5 ms·

I mean, doesn't the madness stop once the identity breakdown in a given field roughly matches the identity in the general population? If X% of people are Black

by mLuby 8y ago

I mean, doesn't the madness stop once the identity breakdown in a given field roughly matches the identity in the general population? If X% of people are Black, I would expect given no structural impediments that roughly X% of Mathematicians would also be Black. The how to get there in the quickest and fairest way is a political question.

eruci 8y ago
That's a rather simplistic political view. Divide all professional achievement equally among races, although individual scientific recognitions (as in this case) are not up to the state to divvy up, but, up to the individual person to earn via hard work and innate talent. Even in the case mentioned in the article, it seems like a doctorate was awarded mostly on political grounds and not so much on the quality of research of the individual in question. Which means the madness of affirmative action politics has already reached the highest levels.
- tptacek 8y ago
  The guidelines ask you to write more carefully as topics get divisive, but you're doing the opposite: talking about the "madness" of affirmative action is emotional language that does nothing but polarize the thread. Plenty of HN people respectfully and carefully disagree with affirmative action; if you can't be one of them, step aside and let them do it instead.
  - eruci 8y ago
    Agreed! Should have used the word "irrational" instead.
    - tptacek 8y ago
      You understand that there are many coherent rational arguments in favor of affirmative action, and that what you're really having is a disagreement over some pretty complicated premises that are unlikely to be disposed of in short, pithy comments, right? I try hard to listen to conservatives despite being a liberal and have learned to dial my hackles down in conversations about race-based affirmative action because, while I disagree with conservatives on that point, I'm not going to get anywhere by claiming that the fairness and practicality of affirmative action is a received truth. You're going to have to do the same thing with your opposition to affirmative action.
      - eruci 8y ago
        I just looked back into this thread and did not realize my comment was misrepresented to the point of starting an ideological war. To get the record straight about my opposition to affirmative action - I do not think any race is inferior/superior to any other and as such people of all races should be treated equally in all fields of professional achievement - including my beloved field of mathematics. That's why when I see someone writing an article about "I'm the only person of race X in this field" I sense BS. As is the case here, a mediocre mathematician using the race card to score some political points. Conservatives and Liberals should openly talk about these issues for the common good, not outright censor/ban each other's opinion.
        tptacek 8y ago
        I sense BS. As is the case here, a mediocre mathematician using the race card to score some political points. Wow, you sure took that to a great place. Can't imagine why you'd have a hard time having this kind of conversation with people.
        eruci 8y ago
        I mean, real professionals focus on their work, not the color of their skin.
        tptacek 8y ago
        All you know about this professional is that he was willing to talk to the NYT about how hard it is to be a black mathematician. That made you uncomfortable, and so you've constructed a whole mathematics code of conduct to forbid it that exists only in your head, which you further projected from to slander them about their competence.
        unclebucknasty 8y ago
