A ranar 25 ga Janairu, 2023, Jami'ar Ghent ta hana amfani da littafina Psychology na Totalitarianism a cikin kwas "Critique of Society and Culture." Hakan ya faru ne bayan wata guguwar kafafen yada labarai da ta barke a watan Satumbar 2022 bayan hirar da na yi da ita Tucker Carlson da kuma Alex Jones. Na riga na rubuta game da hakan a cikin a rubutun da ya gabata.
Bayan wadannan bayyanuwa ta kafafen yada labarai, Jami’ar Ghent ta kaddamar da bincike kan ingancin kimiyyata da ingancin kayan koyarwa na, wanda a karshe ya kai ga dakatar da littafina. Me yasa suka yi zahiri fara wannan hanya? Damuwa game da ingancin ilimi, ina jin mutane suna cewa. Na yarda cewa amincin kimiyya yana da mahimmancin mahimmanci.
A haƙiƙa, Faculty ɗin ya ɗan jima yana samun matsala tare da ni. A gaskiya, kusan shekaru goma sha biyar. Domin, alal misali, ina tsammanin ingancin binciken kimiyya na yanzu a fannin ilimin halin dan Adam yana da matsala sosai kuma ina faɗi haka da babbar murya. Amma galibi saboda muryata mai mahimmanci yayin rikicin corona. Saboda haka, na yi hira da yawa tare da Daraktan Bincike kuma shugaban malamai a 2021. A koyaushe suna jaddada 'yancin maganata, amma kuma sun damu da ni. Na yaba da yunƙurinsu na shiga tattaunawa, amma ina so in tambaye su wannan: shin ba damuwa game da ra'ayin rashin yarda ba shine mafi munin alamun zamaninmu?
Na ci gaba da bayyana ra'ayi na ko ta yaya, amma ba tare da sakamako ba. An kore ni daga ƙungiyar ilimin halin ɗabi'a na sashen ilimin halin ɗan adam a cikin 2021. Dalilin shi ne cewa abokan aikina ba sa son yin tarayya da ni saboda maganganun da na yi a bainar jama'a game da samuwar jama'a yayin rikicin corona. Wannan kyakkyawan harshe ne mai gaskiya kuma madaidaiciya: korar ra'ayi don rashin amincewa.
A watan Satumban bara ma an sake daukar wani mataki. Wannan shi ne lokacin da Faculty of Psychology yanke shawarar bincika amincin kimiyyata da kuma ko kayan koyarwa da nake amfani da su a cikin kwas "Critique of Society and Culture" yana da isasshen inganci.
Wannan tsarin da aka yi mini, wanda a ƙarshe ya haifar da dakatar da littafina a cikin Janairu 2023, yana da wahala sosai. Yana karanta ɗan kamar Franz Kafka. Majalisu da kwamitoci da dama sun shiga hannu kuma ba abu ne mai sauƙi a kwatanta wannan taƙaddama ta hanyar da ba ta zama mai ban sha'awa ba. Zan gwada shi a wani lokaci na gaba, amma da farko zan mayar da hankali kan jigon dabaru na tsari.
Babban zargin da ake yi wa littafina shi ne cewa yana cike da kurakurai da rashin hankali. Lokacin da na yi tambaya game da waɗannan kura-kurai da rashin daidaito, an tura ni zuwa ga yawancin sukar da ke yawo a kan layi. Wannan yana da mahimmancin mahimmanci: hukuncin da ke kan littafina ya dogara ne akan ingancin waɗannan mahimman bayanai.
Binciken da aka yi na kurkusa da wadancan bita-da-kulli ya nuna min cewa salon ya kasance mai yawan batanci, cin mutunci, kuma a wasu lokuta ba daidai ba ne. Me yasa Jami'ar Ghent kawai ta zaɓi waɗannan ra'ayoyi mara kyau na littafina don tantance ƙimarsa? Me yasa babu ɗaya daga cikin ɗimbin tabbatacce ko mafi tsaka tsaki?
Mummunan halayen da ba su da kyau da motsin rai ba safai suke daidai ba. Shi ya sa na saba ba su amsa. Wani lokaci mafi kyawun amsa shine shiru. Duk da haka, a cikin wannan hali zan amsa. Abin da ke cikin hadari ba ƙaramin al'amari ba ne. Yana da game da tambaya a kan wane dalili ne wata jami'a ta yanke shawarar dakatar da littafi.
