ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 10th August 2017, 11:05 PM   #521
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 10,015
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post

Time and modelling. Some subcultures change faster than others, and some subcultures value different properties as a model of ideal professionalism. Medicine is a good example: bedside manner and empathy was not considered a value, so the prejudice was that women were not competent at it. Over time, the effectiveness of having an MD with a full spectrum of talents proved itself. But it took time.
Don't you find it odd that in the process of arguing that variations in ability between men an women don't exist, or at least can't be meaningful, on average, to their unequal representation in particular fields, you bring up variations in ability between men and women?
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2017, 11:44 PM   #522
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,082
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
That first report has some fascinating implications buried in Figure 5.

Young men are ~7x more likely than young women to think about majoring in computer science, and almost 6x more likely to hope for an engineering major. These are first year college students, so it's going to be tricky for companies at the end of the college/grad school pipeline to adjust the gender balance towards parity.

ETA: Seems highly unlikely to me that gaps that big can be mostly the result of biological predispositions uncompounded by cultural stereotyping.
Agreed.

And no, you can't really hope to affect the current generation. It's a long term project to get women into STEM.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th August 2017, 11:45 PM   #523
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,082
Originally Posted by pharphis View Post
Here is what you claimed he said in the memo.


What he actually did was refer to Neuroticism, which has a precise psychological definition. He even explained that high neuroticism = higher anxiety and lesser ability to handle stress. This, in addition to the other factors he mentioned (hypergamy, extraversion, etc.) are all factors one would expect to lead to IN PART to SOME DISPARITY. He makes this as clear as possible, imo.

He suggests alternative strategies for attracting more women to STEM jobs (in particular software engineering at google) based on these biological differences (ex/ making part-time work be more acceptable). Efficacious or not, his proposal was to take a different approach to "diversifying" (more women) which is what his company's stated goal is, but his approach was based a bit more on biological realities than purely social constructionist hypotheses.
I'm seriously not buying it.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 02:01 AM   #524
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,704
Originally Posted by Tony View Post
Why would we condemn him?
Ask trebuchet.

However, I'd be wary of someone who wants to work for Assange, now.

Originally Posted by pharphis View Post
Not too relevant to the topic, but what is the reason for hating him?
Hating? What are you talking about?
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 05:50 AM   #525
d4m10n
Master Poster
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 2,685
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
And no, you can't really hope to affect the current generation. It's a long term project to get women into STEM.
Women are already abundant in STEM fields; they just happen to gravitate towards the medical sciences.



This is literally the first photo I pulled from the university closest to where I am.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 06:15 AM   #526
d4m10n
Master Poster
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 2,685
Looks like the alt-right is going in hard on this one: https://medium.com/@getongab/the-alt...n-a5c9d62ae727

This is great news for Google PR; known baddies are lining up against them.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 06:33 AM   #527
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,082
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Women are already abundant in STEM fields; they just happen to gravitate towards the medical sciences.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...5b33721a5e.jpg

This is literally the first photo I pulled from the university closest to where I am.
Great. Then there's no problem. I wonder where all those other figures about women being under-represented in STEM fields are coming from. Your photo demonstrates that there is no issue.

ETA: What class is that, btw?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

Last edited by uke2se; 11th August 2017 at 06:38 AM.
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 06:35 AM   #528
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,082
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Looks like the alt-right is going in hard on this one: https://medium.com/@getongab/the-alt...n-a5c9d62ae727

This is great news for Google PR; known baddies are lining up against them.
Of course they are. The alt-right has a reputation to uphold about being on the wrong side of history on every single issue.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 06:37 AM   #529
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Agreed.

And no, you can't really hope to affect the current generation. It's a long term project to get women into STEM.
If the problem can only be solved by long-term programs to get women into STEM, then that supports Damore's contention that Google's current diversity programs won't work.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 07:54 AM   #530
d4m10n
Master Poster
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 2,685
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Great. Then there's no problem. I wonder where all those other figures about women being under-represented in STEM fields are coming from...
Did you have a good look at Figure 5 in the AAUW report you cited above? It is clear that women are more interested in learning the biological sciences than men. There are even some medical specialties where women are dominant, such as pharmacy and PA: http://fortune.com/2013/03/11/5-prof...uled-by-women/

(That photo, by the way, is a recent PA class, from a program where my wife taught.)

