punished quite often the public basically attempts to hang them in the court of public opinion. And for that to happen all it takes is for some members of the public to just be convinced the person is guilty for whatever reason.

    I get that....but it also makes me uncomfortable. I feel like we have a justice system for a reason and if someone should be punished for bad behavior it should be through that system where there is some accountability and clear punishments....not via social media and ostracism or job loss.

    He has publicly admitted to it and has also admitted it was serial behaviour so guilty/ not guilty doesn't factor here.

    These women may not want to press charges and for a crime that is (wrongly, in my view) seen as minor there will not be a case in the public interest. But we still know he did these things. Should we continue to reward him with our time, money and attention? Saying "hey these things you said you did, that's disgusting and you're disgusting for doing them" is hardly a harsh or undeserved punishment.
  • jjpptt2
    jjpptt2 Posts: 5,650 Member
    edited September 2018
    Options
    Nevermind
  • 33gail33
    33gail33 Posts: 1,155 Member
    edited September 2018
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    smolmaus wrote: »
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    Honestly, yes I probably am downplaying assault. Are you "upplaying" it, or is that my own sensitivities impacting how I read/interpret your post? IMO, rape is not the same thing as grabbing someone's butt. But both are labeled as assault (at least as I understand it here in the States). And that was my point - not everyone who has been accused of assault should be viewed or treated the same way. Different situations can and do have very different circumstances. Some people are scumbags, thru and thu, no doubt. But not everyone.

    A grope and a rape are never treated equally. Not by anyone, not by any justice system in any country. That’s not your opinion, that’s facts. If you are downplaying what he did do with “well it’s not like he raped anyone” that is... wow. What he actually did do is violate multiple women’s personal space, made them feel uncomfortable and maybe even afraid for their safety at work, possibly restricting their opportunities for career advancement. This behaviour hurts people, it can affect self esteem, confidence, where you feel able to work and be welcome and since he then tried to label one of the women involved as a fantasist that could affect how potential employers and sponsors view her character and she could lose out financially. He did this repeatedly, with apparently no fear of ever being called out and you have to assume would have continued until he was made to stop. Is that not enough to be angry about?

    I think the issue is this.

    If something a crime then it should be punished within the criminal justice system. If something is not a crime then is it then the role of the public to exact whatever punishment they see fit through public pressure?

    If we all agree groping is wrong then it should be a crime and if someone gropes someone it should be a criminal offense....the punishment given and enforced by the judicial system. The issue is if the person isnt convicted and therefore is not punished quite often the public basically attempts to hang them in the court of public opinion. And for that to happen all it takes is for some members of the public to just be convinced the person is guilty for whatever reason.

    I get that....but it also makes me uncomfortable. I feel like we have a justice system for a reason and if someone should be punished for bad behavior it should be through that system where there is some accountability and clear punishments....not via social media and ostracism or job loss.

    Sure the public, and his industry, should respond how they see fit. There is a role for the judicial system in punishing the offender, but that doesn't mean that has to be the only consequence. The judicial system has no way of removing or banning someone from their industry. Just because someone has had a punishment decreed, or not, by the judicial system (and we have all seen how that works) doesn't mean that the public, or his industry, has to accept him back into the fold. Why should they? To give him back his platform? That he abused to begin with?

    I hear all the time when these kinds things hit the news that I should let the courts decide before I form an opinion. But there is no burden of proof in the court of public opinion - we are free to come to our own conclusions and respond accordingly.
  • jjpptt2
    jjpptt2 Posts: 5,650 Member
    Options
    I keep coming back to this thread to post, then I keep deleting my post and leaving... rinse and repeat.

    There seems to be a lot of emotion involved in this topic which is making it hard for people to read/listen to what others are saying. Yes, this includes me. There are a lot of layers to this topic...