        >I do not think any race is inferior/superior to any other and as such people of all races should be treated equally in all fields of professional achievement >Conservatives and Liberals should openly talk about these issues for the common good What's difficult to process here is that you lay out a cogent argument--or at least a coherent rationale--for why you oppose affirmative action. Essentially, you believe no race is superior to others. That's great. But, of course, people can plainly see that you are excluding the actual reason that affirmative action exists--having nothing to do with the inherent features of any race, and everything to do with historical racial inequities. And, it is very difficult to believe that you are unaware of these inequities (or their bases for affirmative action, for that matter). Now, you can make the argument that you don't believe affirmative action is the appropriate remedy for past racial injustices. But, that's not the argument you're making. Instead, you ignore this salient factor and instead posit some saccharine, red-herring rationale for eliminating it. And, this must be purposeful. I mean, surely you don't earnestly believe that affirmative action is intended to mitigate inherent racial inferiorities (or do you?). So, given this, it appears that you are not earnestly interested in "talking about these issues for the common good", to say the least.
umvi 8y ago
> If X% of people are Black, I would expect given no structural impediments that roughly X% of Mathematicians would also be Black. So if Y% of people are White, would you expect given no structural impediments that roughly Y% of rappers/NBA players would also be White?
- moorhosj 8y ago
  It's odd to compare two private industries (NBA and music) to education which is predominantly funded by the public.
ericdykstra 8y ago
This is baseless, unscientific blank-slateism, and isn't true anywhere in the world among any demographic segment in any measure. If 10% of Singaporean men are gay would you expect 10% of male plumbers in Singapore to be gay? If women are 30% of the workforce in Canada, would you expect Canadian dental assistants to be 70% male? Disparate outcomes doesn't imply unfair treatment.
- tptacek 8y ago
  No, that's true. They just suggest it.
  - ericdykstra 8y ago
    No, again, this is blank-slateism. People are born with genetic predispositions that influence things such as height, eye color, mathematical ability, and career preference. You would only expect population-proportionate outcomes if genetics played no role. Even if they only play a 10% role, you get vastly different outcomes.
    - whyisthewhat 8y ago
      So your belief is that black people as a group have inherently less mathematical ability than whites people? Am I misinterpreting you?
      - 0815test 8y ago
        A mathematics PhD is going to be in the far right tail of aptitude for a lot of relevant skills. This is the admittedly very rare case where altogether tiny differences in "inherent" ability will get amplified to the point where they actually start to matter - whatever "inherent" might mean, in the first place! Yup, crucially, even differences that are generally understood as "not inherent" can be so hard to address that they might as well be, for all we can do about them. If you ate too many lead paint flakes as a kid, the probability that you're going to be a successful math PhD drops quite a bit. And, short of tearing down and rebuilding a lot of homes that happen to have lead paint, lead pipes, etc. in them, we're unfortunately not going to be able to address this "inherent" unbalance for the foreseeable future.
towaway1138 8y ago
As a statistician or economist, I would actually be quite shocked if the proportion was often close. This rarely or never happens in other fields, even ones where there is essentially no possibility of such supposed impediments. Randomness happens. Instead of stealing someone's thunder by putting them on easy mode, give them the opportunity to kill it.
adriveatrain 8y ago
Apply it to Olympic 100m runners
- dang 8y ago
  We've banned this account for using HN primarily for ideological battle. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
bluthru 8y ago
>If X% of people are Black, I would expect given no structural impediments that roughly X% of Mathematicians would also be Black. What makes you assume that? Do you feel the same about the NBA?

