zlacker

There are also some real zingers in his unexplored trains of thought here. He notes that "wokeness" in academia originated in the social sciences and not, say, mathematics or engineering. He then goes on to concoct some explanation based on folks from the Sixties getting into academia and not a far more obvious explanation: our modern understanding of the ills and boons of society originated from the sciences focused on studying society.

(Sure, Paul, the physics department didn't come up with woke. They were too busy overlooking Richard Feynman hitting on every undergrad woman that came through his department).

FWIW, I also saw political correctness "rise." In my experience, it rose in the computer science department discovering that when they adjusted their approach to incoming undergrad students based on observations from the social sciences that systemic sexism was bending the nature of their pre-undergrad education, the women performed better in the computer science undergrad curriculum. There's Paul's missing evidence from the "hard sciences."

>>shadow+(OP)

    He notes that "wokeness" in academia originated in 
    the social sciences and not, say, mathematics or
    engineering.

Yeah, what's up with that? Is this supposed to be evidence for why (what he defines as) "wokeness" is bad? Ideas worth considering... can't come from the social sciences? Can they only come from STEM fields? That is uh, certainly a viewpoint for him to have.