The two STEM fields where women are dramatically underrepresented (according to AAUW and various other sources) are computer science and engineering. Some of this is surely due to discrimination, some of it due to the tech bro culture that many (most?) women find offputting, but that probably isn't all there is to it. Some of the differences are due to non-coercive free choices made based on personal preferences which do not need to be socially reengineered.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 09:21 AM   #531
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 19,699
One thing all this discussion has not made clear to me.

Is Google actually trying to reach a 50/50 ratio of male to female programmers?

Or are they just trying to reduce the difference in the ratio they have?
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 09:32 AM   #532
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
One thing all this discussion has not made clear to me.

Is Google actually trying to reach a 50/50 ratio of male to female programmers?

Or are they just trying to reduce the difference in the ratio they have?
I don't think they actually care about the ratio. I think their real concern boils down to two related goals:

1) Appease the braying SJW mob
2) Avoid lawsuits

Getting closer to 50/50 helps with appearance, but it's the appearance which matters, not the actual results.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 12:08 PM   #533
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,679
David Brooks points out that those who are qualified in the areas Damore is talking about say he doesn't make errors in his memo:

Quote:
Several scientists in the field have backed up his summary of the data. “Despite how it’s been portrayed, the memo was fair and factually accurate,” Debra Soh wrote in The Globe and Mail in Toronto.

Geoffrey Miller, a prominent evolutionary psychologist, wrote in Quillette, “For what it’s worth, I think that almost all of the Google memo’s empirical claims are scientifically accurate.”
Of course, fairness and scientific accuracy count for nothing when you're up against the social justice mob.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 12:26 PM   #534
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 19,699
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I don't think they actually care about the ratio. I think their real concern boils down to two related goals:

1) Appease the braying SJW mob
2) Avoid lawsuits

Getting closer to 50/50 helps with appearance, but it's the appearance which matters, not the actual results.

Are you discounting any possibility that senior management at Google might have a sincere interest in increasing the participation of women in the programing field, at least within the limits of their company?

Or any interest in promoting the participation of women in STEM professions in general?
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 12:29 PM   #535
Delphic Oracle
Master Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,195
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Are you discounting any possibility that senior management at Google might have a sincere interest in increasing the participation of women in the programing field, at least within the limits of their company?

Or any interest in promoting the participation of women in STEM professions in general?
I bet they're interested in employees who are productive. They can be asexually-reproducing androgynous purple-with-green-polka-dot aliens from Alpha Centauri, can they meet deadlines and squash bugs? Hire their asses.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 12:38 PM   #536
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
It's time to unload Google stock. Recent events have shown that Google's leadership is feckless and craven. That isn't good for their long-term prospects, and even their short-term prospects are now less attractive if they can't even manage a staff meeting.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 12:40 PM   #537
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Are you discounting any possibility that senior management at Google might have a sincere interest in increasing the participation of women in the programing field, at least within the limits of their company?

Or any interest in promoting the participation of women in STEM professions in general?
Fair enough, their interest in that might be genuine. But it's still secondary. So I will amend my previous claim: those two items I mentioned are their primary concerns.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 01:27 PM   #538
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 10,744
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Sure. But you seem to be saying that all attempts at creating diversity, among whatever groups, are prima facie correct and worthwhile. Calling them the institutional version of the scientific method is assuming your conclusion.
Or assuming their intention. It's also assuming the conclusion that the scientific method works. It's the system we reside within, so we have difficulty evaluating its legitimacy.



Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Did he really say all of this?
No, not all of it, he said that what he knows are facts about average women can't be applied to individuals. I assumed he meant that he was confident this meant he would not do so personally, too. I gave him the benefit of the doubt.


Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Again, this needs to be argued for. Not just asserted. Are you an engineer? Have you determined that engineering firms, in general, undervalue the fact that engineers work together to build a final product for people and will be more competitive if they get the "full package". Well, have at it. Try and convince people.
I'm not an engineer, but I'm a person who hires engineers, and this is the primary skillset bottleneck in our projects. I call it the "engineer disease". We can teach anybody to code. What we can't teach are the social awareness, social competence, &c. These are the skills that are in short supply.



Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Same thing. Maybe the guy does get it. And how have you determined that he's less competent than many female applicants at Google?
The tipoff was the tone deaf email. If he's correct and empathy and emotional awareness are female talents, and knowing these are the competitive skillset for a large organization (like Google), then I think the evidence speaks for itself.


Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
If anything, the guy's memo is a step towards starting to even come close to really discussing these issues. By "really discussing", I mean being allowed to question the wisdom of what he correctly IMO called an ideological echo chamber. That's what skepticism is all about.
The only thing it's a step "towards" is 1960.
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett
blutoski is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 01:36 PM   #539
Delphic Oracle
Master Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,195
The vast bulk of responses I've heard basically focus on parts that are taken down with practiced ease and then conclude there is no need to grapple with the parts that challenge them.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th August 2017, 01:41 PM   #540
pharphis
Graduate Poster
 
pharphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,233
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
I'm seriously not buying it.
Not buying what, exactly? That I presented what he said accurately? That he meant what he said? That his statements are factually accurate?
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Ask trebuchet.

However, I'd be wary of someone who wants to work for Assange, now.



Hating? What are you talking about?
I don't know why I used that word lol.
pharphis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 06:00 AM   #541
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
So Google's CEO said that only parts of the memo violated Google's policy. Strangely enough, he didn't specify which parts. If he wants Google's employees to adhere to this policy, then the obvious and logical course of action would be to specify which parts violate which policies.

But he didn't do that. Here are a number of possible reasons, none of them good for Google.

1) He could just be incompetent.
2) He might not WANT employees to know. Strategic uncertainty: by not specifying the offense, employees will censor themselves to a greater extent than they would if Google specified what opinions were safe to express and which were not. This reinforces the ideological echo chamber.
3) He doesn't want people outside Google to understand Google's policy, because he's afraid of a public backlash against Google.
4) Damore wasn't fired because of any violation of policy. But Google needs to pretend there was to defend against potential lawsuit by Damore. Google's lawyers can figure out a pretense, but they have more flexibility to do so if he doesn't commit them to a position now.

If Google is actually honest about being open to different opinions from employees, then specifying exactly what the violation was is an absolute necessity. Otherwise, regardless of intent, the dynamics of #2 above will still play out: employees will be forced to self-censor. So keep an eye on whether or not that information is forthcoming.

My prediction is that it won't be, that the only conditions under which they will specify the violations is if they are forced to by a lawsuit.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 06:59 AM   #542
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,282
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
So Google's CEO said that only parts of the memo violated Google's policy. Strangely enough, he didn't specify which parts. If he wants Google's employees to adhere to this policy, then the obvious and logical course of action would be to specify which parts violate which policies.

But he didn't do that. Here are a number of possible reasons, none of them good for Google.

1) He could just be incompetent.
2) He might not WANT employees to know. Strategic uncertainty: by not specifying the offense, employees will censor themselves to a greater extent than they would if Google specified what opinions were safe to express and which were not. This reinforces the ideological echo chamber.
3) He doesn't want people outside Google to understand Google's policy, because he's afraid of a public backlash against Google.
4) Damore wasn't fired because of any violation of policy. But Google needs to pretend there was to defend against potential lawsuit by Damore. Google's lawyers can figure out a pretense, but they have more flexibility to do so if he doesn't commit them to a position now.

If Google is actually honest about being open to different opinions from employees, then specifying exactly what the violation was is an absolute necessity. Otherwise, regardless of intent, the dynamics of #2 above will still play out: employees will be forced to self-censor. So keep an eye on whether or not that information is forthcoming.

