Slickdeals is community-supported.  We may get paid by brands for deals, including promoted items.
Sorry, this deal has expired. Get notified of deals like this in the future. Add Deal Alert for this Item
Frontpage

1-Year Scientific American Magazine Subscription (12 Issues) Expired

$23
+30 Deal Score
9,039 Views
Discount Mags.com has 1-Year Scientific American Magazine Subscription (12 Issues) on sale for $36.99 - Extra $14 off w/ coupon code 64786 (apply in cart) = $22.99. Thanks tranquil

Note, must apply the listed coupon code to receive discount.

Editor's Notes & Price Research

Written by
Subscription does not automatically renew.
  • Deal Image
Deal Image
Visit DiscountMags

Original Post

Written by
Edited October 2, 2018 at 01:38 PM by
DiscountMags.com [discountmags.com] offers 1-Year of Scientific American Magazine for $22.99 with coupon code 64786

Don't see deals for this magazine very often
Add Comment
Reply
in Magazines (3) DiscountMags
If you purchase something through a post on our site, Slickdeals may get a small share of the sale.

Check Out Similar Magazines Deals

View All
Frontpage
Fandango At Home
Mad Men complete series $19.99
$20
49 26
Gossip Girl: The Complete Series $19.99
2 0
(Quanity 2) KJV Holy Bible: Gift and Award, Black Leather-Look, Red Letter, Comfort Print: King James Version $8.23
1 0
28-Item The Witcher & Cyberpunk 2077 Digital Comic Bundle $16 ~ Humble Bundle
4 0
Audible - Epic Series Sale Save up to 80% on select series titles
4 10
$70.70* | The Hobbit & The Lord of the Rings Illustrated by Alan Lee Box Set (Hardcover) at Amazon
5 0
Deal
Score +30
9,039 Views
$23
Visit DiscountMags

22 Comments

View Forum Thread

Your comment cannot be blank.

Featured Comments

What I believe he is referring to is the trend that Scientific American is willing to ignore biological realities when the realities do not align with their politics and when they fear the consequences of truths coming out. Not exactly a 'scientific' mindset. He can correct me if I am wrong. Two examples that jumped right to mind, from the same author who has been with the publication for a long time:


https://blogs.scientificamerican....oppressed/


https://blogs.scientificamerican....be-banned/

It's your standard "Don't talk about this, it's offensive and dangerous! The result might not support my agenda so we shouldn't talk about it!" Not even a denial of the realities but a denial we should be able to study and discuss them. Screw this noise.
·
Social science is a part of science, based on empirical evidence.

What would you consider "science"?
Blackholes and quantum theory?
Can you call science something that is not testable or directly observable?
·

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Sep 2005
L3: Novice
> bubble2 157 Posts
242 Reputation
sunbeam312
10-02-2018 at 02:02 PM.
10-02-2018 at 02:02 PM.
Anyone know when the first issue can be expected to be delivered? (Xmas time?)
Reply
Joined Dec 2006
L1: Learner
> bubble2 24 Posts
26 Reputation
zzz
10-02-2018 at 02:24 PM.
10-02-2018 at 02:24 PM.
Quote from sunbeam312 :
Anyone know when the first issue can be expected to be delivered? (Xmas time?)
8 to 12 weeks from order date.
Reply
Joined Mar 2010
L6: Expert
> bubble2 1,255 Posts
168 Reputation
davedumontier
10-02-2018 at 03:16 PM.
10-02-2018 at 03:16 PM.
Thanks. I've been waiting for this.
Reply
Joined Nov 2012
L9: Master
> bubble2 4,384 Posts
304 Reputation
EpicBob
10-02-2018 at 03:23 PM.
10-02-2018 at 03:23 PM.
They've been peddling gender studies pseudoscience as of late. Wouldn't recommend subscribing.
Reply
Joined Nov 2008
Deal Pickle ( 0_o V)
> bubble2 2,405 Posts
1,954 Reputation
User462483
10-02-2018 at 04:05 PM.
10-02-2018 at 04:05 PM.
Quote from EpicBob :
They've been peddling gender studies pseudoscience as of late. Wouldn't recommend subscribing.
Social science is a part of science, based on empirical evidence.

What would you consider "science"?
Blackholes and quantum theory?
Can you call science something that is not testable or directly observable?
Reply
Joined Feb 2007
L2: Beginner
> bubble2 25 Posts
14 Reputation
zhakar
10-02-2018 at 10:30 PM.
10-02-2018 at 10:30 PM.
Good deal! Thanks renewed for 2 more years, this is one of the most expensive magazines I buy, but it actually has reallly good articles based on real science. I have cancelled all others this is the only one left that I read, although I almost exclusively read things online sometimes a real magazine is useful for flights or car rides where there is no internet
Reply
Joined Sep 2016
L3: Novice
> bubble2 284 Posts
37 Reputation
eleganteuni
10-02-2018 at 10:57 PM.
10-02-2018 at 10:57 PM.
Discount works for 2 year subscription. 28 bucks off! Got 2 years for just under $45. What a steal! Been waiting and waiting and waiting for this deal. Put in subscription lock so it'll automatically renew in 2 years at the same price if available. So happy! This rarely goes this low.
Reply

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Nov 2015
New User
> bubble2 10 Posts
10 Reputation
gmoseley
10-02-2018 at 11:00 PM.
10-02-2018 at 11:00 PM.
You want science? You want real science? Go to the source. Try Nature magazine, peer-reviewed publisher of articles on original research results. You won't understand a third of the articles. I sure don't. But you will be learning from the science gods and goddesses. Its a lot more expensive - $60 a year if you can snag an academic subscription, but it comes out weekly.
Reply
Joined Jul 2012
L4: Apprentice
> bubble2 304 Posts
120 Reputation
Lamborghini22
10-02-2018 at 11:03 PM.
10-02-2018 at 11:03 PM.
Quote from completing :
Social science is a part of science, based on empirical evidence.