Marubuta daban-daban ne suka rubuta sharhin littafina da Jami'ar Ghent ta yi la'akari da su. Tattaunawa da duk rubutun zai zama aiki mai mahimmanci, don haka zan fara da mafi mahimmanci.
Babban bita na Farfesa Nassir Ghaemi shine mafi mahimmanci. Daya daga cikin rahoton kwamitin yayi magana akai akai. Zan yi ƙoƙari in tattauna wannan zargi a bushe, fasaha. Wataƙila ba zai yi muku daɗi sosai don karantawa ba, amma duk wanda ke son sanin tushen tuhume-tuhumen da suka kai ga dakatar da littafin na zai iya ganin ya dace.
Ana iya samun sukar Farfesa Nassir Ghaemi a wata kasida mai suna “Ra'ayin Anti-Kimiyya Bayan Zamani: Asalin Tushen Ƙulla Ƙarfafawa" da kuma a kan YouTube, a cikin wani rikodi na zama na musamman a taron shekara-shekara karo na 43 na kungiyar Karl Jaspers Society of North America. (Dubi mintuna na 31 zuwa na 52 don gudunmuwar Farfesa Ghaemi da wasu gajerun kalamai da ya yi don mayar da martani ga wasu gudunmawar.)
Ba abu mai sauƙi ba ne a sami sigar da za a mayar da martani ga ɗimbin suka. Na yanke shawarar fara tantance duk wasu batutuwa na zargi da suke kange, haƙiƙa a cikin yanayi, kuma waɗanda za a iya yanke hukunci ba tare da wata shakka game da daidaitonsu a wannan batun ba. Tare da ɗaya daga cikin masu karanta littafina, na sami irin waɗannan suka guda bakwai a cikin labarin da kuma rikodin bidiyo. Mun tattauna su a kasa. A wani mataki na gaba kuma muna iya tattauna mafi yawan sukar Farfesa Ghaemi.
1. Farfesa Ghaemi ya yi iƙirarin cewa na yi kuskure gabaɗaya (wataƙila da gangan) labarin John Ioannidis “Me ya sa Mafi yawan Binciken Bincike Ƙarya ne” lokacin da na bayyana cewa kashi 85 cikin 33 na nazarin likitanci sun zo ga ƙarshe (57:XNUMX).
Zafin Farfesa Ghaemi yana da ban mamaki tun daga farko. Ya kuma kawo hujjoji da dama daga hukuma kafin ya bada kwararan dalilai. Sukar ta fi musamman game da wannan sakin layi a Babi na 1 na littafina (shafi na 18-19):
“Dukkan wadannan an fassara su zuwa wata matsala ta sake maimaita binciken kimiyya, a takaice, wannan yana nufin cewa sakamakon gwaje-gwajen kimiyya bai tsaya tsayin daka ba, lokacin da masu bincike da yawa suka yi gwaji iri daya, sun zo ga wasu bincike daban-daban.14 a cikin binciken ciwon daji kusan kashi 60 na lokaci, 15 kuma a cikin binciken ilimin halittu ba kasa da kashi 85 na lokaci ba.16 Ingancin bincike ya yi muni sosai har mashahurin masanin kididdigar duniya John Ioannidis ya buga wata kasida a kai a kai mai taken “Me ya sa Yawancin Binciken Bincike da aka Buga Ba Suke ba.” 17 Abin ban mamaki, binciken da ya tantance ingancin bincike ya zo mabanbanta. Wataƙila wannan ita ce mafi kyawun shaidar yadda matsalar take. " (Psychology na Totalitarianism, Babi na 1, p. 18-19).
Farfesa Ghaemi yayi babban kuskure a nan. Ya yi imani da kuskure cewa na koma ga Ioannidis '' Me yasa Mafi yawan Binciken Bincike da Aka Buga Karya Ne "don tallafawa da'awara cewa kashi 85 na binciken likita ba daidai ba ne. Koyaya, rubutun da bayanin ƙarshen (#16), a zahiri, koma zuwa wani labarin daban, wanda C Glenn Begley da John Ioannidis suka buga a cikin 2015 Nazarin zagayawa.
