4 ms·

Have you even read his text? Please quote the "deeply hurtful" passages

by oskbor 9y ago

rifung 9y ago
I have but I can't quote anything because I wasn't offended. Other people were clearly hurt by it though and I don't believe I'm in a position where I should tell other people what they should or shouldn't feel.
- jshevek 9y ago
  We are all responsible for evaluating the reasonableness of claims of being hurt by someone. Otherwise dishonest or mentally unwell people hold us all hostage to their arbitrary claims.
  - rifung 9y ago
    > We are all responsible for evaluating the reasonableness of claims of being hurt by someone. Otherwise dishonest or mentally unwell people hold us all hostage to their arbitrary claims. If they are mentally unwell, it doesn't make their suffering any less real does it? I admit I am biased as someone with a mental illness, I wouldn't want someone to disregard my opinion based on knowledge of my illness. As for dishonest people, I suppose I like to believe I can believe other Googlers, especially when there are so many of them in this case who were upset by this.
    - jshevek 9y ago
      Thank you for pointing out flaws of ambiguity in my comment. > If they are mentally unwell, it doesn't make their suffering any less real does it? I admit I am biased as someone with a mental illness, I wouldn't want someone to disregard my opinion based on knowledge of my illness. I meant only to reference the variations in tendency towards certain mental behaviors (such as accurately assessing reality, or taking responsibility for emotional responses) that exist among people. I gave an example of the "mentally unwell" to illustrate that this spectrum exist, but all parts of the spectrum are worth considering. As an aside, and to hopefully show I'm not brushing with too wide a brush here: people with mental disorders are, sometimes, actually far better (at, say, having an accurate view of events) than people who don't have disorders, because they have [in the course of learning to cope with their issues, have also] learned to understand and correct for flaws that we all have. I did not mean to suggest that people with mental disorders should automatically have their opinion/experience/claims discounted! We should evaluate each situation individually. But there are clearly cases where a person's claim of "being hurt" should not be allowed to influence certain decisions, or policy, regardless of their overall mental/emotional functioning.
    - jshevek 9y ago
      > As for dishonest people, I suppose I like to believe I can believe other Googlers, especially when there are so many of them in this case who were upset by this. This touches on another problem area of ambiguity/clarity in my statement. We should question the reasonableness of the claim of being hurt - by which I not only mean "Were they really hurt?", but also "Is it reasonable for them to have been hurt?" I can choose to be deeply hurt and offended by almost anything. We must strike a balance between respecting peoples feelings, and not allowing manipulators to exploit that respect to unreasonably coerce our behavior. If you take 'respect for people's feelings' to an absurd extreme, we could create a world in which I could have you jailed for posing the questions you pose above. 'They hurt me.' The fact that some demonstrably ideologically intolerant people successfully pressured Google to fire someone for expressing reasonable opinions based on evidence - this suggests to me that our society has already crossed certain thresholds in the balance between "respect for claims of being hurt" and other societal values - such as the allowance of independent thought.
rbanffy 9y ago
We can start from the implication that it's natural there are less women in the profession because most of them are biologically unsuited to it. Now replace woman with black (or Jew) and see what happens. Do you still think it's OK?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- flukus 9y ago
  If it was true then yes. If you find reality offensive then that's your problem to deal with.
  - rbanffy 9y ago
    Is it true?
    - notdonspaulding 9y ago
      Yes. - There are fewer white men in the NBA because they are biologically unsuited to it. - There are fewer tall fighter pilots because they are biologically unsuited to it. - There are fewer women as pitchers in the MLB because they are biologically unsuited to it. These are descriptive statements about reality. The world in which we find ourselves. You may not like that world, you may think we should change the rules of that world, but it is the world as it exists today. Calling it out as such can not rationally be considered offensive.
      - rbanffy 9y ago
        So, do you believe women are biologically unsuited to be software engineers?
- slavak 9y ago
  His main point was that MORE of them were biologically UNINTERESTED in it, not that MOST of them were UNSUITED. And to your point... yes? If someone said a profession mostly working outside in the desert has less gingers in it because most of them are biologically unsuited for prolonged sun exposure, would you really take offense? This isn't phrenology we're discussing here. If you're discussing real, tangible biological differences backed while proper scientific research, while taking care to treat people as individuals and avoid generalizing based on the distribution mean, then what's actually the problem here?

