4 ms·
This entire article is responding to a straw man. "We can say flatly that there is no evidence that women’s biology makes them incapable of performing at the h
by leifaffles 9y ago
This entire article is responding to a straw man.
"We can say flatly that there is no evidence that women’s biology makes them incapable of performing at the highest levels in any STEM fields."
That's nice. But that's not what Damore argued.
Rather, Damore argued that biology has a significant role in the interests of men and women, not their capabilities. There is a mountain of compelling evidence to support this claim.
See slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exaggerated-differences/.
- dvfjsdhgfv 9y agoNevertheless, after reading this article many people will believe Damore was spreading false information.
- kuschku 9y ago> There is a mountain of compelling evidence to support this claim. There is a mountain of evidence that interests are more strongly shaped by biology than by the social environment? That's an interesting thesis, I'd like to see that. All I could find showed that biology had an influence, but it was orders of magnitudes smaller than all influence that social environments had.
- Joeboy 9y ago> There is a mountain of evidence that interests are more strongly shaped by biology than by the social environment? Can I politely suggest that you look up the meaning of the term "straw man" and try to avoid doing it?