A cikin labarin Begley da Ioannidis, "Sake haɓakawa a cikin Kimiyya: Inganta Ma'auni don Bincike na Farko da Na Farko," zaku sami sakin layi mai zuwa (rubutu mai ƙarfi da ni):
"A cikin 'yan shekarun nan, an sami karuwar fahimtar raunin da ke tattare da tsarin mu na yau da kullum na bincike na asali da na asali. An nuna wannan a cikin bincike na ainihi ta hanyar rashin iya yin kwafi yawancin binciken da aka gabatar a cikin manyan mujallu.1-3 Ƙididdiga don rashin haɓakawa bisa ga waɗannan abubuwan da suka faru na empirical% 75 zuwa kashi 90 cikin XNUMX zuwa kashi XNUMX% Waɗannan ƙididdiga sun yi daidai da ƙima da ƙiyasin 85% don rabon binciken ilimin halittu wanda ya ɓace gabaɗaya.4-9 Wannan rashin sake haifuwa ba ya keɓanta ga karatun da ya dace ba. Ana ganin shi a ko'ina cikin nau'ikan binciken ilimin halittu. Alal misali, an bayyana irin wannan damuwa don bincike na lura inda aka tabbatar da sifili na 52 tsinkaya daga nazarin binciken a cikin gwaje-gwaje na asibiti bazuwar.10-12 A cikin zuciyar wannan rashin daidaituwa ya kasance wasu na kowa, kuskuren asali a cikin ayyukan bincike da aka karɓa a halin yanzu. Ko da yake abin takaici ne, wannan ƙwarewar bai kamata ya zama abin mamaki ba, kuma shine abin da mutum zai yi tsammani kuma a ka'ida don yawancin fannonin binciken ilimin halittu dangane da yadda ake gudanar da ƙoƙarin bincike. "
Wannan sakin layi ya tabbatar da bayanina cewa kashi 85% na binciken da aka buga a ilimin kimiyyar halittu ba daidai bane. Don haka, kashi 85 cikin XNUMX na nufin ƙungiyar binciken halittu, lura da kuma gwaje-gwaje masu sarrafa bazuwar (RCTs) sun haɗa. Ban yi wata magana ba a cikin littafina game da ko gefen kuskure ya bambanta a cikin waɗannan nau'ikan karatu guda biyu, kamar yadda Ghaemi ya nanata akai-akai.
Jawabin Farfesa Ghaemi ya mamaye ko'ina a cikin yunƙurin lalata wannan sakin layi na cikin littafina. Ya k'ara duk wani abu da bana fad'a. Ba wai kawai ya juya wannan a cikin tattaunawa mai ban sha'awa game da bambanci tsakanin nazarin lura da RCTs ba, ya kuma sanya shi tattaunawa game da nazarin rigakafin. Abin ban mamaki sai kalmomin "binciken kallo," "gwajin da ba a sani ba," da "alurar rigakafi" ba su bayyana a ko'ina a cikin wannan babi na littafina ba. Babu inda na banbanta tsakanin nau'ikan bincike daban-daban, babu inda na ba da adadin kurakurai daban-daban na nau'ikan bincike daban-daban, kuma babu inda na ambaci karatun rigakafin a cikin wannan babin.
Duk wanda ya karanta sakin layi a cikin littafina zai ga cewa ni, kamar Begley da Ioannidis a cikin sakin layi na sama, na magana akan binciken ilimin halittu. a general. Don haka Farfesa Ghaemi ya ba da misalin misalin gardamar mutumin bambaro. Ya karkatar da abin da ke cikin littafina sannan ya soki yadda ya yi kuskuren bayyana shi.
2. Farfesa Ghaemi ya sa ni a sansanin Heidegger (~47:00). Kamar shi, zan ɗauki matsayin anti-kimiyya. Don haka ina yawan ambaton Heidegger bisa ga Ghaemi (48:53).
Ba na ambata Heidegger a cikin littafina, ko da sau ɗaya. Wataƙila Farfesa Ghaemi yana yin kuskure a nan kuma a zahiri yana nufin ya ce "Foucault." Hakan bai fito fili ba. Ya kamata a bayyana a sarari, duk da haka, ba ina jayayya da kimiyya a ko'ina a cikin littafina ba; Ina jayayya da kimiyyar injiniyoyi akidar, wanda a cikin jawabina shine ainihin kishiyar abin da kimiyya ta hakika. Kashi na uku na littafina gabaɗaya ya keɓe kan hakan. Shin Farfesa Ghaemi ya rasa wannan bangare gaba daya?
