6 ms·
What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?
- s_kilk 9y agoTLDR; manifesto guy was egregiously wrong in basically all assertions.
- dublinclontarf 9y agoAuthor has misread, misunderstood, and misrepresented manifesto guys doc, attributed motives AND tried to tie this into the alt-right.
- pawadu 9y agoI think at this point we can all agree that Damore tied himself to alt-right by doing those interviews. edit: I find it interesting that most comments criticizing the guy is heavily downvoted while his supporters claim they are being gagged
- vixen99 9y agoGiven that 'The alt-right, or alternative right, is a loosely defined group of people' it's great for suggestive hinting while not having to bother to define terms.
- LyndsySimon 9y ago> I think at this point we can all agree that Damore tied himself to alt-right by doing those interviews. I don't think we can. There is no consensus regarding what the "alt-right" is, even among those who self-identify as members.
- dvfjsdhgfv 9y agoThank you for this submission. This is basically the first scientist disagreeing with Demore. The previous ones (five of them I think, submitted to HN and quickly flagged) basically agreed with what he said. I think we can now start to have a normal discussion with arguments, based on studies and evidence, rather that name calling (although Suzanne's answer is not entirely unemotional, but that's her right).
- orthoganol 9y agoYou realize she does lead her comment/ TL;DR with "He's secretly pushing an alt-right agenda"?
- s_kilk 9y agoThe guy is absolutely pushing an alt-right agenda, it's plain to see in the manifesto, and that's before we get to his guest appearance on a prominent alt-right YouTube show.
- orthoganol 9y ago> absolutely You don't know that, and I get little impression of such from his Bloomberg appearance today: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2017-08-10/fired-engineer-damore-i-feel-google-betrayed-me-video https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2017-08-10/fired-engin... Even so you are aware the Quora question is "What do scientists think about the biological claims?", so the ad hominem is not only a distracting annoyance but is also undermining of one's claim to objective impartiality.
- kybernetikos 9y agoI doubt the respondant would claim objective impartiality, and if they did, their article would quickly make clear that they have a background and situation that colours their view of the issue and that they feel very strongly about it and are emotionally engaged with it. None of this means that they are wrong on the substantive points they make though, even though you're right that the alt-right claim isn't helpful. In fact I got the impression of someone who feels very strongly about the issues, but who is still trying to engage logically and reasonably and in good faith, even if they slip occasionally. Much the same can probably be said for the original memo author.
- Klockan 9y ago> argues that cognitive sex differences influence performance in software engineering. Damore never argued for this, he argued that cognitive sex differences could possibly influence interest in software engineering work as it done today and that difference in interest could partially explain the gender gap in tech. He then suggest that we try alternate approaches when we try to increase women's representation since they might work better, which hints at him thinking that women would be valuable as engineers at Google, just that the current arguably misplaced diversity efforts might not achieve that goal.
- slindz 9y agoExactly this. I have never wanted to use all caps so badly before in my life. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
- kybernetikos 9y ago> Damore never argued for this Is the articles quote unfair then? It explicitly calls out an apparent jump from preferences to abilities in the original. (My emphasis) >>I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there’s significant overlap between men and women, so you can’t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions. > > At what point did we jump from talking about personalities to abilities?
- Klockan 9y agoDifference in preferences usually results in difference in abilities due to a difference in life choices, that is how I interpreted it. So if biology has any effect on preferences then biology indirectly influences ability but it is still nothing that can't be overcome by someone who likes the subject.
- kybernetikos 9y ago> Difference in preferences usually results in difference in abilities due to a difference in life choices, that is how I interpreted it. Indeed, but the relationship is not necessarily simple and requires argumentation rather than handwave.
- nippples 9y ago> what scientists think > one scientist's opinion We're reaching "both sides of the climate change debate" levels of spinning here.
- IshKebab 9y agoYeah this must be how climate change deniers feel about the scientific view of climate change. It really feels like it's just one scientist's work against another. I don't have time to actually read their studies so how should I know who to believe? Of course this is much worse than climate change because that's 'hard science' where it's relatively easy to get good evidence. Psychology seems to be barely better than guesswork.
- nippples 9y ago> Psychology seems to be barely better than guesswork. It depends on the school of thought and experimentation methods. Some, for example, will focus almost exclusively in easily measurable physiological responses to stimuli and draw very restricted conclusions on their experimental results. Others will sit on a desk, reflect on their past and speculate extensively about human nature based on that. But yeah, it's a rather soft science.
- asdfologist 9y agoRegardless of whether or not you agree with the original manifesto, why couldn't Googlers have a civil discussion like that Quora thread instead of firing him?
