Nature: She’s the world’s top empathy researcher. But colleagues say she bullied and intimidated them

Posting just for interest. I suppose it's a human fallacy to think, as my automatic reaction was, that a researcher into empathy would automatically show greater empathy towards others, when in fact there is no good reason to think that.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/201...lleagues-say-she-bullied-and-intimidated-them

 

"What is this 'empathy'? I must study that bizarre phenomenon which others describe."

 

Same thing, different day. A witch hunter is generally a witch, a crusader for social justice is generally antisocial and bent on creating injustice.

Human nature hasn’t changed for 50,000 years, it’s not going to change in the next five minutes.

 

Some of the most important achievements of the human race were delivered by people who are, um, socially and ethically challenged.

Isaac Newton, for example. A notoriously prickly and difficult man, and not always ethical in his dealings with others.

 

Reminds me of "Snakes in Suits", although, of course, I can't and don't say that Tania Singer is a "snake".

Is this a quote by her?

 

I can't read the article due to brain dysfunction but if she is the world's top researcher then surely she has not read or assimilated the knowledge contained in this book...

 

I think this extends to scientists in general. They are not the scientific method personified. They are just as susceptible to bias, dogma, ego, perverse incentives as the rest of us.

 

Snakes taste like chicken, but this gal sounds bitter.

 

Perhaps this could be a good "Leaving Present" for M Sharpe? ( ie Leaving ME research).

Had considered the JHP special edition on PACE, but that would go straight in the bin.