Jason Arday dead

[ThisWiseRobin]

Just putting this out there, but just heared.A sad end to a whole sorry mess.

Precisely THIS

I saw the other thread where it’s no longer accepting replies and the way the posters have weaponised the racism towards posters who have called out JA, Cambridge and even the police, truly astounding.

I have also detected the sneering arrogance and the implication that those taking that position believe they’re intellectually and ideologically superior to those of us that see the case for what it is.

I'm not going out to bat for a racist.

If people are attacking him for his racist views, then they can crack on.

It is interesting that when I said he was an outspoken racist, the response was 'YOU think he's a racist'. Yes, I do. If other people don't, then I am not on their side in this.

Sorry, but it was the THE journalist who first ‘exposed’ Arday.

And he is most definitely not a racist.

Don’t let the facts get in the way of the pitch fork!

When the PP posted "asking people to attack someone who highlighted the plagiarism"

why do you assume that the someone that is being attacked is the THE journalist and not the massive racist?

No, but if the black man is punished far more and by thousands more people than a white man committing the same crime, then it's more likely to be a racist witch hunt.

They make race relations worse, just like BLM. Rioting or protesting because a black person is involved. These will be the ones calling you Uncle Tom. They don't want unity.

They are attacking him for exposing JA. They are using his racist views as a weapon to attack him for exposing JA.

If that wasn’t the case they would have been attacking him for his racist views last week when he had the same views as he does this week.

Also, I was using the generic YOU which I would think was fairly obvious but if it wasn’t, I’m clarifying now.

That is not what I asked.

the question was does the crime stop being a crime.

Also, how do you know if it’s a harsher sentence. Usually if you plead not guilty, your sentence will be harsher than pleading guilty. Likewise, if someone is a repeat offender, the sentence will be harsher so let’s not start once again with semantics.

The question was clear.

The views that lost him his job and caused protests against him?

I mean, his views deserve attacking. Obviously he has just come to more people's attention now.

I don't believe that author is racist.

Cofnas? The eugenist who thinks black people are inferior?

Agreed.

I made this point earlier, elevating under qualified minorities makes it so much more harder for us in the long run.

It is almost a sick joke that we are only useful when mediocre or criminal, because what else do you expect from us black people…

Was that his hypothesis or was he exploring group genetics?

Just for info as the editing system can lead to misunderstandings, I edited whilst you were replying to add

Also, I was using the generic YOU which I would think was fairly obvious but if it wasn’t, I’m clarifying now.

The attacks against Nathan Cofnas, on Twitter anyway, are on a completely different scale and level of ferocity to the process which lead to him being sacked.

If you are not understanding the political right or left wing references and it isn't part of your world then I can kind of understand why you don't understand part of the issue with this story. Half the story is what is largely viewed as the politics of the University and the guarding of said political views by the University and others outside the university that actively held this guy up as a hero or now marta.

The work stuff with regard to sweeping statements youprobablyhavea point. Also a fair few of the posters on this thread work in education from my memory of other threads so are on summer holidays at the moment. Hence why the keen interest in not having iffy professors or teachers raised to the status of untouchable by educational establishments or enthusiast people that haven't looked at all the facts or people that are keen to push a political narrative/ideology that is potentially very harmful to students and the public alike.

https://observer.co.uk/news/national/article/nathan-cofnas-the-man-at-the-centre-of-arday-plagiarism-row-was-dismissed-for-views-on-race

Good explainer here.

Yes it’s political. Look at Labour and reaction. Burnham even, Khan and it filters down to every day Labour supporters.

In the same way Rhiannon Whyte’s family was shunned and ostracised by the same politicians and you’d get don’t mention it posts on here.

Agreed. Of course it's political. For a person to say I don't see right or left (or whatever they said) is ludicrous here.

Biologists can attack him on any group genetics issues. As I'm from a maths background and trained in logical argument, I can point out exactly where his assertion falls down logically.

Good article.

Jason Arday, the former professor of sociology at the University of Cambridge, has resigned following a high-profile row about plagiarism. It was reported last month that Arday, who was the youngest black professor ever appointed to Cambridge, was alleged to have plagiarised the work of another PhD student for his own doctorate. Subsequently a series of stories broke about what looked like increasingly tall claims he had made about other areas of his life.

He said he had run 30 marathons in 35 days (the latter portion with a hairline fracture to his femur), and raised over £5.5m for charity. When asked about the fundraising claims, he said he had been part of a large syndicate, none of whom he could name because he had signed a non-disclosure agreement. He said police had investigated the delivery of a severed pig’s head to his parents’ house in London as part of a campaign of harrassment. But the Metropolitan Police said it was “categorically” incorrect that an investigation had taken place.

Interviewed by a newspaper at the weekend, Arday did not deny that he had plagiarised, but said his autism meant he absorbed information by mimicry. Cambridge, which had initially defended Arday against the plagiarism allegations, announced it had launched an investigation following “new information” about his “academic qualifications and honorary appointments”. Arday resigned shortly afterwards.

.. 'absorb information by mimicry'.. that's a new one for me

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/why-cambridge-got-wrong-4691191

Twitter gonna twitter. It has a block function and I'm pretty sure this won't be his first rodeo.

Welcome to 2026 when yes you have to stay in lane

Critical thinking or having mixed views or feelings on a subject is largely frowned upon

Easy to see why institutional, world and more local problems are never solved and society has become more fractured isn't it

A much better article..

...his right as an academic to propagate his opinions is imperative under the law – the Free Speech Act which our government has to-ed and fro-ed over – and under any sound vision for academic advancement.

Dribblings from the SU that the University ought to discipline him are toothless. Per Mill, Voltaire or Milton there are fantastically good reasons why we should not, must not, cede to some board of authority, to choose which ideologies and conjectures we may be exposed to.

It’s equally important that we are forced, on occasion, to pose the question to ourselves: why do we know what we think we know? And to be able, when faced with opinions we find disagreeable ad extremum, to lay down our case with confidence and intellectual courage.

https://www.varsity.co.uk/comment/30487

Never mind what Cofnas thinks. Do you think that recognising someone is less intelligent entails thinking they are inferior? Does this change if it’s a claim about a group? Does it change if it’s not intelligence but other traits like height or speed?

edited to add my own view: I don’t think any of the above do entail that. And at least at an individual level I don’t think most people do either. I think these are empirical and moral questions respectively and should generally be kept separate.