Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
Hi Steve,



Well, I agree with the sentiment if not the specific terms you use . I wouldn't use the term "scientist" in the way you have - there is nothing scientific about their actions and it is, in many ways, anti-scientific. I think the most appropriate term would be "theologian" or, if I was being realy pedantic, neo-Thomistic pseudo-Marxian theologian.

The dynamic itself is nothing new - it is a standard variant on the witch hunting process used by theologians and other demagogues to rout out heretics. As such, the ad hominen attacks are to be expected as is the use of illogical logic (e.g. binary logic with extremely flawed assumptions).
As long as my dander is up and I'm in mid-rant, let me throw out another point. While some trained anthropologist who consult with the government undoubtedly do so because they believe in the cause, I suspect there are other who do it just because it's a job. So the profession generates more anthropologists than the academic market can absorb, and then carps when they seek other ways to make a living.

This is a longstanding pet peeve of mine. I once taught in a master's granting political science department which was desperately trying to get a Ph.D. program. I opposed this, pointing out that there were already dozens of Ph.D.s for every job, so I didn't see why we needed to produce even more. That was not a popular position in my department since all the tenured folks were obsessed with the idea that it would increase their prestige (and salaries) to be a Ph.D. granting department. They didn't care that they'd be churning out many unemployable Ph.D.s.