6 ms·

If you enjoyed this post you should read a few others that have been posted by Scott recently (on the linked website). If any chance were to be made, the least

by ve55 9y ago

If you enjoyed this post you should read a few others that have been posted by Scott recently (on the linked website). If any chance were to be made, the least that I would hope for is that people stop responding to every argument with nothing but hatred. Just pure, unfiltered, hatred. It's very difficult nowadays to find communities, or even individuals, who are good at this.

peacetreefrog 9y ago
Particularly apt: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything...
- ve55 9y ago
  That's a good example that's a bit further back in the archive, but hopefully shouldn't be too hard to find due to how influential it was. Probably better just to read the entire site, some really amazing posts there.
  - petters 9y ago
    That particular post is listed by Scott as one of his "top posts." at http://slatestarcodex.com/about/ http://slatestarcodex.com/about/
smsm42 9y ago
> If you enjoyed this post you should read a few others that have been posted by Scott recently (on the linked website). In fact, you should read all posts in that blog (only joking a little here). I am saying this as a person who disagrees with Scott on many political views. If everybody approached to controversial topics the same way as he does, Internet would be the best place ever for political discussions.
- ZeroGravitas 9y ago
  Interesting you say that, as this seems to be one of his weaker entries, precisely because he's taking a mocking tone without sufficiently backing up his case.
  - smsm42 9y ago
    > because he's taking a mocking tone Given as the alternative is "punch the Nazis!" from one side and "lol libtards are nutz, praise kek" from the other, I'd rather take a gentle mocking now at then. Even if I disagree from time to time. Scott is not ideal, maybe, but definitely in the top 10%. Maybe even 1%, but I don't read enough to claim that. Also, I don't see much mocking going on there, could you give a couple examples, maybe my understanding of mocking is different? > without sufficiently backing up his case. There's plenty of links in the article. Which claim do you think is not backed?
    - ZeroGravitas 9y ago
      See my other comment about women having "conquered" the field of law because they have a representation in higher education 1 percentage point lower than their proportion in society, falling to 36% working in the field and 30% at state judge level. It's such a superficial appraisal of the reality, it's insulting that he then mocks people who think there may be systemic issues.
      - smsm42 9y ago
        > It's such a superficial appraisal of the reality The reality is exactly as described, namely: As the feminist movement gradually took hold, women conquered one of these fields after another. 51% of law students are now female. So are 49.8% of medical students, 45% of math majors, 60% of linguistics majors, 60% of journalism majors, 75% of psychology majors, and 60% of biology postdocs. Yet for some reason, engineering remains only about 20% female. These figures are accurate, as far as I can see. The only objection could be to the word "conquered", which sounds to me like an attempt to mine outrage out of nothing. The discussion is about why there's 51% of female law students (despite huge gap existing not so long before) but only 20% of CS students (despite having 40% 20 years ago). Clearly, there is something going on, and that's the interesting part, not discussing whether 51% of female students is "conquering". > it's insulting that he then mocks people who think there may be systemic issues I still had no examples of "mocking", but given the reality as described, there should be explanation why "systemic issues" exist in CS and engineering, but not in law, medicine, math, biology, etc. If the concept does not explain that, it is not fitting the facts, and as such can be dismissed.
losvedir 9y ago
I agree that Scott is worth reading. I don't always agree with his points, but he's always careful and seems clear to highlight data that disagree with his points. I've never understood how he has the time (as an M.D. with a day job!) to write as much as he does, including his fiction works.
benmmurphy 9y ago
Slate Star Codex has one of the best comment sections on the internet. I think Scott has done a really good job at encouraging and setting good norms for civil discussion of controversial topics.

by ve55 9y ago

peacetreefrog 9y ago

Particularly apt: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything...

ve55 9y ago
That's a good example that's a bit further back in the archive, but hopefully shouldn't be too hard to find due to how influential it was. Probably better just to read the entire site, some really amazing posts there.
- petters 9y ago
  That particular post is listed by Scott as one of his "top posts." at http://slatestarcodex.com/about/ http://slatestarcodex.com/about/

smsm42 9y ago

> If you enjoyed this post you should read a few others that have been posted by Scott recently (on the linked website). In fact, you should read all posts in that blog (only joking a little here). I am saying this as a person who disagrees with Scott on many political views. If everybody approached to controversial topics the same way as he does, Internet would be the best place ever for political discussions.

ZeroGravitas 9y ago
Interesting you say that, as this seems to be one of his weaker entries, precisely because he's taking a mocking tone without sufficiently backing up his case.
- smsm42 9y ago
  > because he's taking a mocking tone Given as the alternative is "punch the Nazis!" from one side and "lol libtards are nutz, praise kek" from the other, I'd rather take a gentle mocking now at then. Even if I disagree from time to time. Scott is not ideal, maybe, but definitely in the top 10%. Maybe even 1%, but I don't read enough to claim that. Also, I don't see much mocking going on there, could you give a couple examples, maybe my understanding of mocking is different? > without sufficiently backing up his case. There's plenty of links in the article. Which claim do you think is not backed?
  - ZeroGravitas 9y ago
    See my other comment about women having "conquered" the field of law because they have a representation in higher education 1 percentage point lower than their proportion in society, falling to 36% working in the field and 30% at state judge level. It's such a superficial appraisal of the reality, it's insulting that he then mocks people who think there may be systemic issues.
    - smsm42 9y ago
      > It's such a superficial appraisal of the reality The reality is exactly as described, namely: As the feminist movement gradually took hold, women conquered one of these fields after another. 51% of law students are now female. So are 49.8% of medical students, 45% of math majors, 60% of linguistics majors, 60% of journalism majors, 75% of psychology majors, and 60% of biology postdocs. Yet for some reason, engineering remains only about 20% female. These figures are accurate, as far as I can see. The only objection could be to the word "conquered", which sounds to me like an attempt to mine outrage out of nothing. The discussion is about why there's 51% of female law students (despite huge gap existing not so long before) but only 20% of CS students (despite having 40% 20 years ago). Clearly, there is something going on, and that's the interesting part, not discussing whether 51% of female students is "conquering". > it's insulting that he then mocks people who think there may be systemic issues I still had no examples of "mocking", but given the reality as described, there should be explanation why "systemic issues" exist in CS and engineering, but not in law, medicine, math, biology, etc. If the concept does not explain that, it is not fitting the facts, and as such can be dismissed.

losvedir 9y ago

I agree that Scott is worth reading. I don't always agree with his points, but he's always careful and seems clear to highlight data that disagree with his points. I've never understood how he has the time (as an M.D. with a day job!) to write as much as he does, including his fiction works.

benmmurphy 9y ago

Slate Star Codex has one of the best comment sections on the internet. I think Scott has done a really good job at encouraging and setting good norms for civil discussion of controversial topics.