4 ms·
https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788 https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-man...
by hackcasual 9y ago
https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788 https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-man...
- EddieRingle 9y ago> I’m not going to spend any length of time on (1); if anyone wishes to provide details as to how nearly every statement about gender in that entire document is actively incorrect,¹ and flies directly in the face of all research done in the field for decades, they should go for it. But I am neither a biologist, a psychologist, nor a sociologist, so I’ll leave that to someone else.
- hackcasual 9y agoYes? He's admitting he doesn't have the expertise to address that. Evo-psych is definitely not a generally accepted scientific field, so I don't really take issue with his off hand dismissal.
- carapat_virulat 9y agoAs far as I understood the original manifesto was about the average population characteristics of currently existing men and women, so those studies shouldn't have anything to do with Evo-psych, I mean they would be valid even if evolution didn't exist.
- stagbeetle 9y agoThere was a passing mention of evolutionary psychology in one of the points where the author was explaining other reasons for the gender disparity.
- kinkrtyavimoodh 9y agoSomeone asked you to link to resources that specifically prove parts of the manifesto as wrong. And you replied with a blog that literally says that they will not engage in any discussion on the issues that are under contention.
- hackcasual 9y agoAny part of the manifesto. And the blog post addresses 2 out of 3 parts of it.