Wednesday, September 8, 2021
I have now had a chance to carefully read Law School Rankings and The Impossibility of Anti-Racism by Rory D. Bahadur. No matter how much I dislike the U.S. News law rankings and like to see them debunked, I find Bahadur's article to be unconvincing.
Ironically, the problem with this article is exactly what it accuses others of--the presence of the confirmation bias. "Confirmation bias is the tendency of people to give more credence and validity to information consistent with their beliefs or hypotheses." (his definition) Bahadur accepts articles that agree with his thesis uncritically, and he ignores all articles that attack his theories. True scholarship closely examines both positive and negative support, which this article does not do. If you can't explain the negative articles, you shouldn't publish the article.
For example, Bahadur cites scholarship about implicit biases, but he ignores the fact that they have been strongly criticized by numerous cognitive and social scientists. (here) It is not scholarship when you ignore the other side; it is naked ideology.
Did the Journal that is publishing this article do a cite check? When I was on journal, we were required to check negative cites. Shame on that journal for a poor job.
P.S. Ignoring negative evidence is called the Semmelweis reflex.