Re:Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
by williamsmj on Tuesday August 08, 2017 @11:21AM
(#14958736)
Update: he doesn't have a PhD https://twitter.com/nitashatiku/status/894939560391565317.
Re:Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
by mosheroperandi on Tuesday August 08, 2017 @08:57AM
(#14957297)
This explains some things. I was sort of surprised he had managed to defend a thesis after trying to follow his argument in the piece in question. I don't expect thesis level work from a forum post, but for something with so much work put into citations and footnoting, it's so bad at linking its evidence to its arguments and its arguments to its conclusions (or even deciding, what, in fact, it's central thesis is). For what he deems to be such a hostile audience, it's very poor piece of persuasive writing.
Re:Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
by panda88888 on Wednesday August 09, 2017 @01:50PM
(#14971792)
It is not a thesis. If anything, it's more like a precursor to a thesis. This is akin to sitting down with the professor, and suggesting that some of these factors may explain certain phenomenon, and should be researched.
Re:Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
by hkon on Tuesday August 08, 2017 @04:54PM
(#14962598)
I am sure he spent many months on it...
Re:Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo
by panda88888 on Wednesday August 09, 2017 @01:48PM
(#14971761)
lol
And by the way, another fun fact:
As far as I can can tell, he doesn't have a PhD. He didn't publish any papers while he was at Harvard. You don't get through a modern elite PhD program without making any contribution to the literature. And his thesis is not showing up in any library search I do. He seems to have dropped out very early.
No shame in that, of course. But since you and many others are saying he has credibility on a matter unrelated to the topic of his PhD precisely because he has a PhD: he, er, may not have a PhD.
By the way, the more cited of his two papers reads like it was written by someone very new to research, who had his editor open in one window and the Wikipedia page for "List of Logical Fallacies" open in another.