4 ms·

Totally wrong, his arguments were from the current era of science and not racist. They weren't even close to that.

dannypgh 7y ago
He misapplied science to make a point that's not supported by science, so that he could try to argue he's talking science. I'm not sure whether it was out of malice or just poor scientific reason. As the most base example: the candidate pool for a company like Google is self-selecting. Taking research about women (which I'm accepting uncritically just for the sake of argument in this post) as a population (research which showed a very small, minor difference in certain narrow traits) and implying this tells us anything at all about the women who have applied, let alone been hired, by Google is completely unsupported by science. Women candidates, or engineers, are very far from random samples of the women population. It was the same kind of fallacious or dishonest thinking as pointing to research that shows that white men are more likely to be serial killers and concluding that the company needed to treat their white male engineers as a threat.
- username90 7y ago
  > As the most base example: the candidate pool for a company like Google is self-selecting. Taking research about women (which I'm accepting uncritically just for the sake of argument in this post) as a population (research which showed a very small, minor difference in certain narrow traits) and implying this tells us anything at all about the women who have applied, let alone been hired, by Google is completely unsupported by science. Women candidates, or engineers, are very far from random samples of the women population. Damore said exactly this in the memo, your post only proves that you didn't really read or understand it.
- DoofusOfDeath 7y ago
  > He misapplied science to make a point that's not supported by science Perhaps other Google employees should have responded with "You appear to be making a flawed argument. Here's where we think your argument goes off the rails, and why." Assuming Damore was arguing in good faith, such a response might have changed the minds of Damore or other like-minded employees. But simply firing Damore was at best a missed opportunity, and at worst evidence that the majority view is simply a matter of opinion with no real justification.
  - manfredo 7y ago
    Keep in mind that the majority of googlers according to a blind poll did not want him fired. Also the memo was circulated for a month internally. Damore didn't get fired until it was leaked to to media and they ran hit pieces that ranges from intellectually dishonest to outright dishonest. I put the blame for this fiasco on the highly slanted media coverage that put Google in a position where they had to fire Damore or get skewered for sexism.

He misapplied science to make a point that's not supported by science, so that he could try to argue he's talking science. I'm not sure whether it was out of malice or just poor scientific reason. As the most base example: the candidate pool for a company like Google is self-selecting. Taking research about women (which I'm accepting uncritically just for the sake of argument in this post) as a population (research which showed a very small, minor difference in certain narrow traits) and implying this tells us anything at all about the women who have applied, let alone been hired, by Google is completely unsupported by science. Women candidates, or engineers, are very far from random samples of the women population. It was the same kind of fallacious or dishonest thinking as pointing to research that shows that white men are more likely to be serial killers and concluding that the company needed to treat their white male engineers as a threat.

username90 7y ago
> As the most base example: the candidate pool for a company like Google is self-selecting. Taking research about women (which I'm accepting uncritically just for the sake of argument in this post) as a population (research which showed a very small, minor difference in certain narrow traits) and implying this tells us anything at all about the women who have applied, let alone been hired, by Google is completely unsupported by science. Women candidates, or engineers, are very far from random samples of the women population. Damore said exactly this in the memo, your post only proves that you didn't really read or understand it.
DoofusOfDeath 7y ago
> He misapplied science to make a point that's not supported by science Perhaps other Google employees should have responded with "You appear to be making a flawed argument. Here's where we think your argument goes off the rails, and why." Assuming Damore was arguing in good faith, such a response might have changed the minds of Damore or other like-minded employees. But simply firing Damore was at best a missed opportunity, and at worst evidence that the majority view is simply a matter of opinion with no real justification.
- manfredo 7y ago
  Keep in mind that the majority of googlers according to a blind poll did not want him fired. Also the memo was circulated for a month internally. Damore didn't get fired until it was leaked to to media and they ran hit pieces that ranges from intellectually dishonest to outright dishonest. I put the blame for this fiasco on the highly slanted media coverage that put Google in a position where they had to fire Damore or get skewered for sexism.