What would you consider "science"?
Blackholes and quantum theory?
Can you call science something that is not testable or directly observable?
What I believe he is referring to is the trend that Scientific American is willing to ignore biological realities when the realities do not align with their politics and when they fear the consequences of truths coming out. Not exactly a 'scientific' mindset. He can correct me if I am wrong. Two examples that jumped right to mind, from the same author who has been with the publication for a long time:

Quote :
Proponents of biological theories of sexual inequality accuse their critics of being "blank slaters," who deny any innate psychological tendencies between the sexes. This is a straw man. I am not a blank-slater, nor do I know any critic of evolutionary psychology who is. But I fear that biological theorizing about these tendencies, in our still-sexist world, does more harm than good. It empowers the social injustice warriors, and that is the last thing our world needs.
https://blogs.scientificamerican....oppressed/

Quote :
So what do I really mean by a ban? Here's one possibility. Institutional review boards (IRBs), which must approve research involving human subjects carried out by universities and other organizations, should reject proposed research that will promote racial theories of intelligence, because the harm of such research--which fosters racism even if not motivated by racism--far outweighs any alleged benefits.
https://blogs.scientificamerican....be-banned/

It's your standard "Don't talk about this, it's offensive and dangerous! The result might not support my agenda so we shouldn't talk about it!" Not even a denial of the realities but a denial we should be able to study and discuss them. Screw this noise.
Reply
Joined Nov 2010
L6: Expert
> bubble2 1,132 Posts
240 Reputation
MustardCap
10-03-2018 at 12:44 AM.
10-03-2018 at 12:44 AM.
Quote from lamborghini22 :
what i believe he is referring to is the trend that scientific american is willing to ignore biological realities when the realities do not align with their politics and when they fear the consequences of truths coming out. Not exactly a 'scientific' mindset. He can correct me if i am wrong. Two examples that jumped right to mind, from the same author who has been with the publication for a long time:


https://blogs.scientificamerican....oppressed/


https://blogs.scientificamerican....be-banned/

it's your standard "don't talk about this, it's offensive and dangerous! The result might not support my agenda so we shouldn't talk about it!" not even a denial of the realities but a denial we should be able to study and discuss them. Screw this noise.

ping!
Reply
Joined Nov 2008
Deal Pickle ( 0_o V)
> bubble2 2,405 Posts
1,954 Reputation
User462483
10-03-2018 at 12:49 AM.
10-03-2018 at 12:49 AM.
Quote from Lamborghini22 :
What I believe he is referring to is the trend that Scientific American is willing to ignore biological realities when the realities do not align with their politics and when they fear the consequences of truths coming out. Not exactly a 'scientific' mindset. He can correct me if I am wrong. Two examples that jumped right to mind, from the same author who has been with the publication for a long time:


https://blogs.scientificamerican....oppressed/ [scientificamerican.com]


https://blogs.scientificamerican....be-banned/ [scientificamerican.com]

It's your standard "Don't talk about this, it's offensive and dangerous! The result might not support my agenda so we shouldn't talk about it!" Not even a denial of the realities but a denial we should be able to study and discuss them. Screw this noise.
Science has always been about politics. It's hard to separate the two even if you think empirical evidence is indisputable. Sometimes underlying assumption is biased, thus influencing the data and conclusions.

The author is pretty clear about what his views are while presenting both sides. This is a pretty standard essay format. Remember this is a magazine article, not a research paper. You can agree or disagree with the author, but he hasn't denied any reality. He is only expressing his opinion.
Reply
Joined Jun 2018
L3: Novice
> bubble2 258 Posts
FeistySwing503
10-03-2018 at 05:51 AM.
10-03-2018 at 05:51 AM.
Quote from gmoseley :
You want science? You want real science? Go to the source. Try Nature magazine, peer-reviewed publisher of articles on original research results. You won't understand a third of the articles. I sure don't. But you will be learning from the science gods and goddesses. Its a lot more expensive - $60 a year if you can snag an academic subscription, but it comes out weekly.
so so so this. scientific american is barely better than popular science. a print magazine of clickbait.
Reply
Joined May 2006
L6: Cheap
> bubble2 1,651 Posts
1,328 Reputation
c_bird
10-03-2018 at 06:42 AM.
10-03-2018 at 06:42 AM.
I've been and remain a fan of Discover magazine. It provides a good balance between learning about science and scientist.
Reply
Page 1 of 2
Start the Conversation
 
Link Copied

The link has been copied to the clipboard.