5 ms·

Four scientists with no expertise in the field of diversity and, as a result, in no position to argue that the scientific argument made justifies the conclusion

by mjg59 9y ago

Four scientists with no expertise in the field of diversity and, as a result, in no position to argue that the scientific argument made justifies the conclusions drawn (as one of them admits). A scientific argument is more than "Here's some science, here are some facts and here's the conclusion" - you have to use the science to explain the observed facts, and doing so takes more than saying "And therefore". There was no attempt to do so whatsoever, and so (from a scientific perspective) this was junk.

true_religion 9y ago
There has to be a more charitable explanation than your implied "four scientists don't know how to do science properly" thesis. Is diversity honestly so narrow a field, that a social psychologist, personality psychologists, evolutionary psychology, and a sexual neuroscientist are in no position to say anything? Gender diversity always seems to bring up two issues (1) are men and women different in mental reasoning, and if so where and how significant are these differences and (2) would differences in mental reasoning lead to different outcomes in choice of studies or employment? Is there a specific scientific field for that?
- mjg59 9y ago
  > There has to be a more charitable explanation than your implied "four scientists don't know how to do science properly" thesis. Indeed - one of them knows how to. > Is diversity honestly so narrow a field, that a social psychologist, personality psychologists, evolutionary psychology, and a sexual neuroscientist are in no position to say anything? Unless they've done any research in it, sure. Why should any of them have more insight into diversity than, say, a nuclear physicist? The issue isn't whether there are gender-related differences that are relevant to the job. It's not even whether those are significant enough to result in a measurable difference in outcome. It's whether those factors are the primary reason for the observed disparity, and neither the document author or the quoted scientists present any evidence whatsoever that that's the case. Failing to do that means that the conclusions drawn (ie, that existing diversity initiatives discriminate against men while providing no benefit to the company) aren't scientific.
  - stoobe 9y ago
    Those scientists specifically studied gender differences so they can at least confirm the Google author was actually correct in his factual claims. Where anyone can disagree is how he interprets them, but I am glad to see four experts clarify a little bit about what is true.
    - mjg59 9y ago
      They can confirm that he was correct in a subset of his factual claims, but not in the further factual claims that he builds on those. Implying that they can is bad science.
      - stoobe 9y ago
        Perhaps I misread it, but it sounded like all the gender differences he claimed were backed by research. What were the factual claims he got wrong?
        mjg59 9y ago
        I didn't say that the factual claims were wrong, I said that the scientists quoted in the article were not in a position to confirm them. Someone with appropriate domain expertise would be able to do so, but none appear to have been asked.
        yawaramin 9y ago
        Also, even if the gender differences were backed by research, what's not backed by research is the assumption that those differences have any significant impact on women's capacity to perform the same work as men. Remember--the scientific method is about making a falsifiable hypothesis and then gathering enough evidence to be able to reject it. In this case the falsifiable hypothesis would have to be that men and women have no significant difference in their ability to perform the same work.
        renaudg 9y ago
canoebuilder 9y ago
the field of diversity uh? What? What is that? Define 'diversity.'
- mjg59 9y ago
  The field of study of the causes of unrepresentative populations and the strategies for mitigation of those causes.
  - canoebuilder 9y ago
    Is that a thing? or did you just make it up? Can you link a couple .edu departments. Does this field just care about "unrepresentative populations" of people interested in coding, or do they also care about "unrepresentative populations" of olympic sprinters, fishing boat crews, and kindergarten teachers?
    - mjg59 9y ago
      http://lmgtfy.com/?q=diversity+studies+site%3Aedu http://lmgtfy.com/?q=diversity+studies+site%3Aedu
    - yawaramin 9y ago
      https://www.google.com/search?q=diversity+studies+site%3Aedu https://www.google.com/search?q=diversity+studies+site%3Aedu
      - canoebuilder 9y ago
        Can you link to one that cares about the apparently highly important matter of "unrepresentative populations" of people interested in coding, and why that is an issue of greater interest than any of the other countless "unrepresentative populations"? The one's I looked just seemed like a mish mash of meaningless postmodern babble. What happened to the scholarly tradition of penetrating insight and clarity?
        9y ago