My prediction is that it won't be, that the only conditions under which they will specify the violations is if they are forced to by a lawsuit.
I think managing public statements that could influence future legal proceedings is a more logical explanation.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 07:29 AM   #543
d4m10n
Master Poster
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 2,685
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
4) Damore wasn't fired because of any violation of policy. But Google needs to pretend there was to defend against potential lawsuit by Damore. Google's lawyers can figure out a pretense, but they have more flexibility to do so if he doesn't commit them to a position now.
Google doesn't want to come out and say "We sacked this dude because he caused dissension within and a PR nightmare without." So they come up with the most plausible thing that should (hopefully) play well both within and without: fighting negative stereotypes.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/

Last edited by d4m10n; 12th August 2017 at 07:31 AM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 08:17 AM   #544
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
The tipoff was the tone deaf email. If he's correct and empathy and emotional awareness are female talents, and knowing these are the competitive skillset for a large organization (like Google), then I think the evidence speaks for itself.
No, it doesn't.

You're claiming that he's tone deaf because the email is offensive. But there are two assumptions here which need to be defended:
1) The emails are really that offensive to people
2) He didn't know that they would be offensive

You have a stronger case for 1, but even there, the fact that so much of the offense being taken relies on mischaracterization of his memo indicates to me that maybe it's not actually that offensive. But I'll let that slide for now, because the far more serious problem comes from 2.

This is an assumption with very little to justify it. Given the pains the author goes to trying to make sure people don't misinterpret his memo (which they did anyways, but that's not his fault), it seems like he did in fact know that people would take offense. Your reasons for this assumption aren't stated, so this is a guess on my part, but it seems like your position is that, had he known it would be offensive, he wouldn't have posted. But why should that be so? Why do we have a duty not to offend? I get that workplace environment requires some level of amicability between employees, but there's also a point at which I'm no longer responsible for any offense you take. It's not simply a given that he crossed this line.

One of the key pieces of evidence that he didn't cross the line is the fact that the memo was published something like a month before he was fired. Nothing happened to him until it was leaked, and then BOOM! he's fired. That suggests that it wasn't the workplace environment effect he had that got him fired, but the PR problem caused by the leak.

Which brings up another issue with the handing of this situation. Whoever leaked the memo likely did so with the intent of getting Damore fired. But regardless, by firing Damore more than a month after the memo was published, but very quickly after it became public, Google has sent a message loud and clear: you can strike at other employees by leaking internal information.

There are several consequences of this which will be very toxic for Google, some of which have already started to manifest themselves. First, the number of leaks will increase. Leaking is now a proven tactic. Second, animosity and distrust between employees will escalate, since your enemies might now have the power to get you fired. Third, trust in the company from outside will erode. Google can't keep their own **** secret, there's no way you can trust them to keep anything you tell them in confidence a secret either.

This is a turning point for Google. Firing Damore was a mistake. It placated one crowd, but enraged another, and guaranteed the conflict will escalate. They chose poorly. They might recover, but as of now, they're headed in the wrong direction.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 09:44 AM   #545
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,704
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
the fact that so much of the offense being taken relies on mischaracterization of his memo indicates to me that maybe it's not actually that offensive.
Exactly.

Quote:
Why do we have a duty not to offend?
It's validation culture. Everybody's special and nice and good and successful in their own way. From that stems the dynamic that things uncomfortable shouldn't be uttered or done.

Quote:
Google has sent a message loud and clear: you can strike at other employees by leaking internal information.
Given how the hard-left has been operating these last couple of years, that's par for the course.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 10:15 AM   #546
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,608
The latest leak: video from inside Google's cafeteria:
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 12:04 PM   #547
pharphis
Graduate Poster
 
pharphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,233
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No, it doesn't.

You're claiming that he's tone deaf because the email is offensive. But there are two assumptions here which need to be defended:
1) The emails are really that offensive to people
2) He didn't know that they would be offensive

You have a stronger case for 1, but even there, the fact that so much of the offense being taken relies on mischaracterization of his memo indicates to me that maybe it's not actually that offensive. But I'll let that slide for now, because the far more serious problem comes from 2.

This is an assumption with very little to justify it. Given the pains the author goes to trying to make sure people don't misinterpret his memo (which they did anyways, but that's not his fault), it seems like he did in fact know that people would take offense. Your reasons for this assumption aren't stated, so this is a guess on my part, but it seems like your position is that, had he known it would be offensive, he wouldn't have posted. But why should that be so? Why do we have a duty not to offend? I get that workplace environment requires some level of amicability between employees, but there's also a point at which I'm no longer responsible for any offense you take. It's not simply a given that he crossed this line.