by mLuby 8y ago

eruci 8y ago

That's a rather simplistic political view. Divide all professional achievement equally among races, although individual scientific recognitions (as in this case) are not up to the state to divvy up, but, up to the individual person to earn via hard work and innate talent. Even in the case mentioned in the article, it seems like a doctorate was awarded mostly on political grounds and not so much on the quality of research of the individual in question. Which means the madness of affirmative action politics has already reached the highest levels.

tptacek 8y ago
The guidelines ask you to write more carefully as topics get divisive, but you're doing the opposite: talking about the "madness" of affirmative action is emotional language that does nothing but polarize the thread. Plenty of HN people respectfully and carefully disagree with affirmative action; if you can't be one of them, step aside and let them do it instead.
- eruci 8y ago
  Agreed! Should have used the word "irrational" instead.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    You understand that there are many coherent rational arguments in favor of affirmative action, and that what you're really having is a disagreement over some pretty complicated premises that are unlikely to be disposed of in short, pithy comments, right? I try hard to listen to conservatives despite being a liberal and have learned to dial my hackles down in conversations about race-based affirmative action because, while I disagree with conservatives on that point, I'm not going to get anywhere by claiming that the fairness and practicality of affirmative action is a received truth. You're going to have to do the same thing with your opposition to affirmative action.
    - eruci 8y ago
      I just looked back into this thread and did not realize my comment was misrepresented to the point of starting an ideological war. To get the record straight about my opposition to affirmative action - I do not think any race is inferior/superior to any other and as such people of all races should be treated equally in all fields of professional achievement - including my beloved field of mathematics. That's why when I see someone writing an article about "I'm the only person of race X in this field" I sense BS. As is the case here, a mediocre mathematician using the race card to score some political points. Conservatives and Liberals should openly talk about these issues for the common good, not outright censor/ban each other's opinion.
      - tptacek 8y ago
        I sense BS. As is the case here, a mediocre mathematician using the race card to score some political points. Wow, you sure took that to a great place. Can't imagine why you'd have a hard time having this kind of conversation with people.
        eruci 8y ago
        I mean, real professionals focus on their work, not the color of their skin.
        tptacek 8y ago
        All you know about this professional is that he was willing to talk to the NYT about how hard it is to be a black mathematician. That made you uncomfortable, and so you've constructed a whole mathematics code of conduct to forbid it that exists only in your head, which you further projected from to slander them about their competence.
      - unclebucknasty 8y ago
        >I do not think any race is inferior/superior to any other and as such people of all races should be treated equally in all fields of professional achievement >Conservatives and Liberals should openly talk about these issues for the common good What's difficult to process here is that you lay out a cogent argument--or at least a coherent rationale--for why you oppose affirmative action. Essentially, you believe no race is superior to others. That's great. But, of course, people can plainly see that you are excluding the actual reason that affirmative action exists--having nothing to do with the inherent features of any race, and everything to do with historical racial inequities. And, it is very difficult to believe that you are unaware of these inequities (or their bases for affirmative action, for that matter). Now, you can make the argument that you don't believe affirmative action is the appropriate remedy for past racial injustices. But, that's not the argument you're making. Instead, you ignore this salient factor and instead posit some saccharine, red-herring rationale for eliminating it. And, this must be purposeful. I mean, surely you don't earnestly believe that affirmative action is intended to mitigate inherent racial inferiorities (or do you?). So, given this, it appears that you are not earnestly interested in "talking about these issues for the common good", to say the least.

umvi 8y ago

> If X% of people are Black, I would expect given no structural impediments that roughly X% of Mathematicians would also be Black. So if Y% of people are White, would you expect given no structural impediments that roughly Y% of rappers/NBA players would also be White?

moorhosj 8y ago
It's odd to compare two private industries (NBA and music) to education which is predominantly funded by the public.

ericdykstra 8y ago

This is baseless, unscientific blank-slateism, and isn't true anywhere in the world among any demographic segment in any measure. If 10% of Singaporean men are gay would you expect 10% of male plumbers in Singapore to be gay? If women are 30% of the workforce in Canada, would you expect Canadian dental assistants to be 70% male? Disparate outcomes doesn't imply unfair treatment.

tptacek 8y ago
No, that's true. They just suggest it.
- ericdykstra 8y ago
  No, again, this is blank-slateism. People are born with genetic predispositions that influence things such as height, eye color, mathematical ability, and career preference. You would only expect population-proportionate outcomes if genetics played no role. Even if they only play a 10% role, you get vastly different outcomes.
  - whyisthewhat 8y ago
    So your belief is that black people as a group have inherently less mathematical ability than whites people? Am I misinterpreting you?
    - 0815test 8y ago
      A mathematics PhD is going to be in the far right tail of aptitude for a lot of relevant skills. This is the admittedly very rare case where altogether tiny differences in "inherent" ability will get amplified to the point where they actually start to matter - whatever "inherent" might mean, in the first place! Yup, crucially, even differences that are generally understood as "not inherent" can be so hard to address that they might as well be, for all we can do about them. If you ate too many lead paint flakes as a kid, the probability that you're going to be a successful math PhD drops quite a bit. And, short of tearing down and rebuilding a lot of homes that happen to have lead paint, lead pipes, etc. in them, we're unfortunately not going to be able to address this "inherent" unbalance for the foreseeable future.

towaway1138 8y ago

As a statistician or economist, I would actually be quite shocked if the proportion was often close. This rarely or never happens in other fields, even ones where there is essentially no possibility of such supposed impediments. Randomness happens. Instead of stealing someone's thunder by putting them on easy mode, give them the opportunity to kill it.

adriveatrain 8y ago

Apply it to Olympic 100m runners

dang 8y ago
We've banned this account for using HN primarily for ideological battle. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.

bluthru 8y ago

>If X% of people are Black, I would expect given no structural impediments that roughly X% of Mathematicians would also be Black. What makes you assume that? Do you feel the same about the NBA?