- jardaroh 9y agoSo the quora article was civil was it? "hints of racism" what racism? Misrepresenting his arguments. Not civil.
- ben_w 9y agoAmongst many other reasons, because stuff like that 'manifesto' actively harms Google by harming a significant minority of their employees who might, if nothing was done about it, leave the industry because it was the last straw after a lifetime of harassment and devaluation.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- Numberwang 9y agoShould HN not be consistent and censor this side of the debate too? I don't understand this site sometimes.
- throwaway417164 9y agoGoogle CEO Sundar Pichai (note to employees): > Our co-workers shouldn’t have to worry that each time they open their mouths to speak in a meeting, they have to prove that they are not like the memo states, being “agreeable” rather than “assertive,” showing a “lower stress tolerance,” or being “neurotic.” Evolutionary biologist Suzanne Sadedin (quora answer linked here): > It’s true that women and men, on average, have been found in some studies to differ in empathizing/agreeableness, systematizing, gregariousness versus assertiveness; and neuroticism.
- anonymoushn 9y ago> The passing mention of IQ is interesting, since it has nothing to do with gender, which is the focus everywhere else. He’s presumably talking about race, but he doesn’t want to be branded a racist, so he keeps the reference subtle. So why risk doing it at all? It’s a dog-whistle to the alt-right. He could be talking about a difference in variance of IQ between genders, which has been observed in some studies.
- Boothroid 9y agoAm I the only one that sees an inconsistency between the touchy feely world of inclusiveness and diversity within these US tech companies, and the Darwinian harshness of life outside them in the US? I'm thinking of what seems to an outsider like a generally held callousness towards those that fall through the cracks, and a focus on individual agency as being the sole determinant of success, ignoring very real factors like background etc.
- slindz 9y agoNo. Plenty of people see what's happening and play along because it's pretty dangerous not to. This guy was naive enough to try and present a rational and measured suggestion for meaningful improvement.
- cerealbad 9y agoamerican civilization lacks the maturity of foresight. their <250 year history is greedy search. this permeates all levels of their culture and cements company ethos as a race between employees rather than a collaborative endeavor in profit sharing, stable growth, harmonious balance. you should look at it as a sandbox environment to test out human ingenuity, everything else be damned. americans are ephemeral, they don't exist as a collective. despite the quasi-fascist 100 year long effort to build militaristic patriotism into the hearts and minds of the young. how many american politicians have been educated in the far east? asia is the biggest threat to american dominance in the next century and americas role in world government is only nascent. they will have a clear road towards leadership and development of the human race going forward. yet their business, cultural and political thinkers have no experience with half of the worlds population. everyone says one thing and does something else. it's more transparent and sleazy in america. give them another few hundred years to refine their technique.
- craigsmansion 9y agoIt's great that someone took the time and had the peace of mind to write down this firm rebuttal. Sexist or not, the original manifesto was anti science. How so many whose paycheck depends on the implementation of logic got hoodwinked into defending what basically amounts to an political pamphlet by a couple of references baffles me.
- zimablue 9y agoMore scientists have written in defense than opposition, and even the most hardened opposition concedes the validity of some of his sources.
- craigsmansion 9y ago> More scientists have written in defense than opposition Yes, and all of them underlining the argument that women are indeed different from men, which isn't contested in the slightest. What remained uncontested is the sloppy science. In science you present a claim, construct an argument, and reach a conclusion. You can't construct an argument that doesn't support your conclusion and then proclaim it must be valid because it has something to do with the initial claim. What happened here was: -Fact: Women are different than men. -Observation: There is a difference between men and woman in IT. -Conclusion: this difference in IT must be based on the primary difference between men and women. or -Fact: all goats breathe -Observation: Plato breathes -Conclusion: Plato is a goat. I hope everyone recognises this fallacy. It's pointless to keep presenting evidence for the initial fact. What you need to do is introduce new facts that construct a solid argument that includes your observation and logically binds it into the conclusion. As the quora article points out, that's not what happened. On top of that (or underneath) there's also some political la-ti-da going on, which is fine for a memo, and if it had been restricted to that, I doubt it would have caused this much commotion. TL;DR (also, don't use that term in any sort of treatise that you want to sound scientific) if you want to use science to shield you from negative reactions to postulating an unpopular idea, make sure it's sound.
- zimablue 9y ago
- IshKebab 9y agoI got as far as this: > > On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed ... > His implicit model is that cognitive traits must be either biological (i.e. innate, natural, and unchangeable) or non-biological (i.e., learned by a blank slate). Within a few lines of each other. I think she is reading what she wants to read.