3. Farfesa Ghaemi ya yi iƙirarin cewa na ƙirƙira kalmar “haɗin kai; Kalmar, a cewarsa, ba ta taɓa wanzuwa a cikin tarihin ɗan adam ba (sic) kuma na sanya shi gaba ɗaya (sic) (~58:43)
Waɗannan su ne kalmomin (tsattsauran ra'ayi) waɗanda Farfesa Ghaemi ya faɗi wannan magana mai ƙarfi:
"Kuma ta hanyar, wani babban hoto mai mahimmanci wanda na manta da shi: manufar 'mass formation' bai taba wanzuwa a cikin tarihin ɗan adam ba. Ba za ku same shi a ko'ina a cikin rubuce-rubucen Gustave Le Bon ba. Ba za ku same shi a ko'ina ba, kamar yadda zan iya fada, a cikin kowane rubuce-rubucen ilimin halayyar zamantakewa. da abokinsa wanda ya tafi a kan Joe Rogan podcast kuma yayi magana game da shi ga ma'aurata miliyoyin mutane ... Wannan ra'ayi na 'samuwar taro' ba shi da wani tushe na kimiyya, babu ra'ayi tushe cewa wani ya taba rubuta game da, babu ka'idar tushen cewa wani mutum ya yi magana game da taro psychosis, taro hysteria, amma kuma, wadannan su ne kawai metaphors, babu wani tushen kimiyya batu, kuma bai yi nuni da hakan ba kwata-kwata a cikin littafin, ba shi da tushe a tunanin wani.” Kuma a cikin nazarinsa (shafi na 200) ya rubuta mai zuwa game da shi: "Kalmar 'mass formation'' shine anti-COVID neologism - tare da ma'anar da ba ta da tabbas a cikin Ingilishi kuma ba ta da ma'ana ko kaɗan a kimiyance - wanda ba shi da tushe a ko'ina a cikin wallafe-wallafen masu tabin hankali kuma babu ɗaya a cikin wallafe-wallafen zamantakewa ko dai."
Wannan watakila shine mafi ban mamaki zargi na Ghaemi. Bari mu fara yin la’akari da yadda ake amfani da kalmar da kanta. Shin gaskiya ne cewa kalmar ba ta wanzu a tarihin ɗan adam? A cikin Jamusanci, kalmar "Massenbildung," a cikin Yaren mutanen Holland "samuwar taro," a cikin Ingilishi yawanci "samuwar jama'a," amma wani lokacin kuma "samuwar taro." A ƙasa akwai zaɓi na ƙarin fa'idar adadin misalan abin da ya faru na kalmar "samuwar jama'a," ko an fassara shi zuwa Turanci a matsayin "samuwar jama'a" ko "samuwar taro:"
- Kalmar “samuwar taro” ta bayyana a bangon baya na fassarar Yaren mutanen Holland na littafin Elias Canetti Mase da macht(Massa a Macht, 1960) kuma an yi amfani da kalmar sau biyu a cikin rubutun littafin. A cikin bugun Turanci, an fassara kalmar a matsayin “haɓakar jama’a.”
- A cikin rubutun Freud Massenpsychologie da ich-bincike (1921) An yi amfani da kalmar "Massenbildung" sau goma sha tara. A cikin bugu na Dutch, an fassara shi da “samuwar taro” kuma a cikin bugun Turanci, an fassara shi da “samuwar jama’a.”
- Salvador Giner yayi amfani da kalmar "samuwar taro" a cikin littafinsa Jama'a (1976).
- Littafin Kurt Baschwitz na Dutch akan tarihin ilimin halin jama'a Denkend mensch da menigte (1940) akai-akai yana ambaton kalmar “samuwar taro.”
- Littafin Paul Reiwald na Dutch Vom Geist der Massen (De geest der masa(1951)) ya ambaci kalmar “samuwar taro” kusan sau arba’in da shida (!).
- Kuma don haka a ...
