5 ms·

A veiled James Damore ('Google Manifesto') analogy perhaps?

kurthr 9y ago
He says, 'I welcome discussion about the responses of Galileo, Kolmogorov, and other historical figures to official ideologies that they didn’t believe in; and about the meta-question of how a truth-valuing person ought to behave when living under such ideologies. In the hopes of maintaining a civil discussion, any comments that mention current hot-button ideological disputes will be ruthlessly deleted.' so it doesn't sound that way to me... more likely related to something in the Texas legislature, though he might be sympathetic to someone who's been dogpiled by the modern media.
- dest 9y ago
  What happened in Texas? (I am not American and had no luck on search engines)
  - idlewords 9y ago
    Nothing happened in Texas, Aaronson just happens to teach there.
    - dest 9y ago
      ok thanks
- jacalata 9y ago
  Nah, it's totally about Damore, he's probably just hoping that using historical analogies will make it harder for him or his commenters to accidentally say something stupid.
pron 9y ago
Damore is no Galileo. He wrote about a subject he knows little about, didn't seriously research, and one that he actually doesn't seem too interested in studying at all. He wanted to enjoy the appearance of a "forbidden truth" while not caring to put in the effort of actually acquiring it. Aside from the fact that his opinion isn't popular in his immediate circle (yet far from revolutionary, and indeed very common among the ruling party in his country), he is a far cry from the iconoclast scientists who care deeply about a subject, devote their lives to studying it, know its ins and outs, and research it with fiery intensity.
- jack9 9y ago
  > He wrote about a subject he knows little about, didn't seriously research, and one that he actually doesn't seem too interested in studying at all He has a Master's Degree in Systems Biology from Harvard. How do you reconcile that?
  - pron 9y ago
    Oh, sorry; I've read his manifesto and didn't realize it was about systems biology. My impression was that it was about women in tech. Did he research social structures or even the psychological differences between the sexes?
    - imron 9y ago
      He did link to and summarise research on the psychological differences between the sexes - but it seems that this was the cause of quite a bit of the blowback because people didn't understand that this is what he was doing e.g. when he was talking about Neuroticism in the technical sense as one of the big 5 personality traits, and many people incorrectly interpreted that as him calling women neurotic. Also the links he provided that would have given this context were removed from quite a few of the online copies of the manifesto, causing further confusion.
      - pron 9y ago
        I saw the links. No expert on the actual matter at hand (women participation in tech) would consider them relevant at all to the issue.
        jack9 9y ago
        > Did he research social structures or even the psychological differences between the sexes? > No expert on the actual matter at hand (women participation in tech) would consider them relevant at all to the issue. Your inability to maintain a frame of reference for your objections is disheartening. It's clear you're just entrenched in a win/lose mentality and have no interest in the topic at all.

He says, 'I welcome discussion about the responses of Galileo, Kolmogorov, and other historical figures to official ideologies that they didn’t believe in; and about the meta-question of how a truth-valuing person ought to behave when living under such ideologies. In the hopes of maintaining a civil discussion, any comments that mention current hot-button ideological disputes will be ruthlessly deleted.' so it doesn't sound that way to me... more likely related to something in the Texas legislature, though he might be sympathetic to someone who's been dogpiled by the modern media.

dest 9y ago
What happened in Texas? (I am not American and had no luck on search engines)
- idlewords 9y ago
  Nothing happened in Texas, Aaronson just happens to teach there.
  - dest 9y ago
    ok thanks
jacalata 9y ago
Nah, it's totally about Damore, he's probably just hoping that using historical analogies will make it harder for him or his commenters to accidentally say something stupid.

pron 9y ago

Damore is no Galileo. He wrote about a subject he knows little about, didn't seriously research, and one that he actually doesn't seem too interested in studying at all. He wanted to enjoy the appearance of a "forbidden truth" while not caring to put in the effort of actually acquiring it. Aside from the fact that his opinion isn't popular in his immediate circle (yet far from revolutionary, and indeed very common among the ruling party in his country), he is a far cry from the iconoclast scientists who care deeply about a subject, devote their lives to studying it, know its ins and outs, and research it with fiery intensity.

jack9 9y ago
> He wrote about a subject he knows little about, didn't seriously research, and one that he actually doesn't seem too interested in studying at all He has a Master's Degree in Systems Biology from Harvard. How do you reconcile that?
- pron 9y ago
  Oh, sorry; I've read his manifesto and didn't realize it was about systems biology. My impression was that it was about women in tech. Did he research social structures or even the psychological differences between the sexes?
  - imron 9y ago
    He did link to and summarise research on the psychological differences between the sexes - but it seems that this was the cause of quite a bit of the blowback because people didn't understand that this is what he was doing e.g. when he was talking about Neuroticism in the technical sense as one of the big 5 personality traits, and many people incorrectly interpreted that as him calling women neurotic. Also the links he provided that would have given this context were removed from quite a few of the online copies of the manifesto, causing further confusion.
    - pron 9y ago
      I saw the links. No expert on the actual matter at hand (women participation in tech) would consider them relevant at all to the issue.
      - jack9 9y ago
        > Did he research social structures or even the psychological differences between the sexes? > No expert on the actual matter at hand (women participation in tech) would consider them relevant at all to the issue. Your inability to maintain a frame of reference for your objections is disheartening. It's clear you're just entrenched in a win/lose mentality and have no interest in the topic at all.