One of the key pieces of evidence that he didn't cross the line is the fact that the memo was published something like a month before he was fired. Nothing happened to him until it was leaked, and then BOOM! he's fired. That suggests that it wasn't the workplace environment effect he had that got him fired, but the PR problem caused by the leak.

Which brings up another issue with the handing of this situation. Whoever leaked the memo likely did so with the intent of getting Damore fired. But regardless, by firing Damore more than a month after the memo was published, but very quickly after it became public, Google has sent a message loud and clear: you can strike at other employees by leaking internal information.

There are several consequences of this which will be very toxic for Google, some of which have already started to manifest themselves. First, the number of leaks will increase. Leaking is now a proven tactic. Second, animosity and distrust between employees will escalate, since your enemies might now have the power to get you fired. Third, trust in the company from outside will erode. Google can't keep their own **** secret, there's no way you can trust them to keep anything you tell them in confidence a secret either.

This is a turning point for Google. Firing Damore was a mistake. It placated one crowd, but enraged another, and guaranteed the conflict will escalate. They chose poorly. They might recover, but as of now, they're headed in the wrong direction.
I just want to add a detail most aren't aware of because as far as I know, it was only mentioned in Damore's interview with Peterson.

He stated in his interview (in the first 15 minutes - go watch it) that he originally gave this as feedback for the "diversity summit" thing he attended. Then, when he did hear back at all after what I think was a few weeks, he was encouraged by other employees (or maybe thought of it himself) that he should put it to the "google skeptics" group who are allegedly motivated to challenge and debunk things. He WANTED his ideas tested. It wasn't an email sent out to everyone. It was leaked after he gave his memo to the skeptic group.

Last edited by pharphis; 12th August 2017 at 12:06 PM.
pharphis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 12:15 PM   #548
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
There is only one thing for certain. They pretty much killed any dialogue or discussion and enforced a monoculture and monologue. Whatever you may think about the majority being right or wrong, killing dialogue is never a good thing in a firm.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 12:26 PM   #549
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,679
The irony is that firing Damore may screw them when it comes to the lawsuit. Remember, his argument boils down to the notion that the lack of women in software engineering is not due to sexism, but to gender differences in areas of interest. By canning Damore, isn't Google admitting that it's sexism?
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 12:59 PM   #550
d4m10n
Master Poster
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 2,685
Damore isn't going away quietly.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-w...gle-1502481290
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 01:17 PM   #551
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 79,237
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
The irony is that firing Damore may screw them when it comes to the lawsuit. Remember, his argument boils down to the notion that the lack of women in software engineering is not due to sexism, but to gender differences in areas of interest. By canning Damore, isn't Google admitting that it's sexism?
No.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 01:20 PM   #552
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
What are the credentials to sign in and read your citation?
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 01:28 PM   #553
Delphic Oracle
Master Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,195
Excommunicate Me From the Church of Social Justice

I was already well on this journey myself and this article totally nailed it.

Quote:
Scrolling through my news feed sometimes feels Iike sliding into a pew to be blasted by a fragmented, frenzied sermon. I know that much of the media posted there means to discipline me to be a better activist and community member. But when dictates aren’t followed, a common procedure of punishment ensues. Punishments for saying/doing/believing the wrong thing include shaming, scolding, calling out, isolating, or eviscerating someone’s social standing. Discipline and punishment has been used for all of history to control and destroy people. Why is it being used in movements meant to liberate all of us?
I'll bang the drum all day long about equal treatment in public spaces and before the law. I'll have all kinds of opinions of other people's opinions, but I don't exercise authority (real or imagined) over people either because of their beliefs or in order to compel them to change.

There's an ugly turn that's happened in the last few years that has escalated to abusive, vindictive, and violent. There is no negotiating.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 12th August 2017 at 01:34 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 07:11 PM   #554
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 10,282
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Excommunicate Me From the Church of Social Justice

I was already well on this journey myself and this article totally nailed it.