Ko da, a cikin matsanancin jinƙai ga Farfesa Ghaemi, za mu ɗauka cewa yana nufin kalmar "samuwar jama'a" musamman ba kalmar "haɗuwar jama'a ba," bayaninsa na cewa kalmar ba ta faru ba zai zama kuskure. Kuma menene hakika ba daidai ba shine da'awar cewa babu wani tushe na ra'ayi don sabon abu na samuwar taro. Da kyar a ce an tafi da Farfesa Ghaemi a nan. Shin da gaske akwai wanda ke shakkar cewa an yi bincike-bincike na ra'ayi game da al'amuran samuwar jama'a? Sukar ba ta da hankali sosai ta yadda kusan ba daidai ba ne a mayar da martani. Tabbas a matsayin alamar fatan alheri, zan yi haka, tare da godiya ta musamman ga Yuri Landman, wanda ya taimaka wajen ba da bayyani game da wallafe-wallafen a kan kafofin watsa labarun da kuma sadarwar sirri:
Nazarin kimiyya na samuwar taro ya fara wani lokaci a cikin karni na sha tara, tare da aikin Gabriel Tarde (Dokokin kwaikwayo, 1890) da Scipio Sighele (Taron Masu Laifi da Sauran Rubuce-rubuce akan Mass Psychology, 1892). Gustave Le Bon yayi cikakken bayani akan wannan aikin a cikin 1895 tare da "La Psychology des foules"Jama'a: Nazarin Shahararrun Hankali). Sigmund Freud ya wallafa littafinsa Massenpsychologie da ich-bincike a cikin 1921, inda ya yawaita amfani da kalmar "Massenbildung," a zahiri an fassara shi azaman "samuwar taro" a cikin Yaren mutanen Holland. An yarda da ka'idar samar da taro kuma ta haɓaka ta Trotter (Illolin Garken Zaman Lafiya da Yaki, 1916), McDoughall's Hankalin Rukuni (1920), BaschwitzDu und mutu masse, 1940), Caneti's Jama'a da Karfi (1960) da kuma Reiwald (De geest der masa, 1951). A cikin lokacin tsaka-tsakin, waɗanda suka kafa farfagandar zamani da gudanarwar hulɗar jama'a, irin su Edward Bernays da Walter Lippman, sun dogara da wallafe-wallafen akan samuwar taro don jagoranci ta hanyar tunani da sarrafa jama'a. Masanin falsafa Ortega y Gasset (Tawayen Talakawa, 1930), masanin ilimin halin dan Adam Erich Fromm (Tsoron 'Yanci, 1942), masanin ilimin halin dan Adam Wilhelm Reich (Mass Psychology na Fascism, 1946), masanin falsafa Hannah Arendt (Tushen Totalitarianism, 1951) kuma ya ba da gudummawa mai mahimmanci ga tunani game da abin da ya faru na samuwar taro. Bugu da kari, ana iya nakalto dukkanin wallafe-wallafen sakandaren da suka dogara da wadannan marubutan ilimi, kusan ba su da iyaka, idan aka zo ga kwatanta cewa, sabanin abin da Farfesa Ghaemi ke ikirarin, hakika akwai ma’ana ta asali na kalmar “samuwar jama’a” da ke ci gaba da bunkasa a yau.
4. Ghaemi yayi iƙirarin cewa nace duk kimiyya yaudara ce.
Ya maimaita haka sau da yawa (shafi na 88 da 89 a cikin labarinsa da kuma cikin faifan bidiyo), don ƙarfafa ra'ayinsa (kuskure) na cewa ni 'mai tsattsauran ra'ayi ne na anti-kimiyya. Littafina, duk da haka, ya bayyana a fili cewa: ɓatanci, kurakurai, da ƙaddamarwa na tilastawa na kowa ne, amma "cikakkiyar zamba ba ta da yawa, duk da haka, kuma ba ainihin babbar matsala ba" (Babi na 1, shafi na 18).
Bugu da ƙari, za ku iya ganin 'daji' a fili da kuma rashin tushe na manyan zarge-zargen da Ghaemi ya kaddamar.
5. Ghaemi ya yi iƙirari a cikin labarinsa (shafi na 89) cewa na bayyana cewa “95% na mutuwar COVID-19 suna da ɗaya ko fiye da yanayin rashin lafiya, kuma hakan bai faru ba saboda COVID-19."
