Talk:Vandana Shiva

This article contains information about one or more living persons. Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats. Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed. If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

	This food woo related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Qualifications

Hi. Like her, I also have a physics degree. Considering she received bachelor's and master's degree from a university and worked at an atomic research center, she is a physicist.

You pretend to be a rational website in support of science. Remove her qualifications, squash her work history, and I will troll the fuck out of you replacing it :)

Take care. - a fellow physicist who doesn't tolerate slander.^{— Unsigned, by: 71.34.143.219 / talk / contribs}

First of all, I was not involved in any previous edit wars on this page. Second of all, she only got a master's degree in physics. Her doctorate is in philosophy. In order to qualify as a physicist, you need a PhD in physics. Nerd (talk) 01:44, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

That is blatantly false. There are thousands of practicing physicists with only master's degrees. To qualify as a physicist, you have to be trained by a university and do physics research. She did. What's more, she didn't get her PhD in literature. She got it on Bell's theorem. What is your degree in?

You continue this slander, and you will lose this war in a big way. Here is what's going to happen: I will spread her work history and degrees throughout the article. They will appear in irrelevant articles as well. If you continue to slander her, I will contact some friends. You attack one of us, you attack all of us. Feel free to disagree with her opinions all you want. Politically motivated slander of scientists will not be tolerated. ^{— Unsigned, by: 71.34.143.219 / talk}

@71.34.143.219 Do not threaten other users. If you continue to do so you will (briefly) find yourself blocked and the discussion will end. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 02:32, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Maybe you didn't catch the part where I'm a physicist. If you honestly think a simple block will stop the coming shit storm, you underestimate us. Leave it as it is. Think whatever the fuck you want, but stop ommitting or twisting facts. You put the "she has to have a PhD" on there again, I expect a goddamn citation from the fucking president of Harvard saying as much. ^{— Unsigned, by: 71.34.143.219 / talk}

I caught the part wherein you opened with threats and an attempt at intimation and bullying, as if you could only get your way via those means. If you are a professional scientist you should be ashamed of such disgraceful behavior. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 02:40, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

PS: I noticed in your last post that you are still issuing threats. That behavior will not be tolerated, as it is that of a blustering child throwing a tantrum, not that of a professional scientist. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 02:43, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Let me get something straight here. You keep using the world 'slander', but I don't think you know what it means. She earned her bachelor's and master's degrees in physics, but got her (master's and) PhD in philosophy. That makes her a philosopher with above-average knowledge of physics, which she may or may not use properly. The fact that she worked in a research institute is certainly interesting — definitely nice to put on a CV — but not particularly relevant for our purposes here. There are plenty of talented and motivated undergraduates and graduate students who assist their professors on research projects. But we do not call them scientists, only research assistants, apprentices, if you will. In order to be call a physicist, you need to have a PhD, and in order to earn it, you have to conduct some substantial original research under the auspices of a professor of physics, write it up neatly in a dissertation, then successfully defend it in front of a panel of experts. If you are really a physicist, this should not be surprising for you. Nerd (talk) 02:49, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Nerd Beyond all of that she still isn't qualified to speak on the subject of genetically modified crops, as that would be the expertise of a Botanist (or "plant scientist" as they apparently call it these days). ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 03:03, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

So Freeman Dyson isn't a physicist? Or does he get a pass for not having a Ph.D? You want to challenge her credentials on GMOs, point out her lack of botany degree in the section on GMOs. Why discredit and delete her work and school history?

Do you think they just give out Master's like Cracker Jack's? That process you just described, a thesis defense -- if you'd actually been to college you would know that Master's students have to do that, too, just to a lesser degree. She wasn't a "graduate assistant." She was a graduate. She got the degree. And then she did research. And got paid for it. At an actual lab.

And, again, her PhD was not in an unrelated field. It was in quantum theory. Kind of the center issue of quantum theory, to boot: entanglement.

I want you to explain to me why she isn't a physicist but Freeman Dyson is. And then admit that you've never set foot in a physics department. ^{— Unsigned, by: AndrewJG / talk / contribs}

For the master's degree, it depends on the school. In some, it's just an extension of of the bachelor's degree. No thesis is required. (Some schools, such as Princeton University, require undergraduate papers.) For the PhD, the thesis requirement is universal.

Yes, but it was for her PhD in philosophy, not physics. And no, I don't think quantum entanglement is the central issue of quantum mechanics. It is an important one, to be sure, but the central one. Quantum mechanics is a rich subject. (Can you guess why I know that?)

Freeman Dyson actually conducted a substantial amount of physics research which could have been written up as a doctoral thesis. It's just that he never bothered to get one. Why are you thinking of Lady Shiva as an equivalent case? It's special pleading, don't you think? Nerd (talk) 03:40, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Philosophy OF physics. Do you even know what Bell's theorem is and what it means? Do you honestly think NON-physicists can write papers on that? She didn't write a dissertation on Aristotle.

Entanglement IS the central issue of qm. Do you know how *I* know that? Because, again, unlike you, I actually have training in physics. But hey, don't take my word for it: https://www.nature.com/news/the-quantum-source-of-space-time-1.18797 It's only at the center of a modern revolution in my field. But what do I know?

No, it's not special pleading. Here is DYSON HIMSELF talking about the PhD and its requirement for being a physicist: https://www.wired.com/2014/03/quanta-freeman-dyson-qa/

“Oh, yes. I’m very proud of not having a Ph.D. I think the Ph.D. system is an abomination. It was invented as a system for educating German professors in the 19th century, and it works well under those conditions. It’s good for a very small number of people who are going to spend their lives being professors. But it has become now a kind of union card that you have to have in order to have a job, whether it’s being a professor or other things, and it’s quite inappropriate for that. It forces people to waste years and years of their lives sort of pretending to do research for which they’re not at all well-suited. In the end, they have this piece of paper which says they’re qualified, but it really doesn’t mean anything. The Ph.D. takes far too long and discourages women from becoming scientists, which I consider a great tragedy. So I have opposed it all my life without any success at all. . .”

