3 ms·

But the primary goal of a graduate program isn't avoiding harassment and discrimination at all costs. It's to provide the best candidates for the relevant field

by wvh 7y ago

But the primary goal of a graduate program isn't avoiding harassment and discrimination at all costs. It's to provide the best candidates for the relevant field. To "forcefully" throw in some extra "support pets" feels like a really silly solution to tackle that problem.

abdullahkhalids 7y ago
I don't agree at all. I think the primary goal of every government funded institution is to promote social welfare - not economic growth. As a physics PhD, I am totally happy if the progress in my field slows down by even 50%, if it means that 50% of the population, who currently are and feel discriminated against, aren't and don't feel that way any more. I will always vote for the political candidate who supports one over the other. In most (but not all) fields of human intellectual endeavor, we have made progress far beyond needed, that with the right politics and social commitment, every human on this planet can have all their needs and basic wants fulfilled. There is no need to constantly fuel the GDP, only the craft a world in which people can be happy.
- wvh 7y ago
  We agree to disagree then, though my point isn't the GDP. As a not entirely neurotypical human being, I not unsurprisingly believe that mono-focus causes progress in technology and science; progress which has the potential to improve conditions in the world. I don't think the relative equality in today's (at least North/West European) society would have been possible without this progress beyond a society based on brute force. To me, scientific progress and understanding enables social welfare. At some point – and you can adapt this example to other fields – you want build a bridge that doesn't collapse, and niceness is not going to get you there. The engineer can be female, from an ethnic minority, disabled or a kid with rich parents, but you want to rely on them being a good engineer and not someone who got a free pass and cuddle treatment. This is why the primary goal should be skill and not some rather subjective sense of social justice. I feel you promote equality of outcome and not just equality of opportunity. This needs not be a black and white comparison, but consistently choosing politicians that prefer cuddle over hard results could very well lead to a society where there is no money for the weak, unprivileged, disadvantaged minorities, education, social welfare, medical care, etc; a society that – perhaps out of necessity – will squeeze out some of those people you'd want to support.

by wvh 7y ago

abdullahkhalids 7y ago

I don't agree at all. I think the primary goal of every government funded institution is to promote social welfare - not economic growth. As a physics PhD, I am totally happy if the progress in my field slows down by even 50%, if it means that 50% of the population, who currently are and feel discriminated against, aren't and don't feel that way any more. I will always vote for the political candidate who supports one over the other. In most (but not all) fields of human intellectual endeavor, we have made progress far beyond needed, that with the right politics and social commitment, every human on this planet can have all their needs and basic wants fulfilled. There is no need to constantly fuel the GDP, only the craft a world in which people can be happy.

wvh 7y ago
We agree to disagree then, though my point isn't the GDP. As a not entirely neurotypical human being, I not unsurprisingly believe that mono-focus causes progress in technology and science; progress which has the potential to improve conditions in the world. I don't think the relative equality in today's (at least North/West European) society would have been possible without this progress beyond a society based on brute force. To me, scientific progress and understanding enables social welfare. At some point – and you can adapt this example to other fields – you want build a bridge that doesn't collapse, and niceness is not going to get you there. The engineer can be female, from an ethnic minority, disabled or a kid with rich parents, but you want to rely on them being a good engineer and not someone who got a free pass and cuddle treatment. This is why the primary goal should be skill and not some rather subjective sense of social justice. I feel you promote equality of outcome and not just equality of opportunity. This needs not be a black and white comparison, but consistently choosing politicians that prefer cuddle over hard results could very well lead to a society where there is no money for the weak, unprivileged, disadvantaged minorities, education, social welfare, medical care, etc; a society that – perhaps out of necessity – will squeeze out some of those people you'd want to support.