I'll bang the drum all day long about equal treatment in public spaces and before the law. I'll have all kinds of opinions of other people's opinions, but I don't exercise authority (real or imagined) over people either because of their beliefs or in order to compel them to change.

There's an ugly turn that's happened in the last few years that has escalated to abusive, vindictive, and violent. There is no negotiating.
None of those things are punishment. It is ridiculous to now that expressing your opinion on someone would be punishing them.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 07:27 PM   #555
KoihimeNakamura
Creativity Murderer
 
KoihimeNakamura's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In 2.5 million spinning tons of metal, above Epsilion Eridani III
Posts: 7,958
"Discipline and punishment" are corrective terms in any social group. In any case..

Quote:
James Damore says his good-faith effort to discuss differences between men and women in tech couldn’t be tolerated in the company’s ‘ideological echo chamber’
'good-faith effort'. Sure.
__________________
Don't mind me.
KoihimeNakamura is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 08:29 PM   #556
d4m10n
Master Poster
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 2,685
What makes you conclude he was acting in bad faith?
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 08:46 PM   #557
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 13,743
Double post-see below. Sorry.

Last edited by Giordano; 12th August 2017 at 09:15 PM.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 08:54 PM   #558
Delphic Oracle
Master Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,195
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
None of those things are punishment. It is ridiculous to now that expressing your opinion on someone would be punishing them.
An isolated bit of feedback, no. But 'feeding frenzy' can occur. Since everyone needs to score sensitivity creds, then everyone takes a turn denouncing anyone not toeing the line.

One time I used "Hispanic" instead of "Latino." I got a simultaneous lecture from about 8 directions. About 20 minutes in I said "okay, you've made your point." I was told it was rude for me to try and "center the conversation on my feelings."

I was spared when someone else pointed out that it really should be "Latinex" to respect gender diversity and they turned on each other from there.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Tapatalk
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 09:02 PM   #559
pharphis
Graduate Poster
 
pharphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,233
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Again and again groups in society dominated by men have argued that the biological differences between men and women made women inherently less suitable than men, or even completely unsuitable, for certain roles and these biological differences were what accounted for the lack of women in those groups. Over and over again: Voting. Holding political office. Owning and controlling property. Higher education. Being a biologist. Bring a medical doctor. Being a veterinarian. Being a chemist. Holding a supervisor role in a company. And each time there were multiple "scientific" studies cited to support these claims. Yet one by one, once the barriers were torn down, women flooded into these fields and excelled at them.

So we are to assume that although these former arguments were dead wrong, over and over again when applied to biology, medicine, chemistry, etc., and only arose from prejudice or a lack of insight, somehow these arguments are supposed to be accurate when now applied to physics or programming? Really? I wouldn't bet on it. Especially given we already see these fields starting to change form K-12 and on up.

To argue that the already decreasing discrepancies in gender in physics or programming is biologically based is just like the ever retreating God-of-the gaps issue in theology. The more we learn, the more we remove the barriers of prejudice, the less we see differences in the interests and abilities of women vs men in more and more fields. There is no deep gulf separating physics or code writing from all the other fields that women now populate successfully. Spatial lreasoning? Pretty important in much of chemistry, let alone many aspects of medicine and other fields listed.

Of course I do see biological differences between men and women that can influence their suitability for certain jobs. Men on average are stronger than women and I would expect to see more men then women in jobs demanding great physical strength. But there are some women stronger than some men, so women who can meet the necessary criteria of strength should be encouraged to enter into even these jobs. But I see no evidence of the supposed mental differences that have been advanced over time to account for gender imbalances. instead I've seen this concept invalidated time after time in area after area. Apparently the "scientific" studies that suggested otherwise were simply wrong or irrelevant. Or only reflected the limitations imposed by society's do not by biology. Limitations that disappeared when the existing barriers on women were removed
This sounds fairly revisionist. What is your source for this? Wasn't property ownership tied to voting? Then the draft? Exactly how long did the average man have access to voting before women? Again and again I see this narrative pushed that men held women back from voting for ages.