Ba na zana wani irin wannan ƙarshe. A cikin mahallin dalla-dalla na lambobi, Ina gabatar da wannan madaidaicin tambaya: Ta yaya kuke tantance wanda ya mutu daga COVID-19? "Idan wanda ya tsufa kuma ba shi da lafiya" ya kamu da cutar ta coronavirus kuma ya mutu, shin mutumin ya mutu 'daga' kwayar cutar? Shin digon karshe a cikin guga ya sa ta zube fiye da na farko?" (Babi na 4, shafi na 54).
Har ila yau, Ghaemi ya karkatar da hujjata sannan ya soki waccan karkatacciyar hujja.
6. Ghaemi ya bayyana a cikin labarinsa (shafi na 89) cewa na yi ikirarin cewa neman kudi shine babban dalilin da ya sa asibitoci ke kwantar da marasa lafiya na COVID-19 a asibiti. Ya sanya shi kamar haka: "Da yake magana game da labarin jaridar Belgium na 2021 wanda ɗan jarida Jeroen Bossaert ya rubuta wanda ya yi iƙirarin cewa asibitoci sun ƙara adadin mutuwar COVID-19 da asibitoci don samun kuɗi, marubucin wannan littafin ya yi amfani da damar don bayyana ra'ayinsa cewa samun riba shine babban manufar waɗannan asibitocin COVID-19."
A gaskiya, ba haka nake cewa ba (sake, gardamar bambaro). Abin da I do a ce abin ƙarfafawa na kuɗi abu ne guda ɗaya da ke haifar da haɓaka adadin shiga ta hanyar wucin gadi kuma ta haka ne ke gurbata waɗannan bayanan su ma. Babu inda littafina ya bayyana cewa shi ne firamare ko fa'ida kaɗai. Ga sakin layi mai dacewa a cikin littafina (Babi, shafi na 54):
"Wannan ba shine kawai abin da ya gurbata bayanan asibiti ba. A cikin bazara na 2021, Jeroen Bossaert na jaridar Flemish Het Laatste Nieuws ya buga daya daga cikin 'yan cikakken binciken aikin jarida na duk rikicin coronavirus. hanyoyin na dogon lokaci. Magungunan Mutuwa da Laifukan da aka Shirya by Peter Gøtzsche.7)"
7. Farfesa Ghaemi ya ce ina yaudarar mai karatu ta hanyar bayyana cewa akwai bayanan kimiyya game da mutanen da ke da raguwar girman kwakwalwa da har yanzu maki sama da 130 a gwajin hankali. A cewar Farfesa Ghaemi, majinyacin da nake magana a kai bai wuce 75 ba, don haka na (da gangan) na kara wannan adadin.
Ga abin da Ghaemi ya rubuta a labarinsa (shafi na 91): “Bayanan karya sun yi yawa a cikin wannan littafin, an sami karya ɗaya da ba za a iya warware ta ba a cikin fassarar da marubucin ya yi na wani bincike na 2007 wanda aka buga a cikin littafin Lancet. Na sake duba takardar da aka ambata, 'Brain of a white collar worker' (PT165). Takardar ta bayyana wani mutum mai shekaru 44 da ke da hydrocephalus tun yana da shekaru shida. Ya kasance ma'aikacin gwamnati mai aure, tare da rahoton ayyukan zamantakewa na yau da kullun, amma IQ ɗinsa ya kasance 75, wanda ke cikin kewayon raunin hankali. Koyaya, a cikin jagorar gabatarwar wannan harka, marubucin ya bayyana cewa mutumin yana da IQ sama da 130, wanda ke cikin kewayon hazaka. Maganar da marubucin ya yi na shari’ar karya ce ta gaskiya.”