Have you even read his text? Please quote the "deeply hurtful" passages

by oskbor 9y ago

Have you even read his text? Please quote the "deeply hurtful" passages

I have but I can't quote anything because I wasn't offended. Other people were clearly hurt by it though and I don't believe I'm in a position where I should tell other people what they should or shouldn't feel.

jshevek 9y ago
We are all responsible for evaluating the reasonableness of claims of being hurt by someone. Otherwise dishonest or mentally unwell people hold us all hostage to their arbitrary claims.
- rifung 9y ago
  > We are all responsible for evaluating the reasonableness of claims of being hurt by someone. Otherwise dishonest or mentally unwell people hold us all hostage to their arbitrary claims. If they are mentally unwell, it doesn't make their suffering any less real does it? I admit I am biased as someone with a mental illness, I wouldn't want someone to disregard my opinion based on knowledge of my illness. As for dishonest people, I suppose I like to believe I can believe other Googlers, especially when there are so many of them in this case who were upset by this.
  - jshevek 9y ago
    Thank you for pointing out flaws of ambiguity in my comment. > If they are mentally unwell, it doesn't make their suffering any less real does it? I admit I am biased as someone with a mental illness, I wouldn't want someone to disregard my opinion based on knowledge of my illness. I meant only to reference the variations in tendency towards certain mental behaviors (such as accurately assessing reality, or taking responsibility for emotional responses) that exist among people. I gave an example of the "mentally unwell" to illustrate that this spectrum exist, but all parts of the spectrum are worth considering. As an aside, and to hopefully show I'm not brushing with too wide a brush here: people with mental disorders are, sometimes, actually far better (at, say, having an accurate view of events) than people who don't have disorders, because they have [in the course of learning to cope with their issues, have also] learned to understand and correct for flaws that we all have. I did not mean to suggest that people with mental disorders should automatically have their opinion/experience/claims discounted! We should evaluate each situation individually. But there are clearly cases where a person's claim of "being hurt" should not be allowed to influence certain decisions, or policy, regardless of their overall mental/emotional functioning.
  - jshevek 9y ago
    > As for dishonest people, I suppose I like to believe I can believe other Googlers, especially when there are so many of them in this case who were upset by this. This touches on another problem area of ambiguity/clarity in my statement. We should question the reasonableness of the claim of being hurt - by which I not only mean "Were they really hurt?", but also "Is it reasonable for them to have been hurt?" I can choose to be deeply hurt and offended by almost anything. We must strike a balance between respecting peoples feelings, and not allowing manipulators to exploit that respect to unreasonably coerce our behavior. If you take 'respect for people's feelings' to an absurd extreme, we could create a world in which I could have you jailed for posing the questions you pose above. 'They hurt me.' The fact that some demonstrably ideologically intolerant people successfully pressured Google to fire someone for expressing reasonable opinions based on evidence - this suggests to me that our society has already crossed certain thresholds in the balance between "respect for claims of being hurt" and other societal values - such as the allowance of independent thought.

rbanffy 9y ago

We can start from the implication that it's natural there are less women in the profession because most of them are biologically unsuited to it. Now replace woman with black (or Jew) and see what happens. Do you still think it's OK?

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
flukus 9y ago
If it was true then yes. If you find reality offensive then that's your problem to deal with.
- rbanffy 9y ago
  Is it true?
  - notdonspaulding 9y ago
    Yes. - There are fewer white men in the NBA because they are biologically unsuited to it. - There are fewer tall fighter pilots because they are biologically unsuited to it. - There are fewer women as pitchers in the MLB because they are biologically unsuited to it. These are descriptive statements about reality. The world in which we find ourselves. You may not like that world, you may think we should change the rules of that world, but it is the world as it exists today. Calling it out as such can not rationally be considered offensive.
    - rbanffy 9y ago
      So, do you believe women are biologically unsuited to be software engineers?
slavak 9y ago
His main point was that MORE of them were biologically UNINTERESTED in it, not that MOST of them were UNSUITED. And to your point... yes? If someone said a profession mostly working outside in the desert has less gingers in it because most of them are biologically unsuited for prolonged sun exposure, would you really take offense? This isn't phrenology we're discussing here. If you're discussing real, tangible biological differences backed while proper scientific research, while taking care to treat people as individuals and avoid generalizing based on the distribution mean, then what's actually the problem here?