by mjg59 9y ago

true_religion 9y ago

There has to be a more charitable explanation than your implied "four scientists don't know how to do science properly" thesis. Is diversity honestly so narrow a field, that a social psychologist, personality psychologists, evolutionary psychology, and a sexual neuroscientist are in no position to say anything? Gender diversity always seems to bring up two issues (1) are men and women different in mental reasoning, and if so where and how significant are these differences and (2) would differences in mental reasoning lead to different outcomes in choice of studies or employment? Is there a specific scientific field for that?

mjg59 9y ago
> There has to be a more charitable explanation than your implied "four scientists don't know how to do science properly" thesis. Indeed - one of them knows how to. > Is diversity honestly so narrow a field, that a social psychologist, personality psychologists, evolutionary psychology, and a sexual neuroscientist are in no position to say anything? Unless they've done any research in it, sure. Why should any of them have more insight into diversity than, say, a nuclear physicist? The issue isn't whether there are gender-related differences that are relevant to the job. It's not even whether those are significant enough to result in a measurable difference in outcome. It's whether those factors are the primary reason for the observed disparity, and neither the document author or the quoted scientists present any evidence whatsoever that that's the case. Failing to do that means that the conclusions drawn (ie, that existing diversity initiatives discriminate against men while providing no benefit to the company) aren't scientific.
- stoobe 9y ago
  Those scientists specifically studied gender differences so they can at least confirm the Google author was actually correct in his factual claims. Where anyone can disagree is how he interprets them, but I am glad to see four experts clarify a little bit about what is true.
  - mjg59 9y ago
    They can confirm that he was correct in a subset of his factual claims, but not in the further factual claims that he builds on those. Implying that they can is bad science.
    - stoobe 9y ago
      Perhaps I misread it, but it sounded like all the gender differences he claimed were backed by research. What were the factual claims he got wrong?
      - mjg59 9y ago
        I didn't say that the factual claims were wrong, I said that the scientists quoted in the article were not in a position to confirm them. Someone with appropriate domain expertise would be able to do so, but none appear to have been asked.
      - yawaramin 9y ago
        Also, even if the gender differences were backed by research, what's not backed by research is the assumption that those differences have any significant impact on women's capacity to perform the same work as men. Remember--the scientific method is about making a falsifiable hypothesis and then gathering enough evidence to be able to reject it. In this case the falsifiable hypothesis would have to be that men and women have no significant difference in their ability to perform the same work.
        renaudg 9y ago

canoebuilder 9y ago

the field of diversity uh? What? What is that? Define 'diversity.'

mjg59 9y ago
The field of study of the causes of unrepresentative populations and the strategies for mitigation of those causes.
- canoebuilder 9y ago
  Is that a thing? or did you just make it up? Can you link a couple .edu departments. Does this field just care about "unrepresentative populations" of people interested in coding, or do they also care about "unrepresentative populations" of olympic sprinters, fishing boat crews, and kindergarten teachers?
  - mjg59 9y ago
    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=diversity+studies+site%3Aedu http://lmgtfy.com/?q=diversity+studies+site%3Aedu
  - yawaramin 9y ago
    https://www.google.com/search?q=diversity+studies+site%3Aedu https://www.google.com/search?q=diversity+studies+site%3Aedu
    - canoebuilder 9y ago
      Can you link to one that cares about the apparently highly important matter of "unrepresentative populations" of people interested in coding, and why that is an issue of greater interest than any of the other countless "unrepresentative populations"? The one's I looked just seemed like a mish mash of meaningless postmodern babble. What happened to the scholarly tradition of penetrating insight and clarity?
      - 9y ago