3 ms·

>Meritocracy should be the paramount consideration in all things, and possibly a small consideration of diversity of ideas and beliefs, but not diversity of ski

>Meritocracy should be the paramount consideration in all things, and possibly a small consideration of diversity of ideas and beliefs, but not diversity of skin color or genitalia. >If all of the most brilliant astrophysicist minds in the world happen to be Japanese women, why shouldn't they be preferred over all others in getting into prestigious colleges to study astrophysics? Why do we care if we have a certain number of European males in that situation? The fallacy with assumptions like these is that it presupposes a completely level starting point for all demographics/ethnicities. If everyone had access to the exact same resources throughout the entirety of their developmental lifespan, then yes, no one would rightfully care whether or not $genderNationality was predisposed to be above-average at a given discipline. That is just not how reality plays out though. More often than not, certain groups are predisposed to excel because they simply won the socioeconomic lottery. To draw on your hypothetical example, if Japanese women happen to dominate the field of astrophysics, is it because they're predisposed to it? Or is it because Ugandan men and Mongolian women simply don't have the same access to the educational systems and resources that give them a decided advantage in preparing for a rigorous, top-10 education in such a discipline? I think a lot of times people look at efforts like this and try to oversimplify it to "oh look they just arbitrarily think they need more of a certain gender or ethnicity". It's far more complex than that, and we need to make an honest effort to understand why some groups are underrepresented. I'm willing to be it has less to do with pre-disposition, and more to do with inherent inequality in an adversarial and unevenly distributed socioeconomic system.

michaelscott 8y ago
The problem with such an academic (pun!) view is it misses the politicization of gender and race in society. That's why you get the "oh look they think they need more of a certain gender or ethnicity". Additionally, you're casting an individual who happens to have certain characteristics as a member of a group of people who share those characteristics (and more often than not it's a concentration on a very particular characteristic as opposed to the individual as a whole). "We need more black women in the student body" is not a valid reason to take on a specific black woman as a student. Of course, dismissing that woman based on those characteristics is also ridiculous. Like you've said, this is a very complex topic that definitely requires further research. The pity is that operational regulations (and in a few cases even laws) are being changed before this research has had a chance to take place.
wu-ikkyu 8y ago
>I'm willing to be it has less to do with pre-disposition, and more to do with inherent inequality in an adversarial and unevenly distributed socioeconomic system. Wouldn't it be best to start at the root of the problem then, rather than merely patronizing? If someone does not meet the high standards of an "elite" institution but are admitted anyway, aren't you setting them up to fail?

michaelscott 8y ago

The problem with such an academic (pun!) view is it misses the politicization of gender and race in society. That's why you get the "oh look they think they need more of a certain gender or ethnicity". Additionally, you're casting an individual who happens to have certain characteristics as a member of a group of people who share those characteristics (and more often than not it's a concentration on a very particular characteristic as opposed to the individual as a whole). "We need more black women in the student body" is not a valid reason to take on a specific black woman as a student. Of course, dismissing that woman based on those characteristics is also ridiculous. Like you've said, this is a very complex topic that definitely requires further research. The pity is that operational regulations (and in a few cases even laws) are being changed before this research has had a chance to take place.

wu-ikkyu 8y ago

>I'm willing to be it has less to do with pre-disposition, and more to do with inherent inequality in an adversarial and unevenly distributed socioeconomic system. Wouldn't it be best to start at the root of the problem then, rather than merely patronizing? If someone does not meet the high standards of an "elite" institution but are admitted anyway, aren't you setting them up to fail?