Binciken na kusa ya nuna cewa abubuwa da yawa sun yi kuskure a nan. Fassarar Ingilishi a bayyane ta yi kuskure ta tsallake wani tunani, wanda ke can a cikin ainihin rubutun (De Pyschologie van Totalitarism, Babi na 10, p. 219): "Voor all duidelijkheid, ik spreek hier niet kan m beweringen, maar wel over wetenschappelijke observaties waarover gerapporteerd werd in tijdschriften als The Lancet en Science (bijvoorbeeld Feuillet et al., 20076; Lewin, 19807) ” tare da fassarar turanci, wanda ya ce (Psychology na Totalitarianism, Babi na 10, p. 165): “Don fayyace, ba wai ina magana ne game da maganganun da ba a sani ba amma game da abubuwan da suka faru na kimiyya da aka ruwaito a mujallu irin su The Lancet da Science.6. ")
A wasu kalmomi, ainihin rubutun ba kawai yana nufin labarin “Kwakwalwar Ma'aikacin Farin Kaya” (na Feuillet) amma kuma ga labarin na Lewin wanda yayi magana game da majinyacin Lorber—a daban-daban haƙuri fiye da na Feuillet-wanda ya zira kwallaye 126 akan gwajin IQ. Duk da haka, babu daidaituwa a cikin wallafe-wallafe game da wannan adadi na ƙarshe kamar yadda wasu wallafe-wallafen suka bayyana cewa wannan majiyyaci (na Lorber) ya sami maki 130 har ma da 140 akan gwajin IQ. A wasu kalmomi, maɓuɓɓuka daban-daban suna ambaton lambobi daban-daban (lokaci ɗaya 126, ɗayan lokaci> 130). A cikin ƙididdigewa, magana ɗaya game da majiyyaci da ake tambaya ya isa, kuma na zaɓi abin da ya ambaci IQ na 126 cikin rashin sani. Anan, na haɗa abubuwan da suka dace daga sauran wallafe-wallafen da ke ƙasa. Daga cikin wasu abubuwa, bita ta Nahm et al., mai take "Bambanci Tsakanin Tsarin Kwakwalwa da Ayyukan Fahimi, Bita,” in ji mai zuwa: “Dalibin da aka ambata a cikin ilimin lissafi yana da IQ na duniya na 130 da IQ na baki na 140 yana dan shekara 25 (Lorber, 1983), amma ba shi da 'kwakwalwa kusan' (Lewin, 1982, shafi na 1232)."
Bugu da ƙari, wannan sakin layi daga gudummawar ta Lorber da Sheffield (1978) zuwa "Tsarin Kimiyya" na Taskokin Cututtuka a Yara Ya tabbatar da haka: “Ya zuwa yanzu an gano wasu mutane 70 da ke tsakanin shekaru 5 zuwa 18 suna da matsananciyar hydrocephalus da kusan babu neopallium wanda duk da haka a hankali da kuma na jiki, da yawa daga cikinsu ana iya ɗaukan su haziƙi. babu alamun neopallium tare da IQ na sama da 130 wanda tun yana jariri kusan ba shi da kwakwalwa kuma wasu wadanda ko a farkon rayuwarsu ba su da neopallium kadan.
Duk da cewa Ghaemi ya zarge ni da zarge-zarge a kan zalunci, kuma a gaskiya bayanina daidai ne, yana da ɗan ƙaramin magana a nan: ya kamata a ƙara magana, musamman ga ɗaya daga cikin labaran da aka ambata a sama wanda ya ba da rahoton IQ na 130 da ƙari.
Za mu iya zana ƙarshe na farko game da wannan tsari. Dukanmu mun san cewa mutanen da ke da fifikon ra'ayi daban-daban suna fassara magana daban. Wannan ba zai bambanta da Farfesa Ghaemi ba. Duk da haka, ba za a iya musun cewa Farfesa Ghaemi yana yawan kuskure akan abubuwan da za a iya tantance su da gaske. Amma duk da haka tsarin yanke shawara na Jami'ar Ghent ya nuna karara cewa sukar Farfesa Ghaemi na da matukar muhimmanci wajen tantance littafina.
Tun da Jami'ar Ghent ta nemi in gyara rubutun littafina don kurakurai da rashin hankali kamar yadda aka nuna, da dai sauransu, ta hanyar Farfesa Nassir Ghaemi, da gaske nake tambayar su ko har yanzu za su iya gano kuskure guda ɗaya bayan karanta rubutun da ke sama, ko kuma nuna wani kuskuren da Farfesa Ghaemi ya yi iƙirarin ganowa a cikin littafina (sai dai wannan gyara game da waɗannan nassoshi). A daya bangaren, zan iya nuna kurakurai da dama a cikin sukar Ghaemi kadai. Karin bayani kan wannan daga baya.
Rubuta daga Mayarwa
-
Mattias Desmet, Babban Jami'in Brownstone, farfesa ne a fannin ilimin halin dan Adam a Jami'ar Ghent kuma marubucin The Psychology of Totalitarianism. Ya bayyana ka'idar samuwar taro yayin bala'in COVID-19.
Duba dukkan posts