The one doing the special pleading here is you. She did a thesis defense in physics, worked at a research lab IN PHYSICS, got a PhD in philosophy OF PHYSICS in a central area OF PHYSICS, and you're willing to call a man without a PhD a physicist but for a woman you DEMAND she have a piece of paper with exactly the write term on it. Special pleading indeed.

But, really, none of this matters. Your claim that she needs a PhD requires a citation. I am formally demanding a citation. ^{— Unsigned, by: 107.242.113.9 / talk}

And I am formally demanding you learn to format and sign your comments. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 04:01, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Why on Earth is her gender relevant again? You can swap their genders, or give them identical gender, and my argument would still stand.

Freeman Dyson is entitled to his own opinions. I respect him for his work. But I disagree with him here. I think I am not alone in thinking that.

Did you just assume I have no formal training in physics? Check your privileges!

If you actually read what I wrote, I never denied importance of quantum entanglement; I only said it is not the only central issue. It may be the topic of considerable research, sure. But if you check your textbook, there are plenty of other major topics.

As for the PhD, she is a philosopher because she earned her PhD in that subject. Sorry but having a PhD is a rite of passage towards academic research at the highest level in not just physics but any other natural sciences and mathematics. You cannot call yourself a scientist or a mathematician if you lack a PhD in the relevant field. Why is that so hard to understand? Nerd (talk) 04:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

So you're going to edit Freeman Dyson's article to remove the claim that he is a physicist, right?

Of course not. And if I edit it to quote you here, that edit will be removed. While maintaining this one. ^{— Unsigned, by: AndrewG / talk / contribs}

Please learn to sign after you post on a talk page, by typing ~~~~.

Freeman Dyson is a physicist because he functions as one: conducting high-quality research and supervising students. Also, he is recognized as one by physicists (like J. Robert Oppenheimer). As for Lady Shiva, she does not even call herself a physicist. Don't believe me? Check her Wikipedia page. The word 'physicist' appears only twice in that entire article, and both times, they're in this section. Nerd (talk) 04:25, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Nope. Fraid not. You cannot call yourself a scientist or a mathematician if you lack a PhD in the relevant field. Why is that so hard to understand?

I know how to properly cite my responses. I just don't bother for sexist hypocrites. If it annoys you, good. ^{— Unsigned, by: AndrewG / talk / contribs}

Yeah, throwing inflammatory accusations at someone else for disagreeing with you. Who's slandering now? Or is the word 'libeling'? You insist on calling her a physicist, when she doesn't even want to. Don't like it? Tough! Nerd (talk) 04:32, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I hear that deliberately annoying people is a great way to convince them and change their minds. But the irony here, coming from someone demanding citations, is what gets me: "I know how to properly cite my responses. I just don't bother for sexist hypocrites." —Kazitor, ^pending 04:36, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Nerd (talk) 04:42, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

* dons Mod Hat * 

This discussion is not really going anywhere. You can continue the discussion, but I'd really rather you, I.P./AndrewG, don't throw accusations of "slander" or "sexist hypocrites" around. 🍝 --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 04:48, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Just dropped by to comment on the irony of this argument about field-specific PhDs, given that Shiva's thesis advisor for her philosophy PhD, Jeffrey Bub, does not have a PhD in philosophy. He received his PhD in physics under David Bohm. ^{— Unsigned, by: 104.222.153.92 / talk}

If Vandana Shiva is so cranky and woo-meister...

...why is she so well recognised and awarded by countless universities, NGOs and foundations? She received a Right Livelihood award in 1993... (BTW, Genetic Literacy Project is an astroturf from Monsanto and other powerful entities) 37.35.148.242 (talk) 22:03, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Monsanto no longer exists as an independent company. You're very obviously wrong, as even the most basic research shows. You've cited nothing for your claims, and can be dismissed out of hand. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 22:26, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

https://geneticliteracyproject.org/glp-facts/vandana-shiva/

Here you have... her large list of credentials/merits/support recognised by that *Monstanto-Bayer* astroturf (yes, SourceWatch warned me about ties with agrochemical corporations)37.35.148.242 (talk) 23:46, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

The source you provided says she has a PolPhil PhD and that she lies about having a doctorate in physics. The ties only show that she's extremely politically active, which given she's an activist is neither surprising nor compelling. You have not presented evidence of criminal wrongdoing on Bayer's part. Please note that I'll take nothing less than evidence usable in a court of law. Oh, and you should have led with the sources. It kinda makes you look bad when you open with smoke but no fire. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 23:57, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Oh, and the relevant degree for her claims is a specialized degree in botany. Specifically genetics. So there's that... ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 23:59, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_legal_cases 37.35.148.242 (talk) 13:30, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Is trying to win an argument more online than having self respect and intellectual honesty? The corporations in question can be lying conniving bastards and Shiva can still be full of shit. Just gesturing at Bayer and Monsanto's wrongdoing isn't enough to convince me, you need something solid. Oh, and you still need to show Shiva has credentials in the field of botany. And an actual doctorate in physics... And then we can actually talk about her claims... ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 13:41, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2022/06/20/viewpoint-green-technology-rejectionist-vandana-shiva-at-center-of-sri-lankas-disastrous-organic-farming-embrace-and-crop-protection-chemical-rejection/. Well Vandana Shiva politicized farming methods in Sri Lanka and it became a disaster. 2601:640:C682:79C0:B181:9A97:AEAD:D9CA (talk) 13:28, 9 September 2022 (UTC)