But seriously, were "scientific studies" used for any of these? What was wrong with the evidence used? Was the science poor science or were the conclusions exaggerated by those men who allegedly made those arguments?

I ask because this memo makes a claim: not that women are less capable but that there is good reason to suspect they would be less interested, and that such characteristics suggests that 1) we shouldn't expect a 50:50 ratio between men and women in software engineering, and 2) because men and women are different, IF we want "diversity" (more women) that the approach taken should take these differences into consideration. One suggestion was to make part-time work more respectable/doable for that type of job or that we should be more honest when teaching prospective students and employees what to expect on the job (less interaction with people rather than more is typical)
pharphis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th August 2017, 09:14 PM   #560
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 13,743
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I didn't say otherwise. But your argument was based on superficial similarities, and one of those supposed similarities was simply wrong. The arguments you're objecting to now aren't coming from the institutions, as they were back then. The difference matters.



Google's diversity training, microaggression training, etc. don't have anything to do with that. They won't help that. So any need for K-12 change can't justify what Damore is actually objecting to.



No. It gives lie to that argument in those specific cases. It doesn't categorically disprove those arguments across all fields.



First off, we know that inherent differences exist. We can measure them. We can, in some case, even trace their biological causes. Second, I never claimed that these differences are the basis for the disparate numbers in any career. I'm saying that, without actual evidence (of which you have none), you cannot discount the possibility that inherent differences contribute to the disparity.



There are a lot of studies which suggest men are inherently better at spacial reasoning, which is quite relevant to physics.



Neither I nor Damore ever even suggested that there were intrinsic differences between races.
Again and again groups in society dominated by men have argued that the biological differences between men and women made women inherently less suitable than men, or even completely unsuitable, for certain roles and these biological differences were what accounted for the lack of women in those groups. Over and over again: Voting. Holding political office. Owning and controlling property. Higher education. Being a biologist. Bring a medical doctor. Being a veterinarian. Being a chemist. Holding a supervisor role in a company. And each time there were multiple "scientific" studies cited to support these claims. Yet one by one, once the barriers were torn down, women flooded into these fields and excelled at them.

So we are to assume that although these former arguments were dead wrong, over and over again when applied to biology, medicine, chemistry, etc., and only arose from prejudice or a lack of insight, somehow these arguments are supposed to be accurate when now applied to physics or programming? Really? I wouldn't bet on it. Especially given we already see these fields starting to change from K-12 and on up.

To argue that the already decreasing discrepancies in gender in physics or programming are biologically based is just like the ever retreating God-of-the gaps issue in theology. The more we learn, the more we remove the barriers of prejudice, the less we see differences in the interests and abilities of women vs men in more and more fields. There is no deep gulf separating physics or code writing from all the other fields that women now populate successfully. Spatial lreasoning? Pretty important in much of chemistry, let alone many aspects of medicine and other fields listed.

Okay- you ask can I completely dismiss the very possibility that such inherent gender differences in physics and programming might exist? No, no more than I can dismiss the possibility that i will win a Nobel Prize. But the possibility is so small why bother discussing it? Especially when discussing it is inherently insulting and damaging to the women in the field and discouraging to those seeking to enter it. Is there any authentic evidence that Jews bake matzohs with the blood of Christian children? No. But why not discuss it given there are people who have argued that they do? Because it would give undeserved credence to a discredited point of view and would place an entire group of people at risk of the resulting consequences. I pick this example because I am Jewish.

Of course I do see biological differences between men and women that can influence their suitability for certain jobs. Men on average are stronger than women and I would expect to see more men then women in jobs demanding great physical strength. But there are some women stronger than some men, so women who can meet the necessary criteria of strength should be encouraged to enter into even these jobs. But again, I see no evidence of the supposed mental differences that have been advanced over time to account for gender imbalances. instead I've seen this concept invalidated time after time in area after area. Apparently the "scientific" studies that suggested otherwise were simply wrong or irrelevant. Or only reflected the limitations imposed by society's do not by biology. Limitations that disappeared when the existing barriers on women were removed.

Last edited by Giordano; 12th August 2017 at 09:16 PM.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:07 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.