Re:Google Doesn't Want What's Best for Us
by mpweiher on Monday August 14, 2017 @02:49AM
(#15006972)
> Lee Jussim ...quoted many times
Yes, because what he writes is very relevant. Und seems to be backed up by a lot of research, including his own on Stereotype Accuracy.
And also includes research that shows "brilliant" women don't choose STEM because they are, on average, more capable than the men who go into STEM.
> David P Schmitt
> should we be able to openly discuss and be informed by some of the real psychological sex differences that might account for variation in men’s and women’s workplace performance?
> Geoffrey Miller, who seems to fundamentally miss the point:
How so?
The fact that "we must have diversity because there are (useful) differences" is irreconcilable with "there are no differences" should be trivial and uncontroversial.
> Debra W Soh, who I am having a bit of trouble understanding:
What's difficult to understand?
If you tried to argue for purely social influence, you'd be laughed at.
> "inherently supportive of sexism or stratifying opportunities based on sex" is quite large,
Who, where?
> Thanks for the link
You're welcome.
There were actually two links, the other is to Jordan Peterson's interview, where he says that James "got the science correct" and who also provides tons and tons of links to relevant research, for anyone who actually wants to inform themselves.
I have to admit I found the nuanced views expressed by multiple people a lot more convincing than the largely uninformed rant (at least wrt. to the contents of the memo) in the Quora post. YMMV
Yes, because what he writes is very relevant. Und seems to be backed up by a lot of research, including his own on Stereotype Accuracy.
And also includes research that shows "brilliant" women don't choose STEM because they are, on average, more capable than the men who go into STEM.
> David P Schmitt
> should we be able to openly discuss and be informed by some of the real psychological sex differences that might account for variation in men’s and women’s workplace performance?
> Geoffrey Miller, who seems to fundamentally miss the point:
How so?
The fact that "we must have diversity because there are (useful) differences" is irreconcilable with "there are no differences" should be trivial and uncontroversial.
> Debra W Soh, who I am having a bit of trouble understanding:
What's difficult to understand?
If you tried to argue for purely social influence, you'd be laughed at.
> "inherently supportive of sexism or stratifying opportunities based on sex" is quite large,
Who, where?
> Thanks for the link
You're welcome.
There were actually two links, the other is to Jordan Peterson's interview, where he says that James "got the science correct" and who also provides tons and tons of links to relevant research, for anyone who actually wants to inform themselves.