Dieter Nuhr is for the "Süddeutsche Zeitung", a "comedian". It is fine when a newspaper defends the German research Foundation (DFG), because the no longer want to be now no longer Nuhr publicly represented. Not in order, however, is to operate with false allegations. And Dieter Nuhr you will be with the name of "comedian" now is just not fair. About the author: Ulrich Reitz

Ulrich Reitz worked as a correspondent in the world, was in the starting team of FOCUS, which he led, and was a total of 17 years as editor-in-chief of the two largest German regional newspaper "WAZ" and "Rheinische Post". He deals with the societal consequences of digitalization, the cultural foundations of Germany and the Performance of its elites in politics and the economy. Reitz sees itself as economically ordoliberal and politically conservative. He appreciates the well-maintained controversy.

Dominik Butzmann Ulrich Reitz

the satirist, whose opinion you do not like, but still a satirist. And is not the "comedian", a joke so. Who referred to the comedian only as a "comedian", doesn't want to deal with him, but him down not more that a confrontation with such people is worth it at all.

conflict shows what attitude journalism

I Just read in the magazine of "time" the weekly column by Harald Martenstein. The deals with the experience report, an award-winning Reporter has written, Birk Meinhardt. The report is entitled: "How I lost my newspaper." Reinhardt's newspaper, the "Süddeutsche Zeitung".

Meinhardt describes supported experience, his alienation from this sheet, for which he wrote, and whose subscription he announced at the end of even. Marten-stone of the Meinhardt: It "recognizes the principle of partisanship again, he knows it from the GDR, now the attitude is. He can't be a Journalist, not like that." I find the sometimes drastic support loss of Newspapers is a pity to be dangerous, but also of how much journalists themselves have. To put it bluntly: how Much of the pad actually takes a stance journalism?

conflict between Nuhr and DFG

What is the attitude of journalism, can you explain the conflict Nuhr/DFG well. An attitude of a journalist explains Nuhr the same time, the "comedian". Greta Thunberg takes against him. And the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. The latter is just tumb.

How did the conflict? The DFG is celebrating its 100-year anniversary, and to the well-wishers Dieter Nuhr belong. The DFG is asked only to itself. He delivered. There was then, as a reaction to Nuhrs Audio Statement a Shitstorm. There is always, as soon as Dieter Nuhr also says only one sentence. The latest outrage came from the left, as is mostly the case, and the Indignant power, downright furious, that only does not want to bend before its fury partout. However, he's right and we wish him from here a lot of strength.

climate science with new facts,

science, to be updated Nuhr says, means to be 100 percent sure. Science means truth, but seek it out. So, "that the opinion changes when the facts change," as it is possible to study the epidemiologists in the Corona of a crisis just fine. The opposite of science, Religion or ideology either.

With two types of Non-science only deals for years with pleasure. Ideologues are anathema to him, whether from the right or from the left. Anti-science is to misjudge the nature of science by wants you to make the own ideology of service to you. This is Nuhrs reproach to Greta Thunberg. Who "calls all the time (as Thunberg) 'Follow the science'", have not exactly understood. Touche.

If the essence of science is to update with new facts, old theories, then that applies also for climate science. Nothing else Nuhr says.

DFG bends of criticism

in other words: Dieter Nuhr is with his tips theses an almost perfect Ambassador of science. The DFG is committed to a high Ideal, namely, all the scientific evidence consistently self-doubt, and "a critical discourse in the scientific community to allow and promote". The critical discourse about Dieter Nuhr wanted to promote the DFG, however,, nor allow it. She bent a Mob.

This capitulation, even without force of arms, called the FAZ of a "bankruptcy". That's true. It is a scientific organisation unworthy. It is not the task of science to politicize. Or admit that you will be excited by whoever, before an ideological barrow. You can expect from science as from a decent criminologists, to always research in several directions. Truth is, scientifically considered, is not what is always. Truth is only what we have in this moment is.

No room for changes in Opinion?

In the American media as the American universities there is a bad Trend. He comes in from the left and means that the science, per se, to narrow it down to certain points of view. It began with the "political correctness", which is the exact opposite of freedom of Research and continued with the claimed "safe spaces" and spaces so that students claimed to be not with views facing that could hurt their feelings.

As if hurt feelings would have anything to do with science and research. Who wants to bind the opinions of others, has taken lost to universities exactly nothing. The latest Trend brings about a further increase in: White is denied the right and the competence to be able to Black Express. Heterosexual over homosexual, and so on.

This way of Thinking has now found its way even in the case of the occupation of roles for actors. As regards the media, it is sufficient for the time being, to read the resignation letter in the New York Times commentator Bari Weiss. You wanted to no longer be mocked for their in the direction of the "conservative" understanding and knowledgeable comments. Of their own colleagues, mind you.

Also, the under your NYT colleagues, in their opinion, common left-hand pattern of anti-Semitism did not want to accept this any longer. Weiss announced. The Parallels to the case of Meinhardt are, apparently, no coincidence. You are a bad development. This development, if it is, what could be, will harm the universities, as well as journalism.

The sentence, Diether Nuhr is a "comedian", wrote in the "süddeutsche Zeitung", a science journalist.

With the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Germany Trump Central Obama error FOCUS Online/Wochit "repeatedly we still miss you Will": With the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Germany to repeatedly Trump Central Obama error

Date Of Update: 04 August 2020, 10:28