News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Neuroscientist Larry Cahill on the ‘neurosexism’ debate. Parent comment

Re:Neuroscientist Larry Cahill on the ‘neurosexism’ debate by ThrowawayR2 on Monday April 22, 2019 @11:12AM (#19719499)
> No, to any sane, empathic, person, the meaning of equality is clear: you want similar outcomes for everybody.

Have you read Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron? Wanting similar outcomes for everybody is pretty much the diametric opposite of sane. It fails to acknowledge the statistical spread of abilities even within a protected category, let alone any that might exist between them.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Neuroscientist Larry Cahill on the ‘neurosexism’ debate by Iv on Wednesday April 24, 2019 @11:02AM (#19739034)
Yes, as a kid. I found it an interesting caricature. I am now discovering in awe, as you are the second person mentioning that, that some people actually take it for a serious criticism of the very notion of equality.

That's not even an exaggeration of the position you are attacking, that's a wilful misrepresentation.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Neuroscientist Larry Cahill on the ‘neurosexism’ debate by ThrowawayR2 on Thursday April 25, 2019 @11:08AM (#19748952)
Fables often exaggerate in order to drive their moral lesson home, that's hardly a point against Harrison Bergeron. And to be precise, it's not a criticism of equality, it's a criticism of the "equal outcomes" school of thought.
[ Parent | on HN ]