3 ms·

> Why do you need to be 'sold' on scientifically verified knowledge? Nothing wrong with scientific inquiry, but when such facts are placed in context of, say,

> Why do you need to be 'sold' on scientifically verified knowledge? Nothing wrong with scientific inquiry, but when such facts are placed in context of, say, an internal memo at Google, or, an opinion piece in popular scientific press, it has rhetorical impact. You have to wonder 'to what end' they are hoping for with their exposition. With the Google memo, did they hope to change hiring strategies? Would this have had any real impact on the operations at Google? Did Damore feel that the hiring strategies at the company were having any tangible negative outcomes... if so, he didn't care to mention that. So why then? Same with this article. What is the author's concern here? What is really lost when we cease to generalize people's behavior by sex? The article gave no compelling answers.

TeMPOraL 7y ago
> it has rhetorical impact. You have to wonder 'to what end' they are hoping for with their exposition. I think the difference between scientific mindset and political mindset is that the former doesn't ask this question or consider it relevant. > With the Google memo, did they hope to change hiring strategies? Would this have had any real impact on the operations at Google? Yes, this was kind of the reason this memo was written - and remember, it was written in response to Google soliciting ideas on the topic. > Did Damore feel that the hiring strategies at the company were having any tangible negative outcomes... if so, he didn't care to mention that. So why then? Did you read the memo? It's whole text was arguing that diversity efforts at Google are misguided and harmful, and what should be done instead.
- h0l0cube 7y ago
  > I think the difference between scientific mindset and political mindset This article is a rhetorical play, for the average person to consider more this point of view. It's arguments to do so were weak at best. > Did you read the memo? It's whole text was arguing that diversity efforts at Google are misguided and harmful, and what should be done instead. Did you? Because I don't recall him stating any actual harms, but speculation. No even an anecdote to back his claims.
  - edanm 7y ago
    > Because I don't recall him stating any actual harms, but speculation. No even an anecdote to back his claims. To be fair, the memo argued that the specific way Google goes about in trying to increase diversity was not going to work, because the underlying assumptions of the cause of the differences was wrong, and proposed specific other ways to increase diversity.
  - extempore 7y ago
    Did you read the memo as it was written, replete with links to supporting research? Or did you only read the maliciously leaked version which had stripped out all the links?
TulliusCicero 7y ago
You’re desperately looking for an agenda beyond “more knowledge is good”, and seemingly frustrated that you’re not finding it. Why? Scientists don’t need to have an end goal in mind to dispel myths or discover new truths. Sometimes they do, and that’s fine, but it’s hardly a requirement. Reducing ignorance is itself A Good Thing.
- h0l0cube 7y ago
  > Scientists don’t need to have an end goal I agree. Also, the article isn't a scientific paper.
  - TulliusCicero 7y ago
    It's an article by a scientist that summarizes scientific papers and the scientific consensus, is it not?
    - h0l0cube 7y ago
      Yep, those things are true, but it doesn't negate the fact that the 'article' is journalism.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

> it has rhetorical impact. You have to wonder 'to what end' they are hoping for with their exposition. I think the difference between scientific mindset and political mindset is that the former doesn't ask this question or consider it relevant. > With the Google memo, did they hope to change hiring strategies? Would this have had any real impact on the operations at Google? Yes, this was kind of the reason this memo was written - and remember, it was written in response to Google soliciting ideas on the topic. > Did Damore feel that the hiring strategies at the company were having any tangible negative outcomes... if so, he didn't care to mention that. So why then? Did you read the memo? It's whole text was arguing that diversity efforts at Google are misguided and harmful, and what should be done instead.

h0l0cube 7y ago
> I think the difference between scientific mindset and political mindset This article is a rhetorical play, for the average person to consider more this point of view. It's arguments to do so were weak at best. > Did you read the memo? It's whole text was arguing that diversity efforts at Google are misguided and harmful, and what should be done instead. Did you? Because I don't recall him stating any actual harms, but speculation. No even an anecdote to back his claims.
- edanm 7y ago
  > Because I don't recall him stating any actual harms, but speculation. No even an anecdote to back his claims. To be fair, the memo argued that the specific way Google goes about in trying to increase diversity was not going to work, because the underlying assumptions of the cause of the differences was wrong, and proposed specific other ways to increase diversity.
- extempore 7y ago
  Did you read the memo as it was written, replete with links to supporting research? Or did you only read the maliciously leaked version which had stripped out all the links?

TulliusCicero 7y ago

You’re desperately looking for an agenda beyond “more knowledge is good”, and seemingly frustrated that you’re not finding it. Why? Scientists don’t need to have an end goal in mind to dispel myths or discover new truths. Sometimes they do, and that’s fine, but it’s hardly a requirement. Reducing ignorance is itself A Good Thing.

h0l0cube 7y ago
> Scientists don’t need to have an end goal I agree. Also, the article isn't a scientific paper.
- TulliusCicero 7y ago
  It's an article by a scientist that summarizes scientific papers and the scientific consensus, is it not?
  - h0l0cube 7y ago
    Yep, those things are true, but it doesn't negate the fact that the 'article' is journalism.