According to dipshit leftists, people who use logic, reason, common sense, empirical proof, mathematical proof, etc. are "uninformed and naive" - probably because they don't fall for their leftist bullshit so easily:
Left to their own devices, scientists and engineers can often approach social policy
questions from a fairly uninformed and naive standpoint.
note the experts listed at the beginning, notably leftist Stiglitz whose claim to fame is his genius work, 'Some people know more than others.' - which is also funny because Fama got a Nobel prize for saying that they don't, and a staff writer at leftist The New Yorker.
Entertaining little excerpt here:
We noted that John Koza, who originated the idea of the National Popular Vote, is a computer
scientist who co-invented the scratch-off instant lottery ticket. An important challenge for the
working group is to figure out how we can regularly bring OSF into closer contact with the kinds
of people who are inventing scratch-off lottery tickets and then converting that into insight about
Electoral College reform. How do we develop an open-ended source of contact with a wide
range of innovators, some of whom may be innovating through the process of science and
technology but who may not necessarily be connecting that with the potential for the
development of political or civic ideas?
Apparently, these geniuses don't like the idea that 'mericuh wanted a little populism. And that those sorts of innovators likely are on the same side of the political spectrum. Because they're the innovators (see Atlas Shrugged and its innovators). And probably so because they don't just go along with being told how to think, even with political or civic ideas.
The ability to think, instead of regurgitate political ideas fed to them by the media because of groups like this, are likely why they became scientists to begin with.