9 ms·

Goodbye, MIT

166 points by RickJWagner 5y ago

throwawaymanbot 5y ago
>We graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology more than 50 years ago Therein lays part of the problem. Yale and MIT and Harvard allow the sons and daughter of wealthy people in for donations. George W Bush got in to Yale because of his dad not his academic record which history shows to be below average. But their problem is with for example making the huge campus safe for women? Laughable.
GoodJokes 5y ago
The merit system that the Chicago professor suffers is really laughable and speaks more to his general critical thinking than anything. ACTUAL critical race theory explores how institutions, especially in America, do have the original sin of benefitting certain people over another. So, this whole judgement of merit and fairness has to come from somewhere. An institution. How people are evaluated isn’t straight forward, and straightforward evaluations are rife with embedded racism, sexism, classism, etc.
theHIDninja 5y ago
I am convinced that the relationship between American universities and its public are entirely untenable. There is no reason to give them any money as their goals are not to educate people. I have no sympathy for anybody that goes to a university and accrues a massive amount of debt anymore. The general assumption now is that people who went to these toxic places did so fully knowing that they will be lied to about economic prospects and brainwashed into believing a certain brand of racist wokeism. I do not offer any solutions to this. The only solution I can see involves some form of violent and total destruction of these institutions. It would also require a building of new that absolutely forbid all parties involved with the old institions from even contacting the people involved with the new ones. I do not know what this will entail. There is no means of peaceful transfer of power away from these virtue signalling sycophants and toxic soulless wretches.
ivanjef 5y ago
Am Dr Ivan Jefferey, Medical Field, Lab Scientist, Had a big problem with my grades and needed help for who to help me change it, Joe Engressia was the right hacker after my bad experience with fake hackers, Not only changing my grades, he help increase my score, explain to him what you want And see him do it as you want it done. His contact & Email: Text/WhatsApp:+1(732) 639–1527 / digitaldawgpoundhackergroup@gmail.com digitaldawgpoundhackergroup.blogspot.com
ivanjef 5y ago
I’m Dr Ivan Jefferrey I want to say a Grateful thank you to Joe after different experience of fake hacker i have met,, a friend recommend him to me with faith i contact him and explain my self, on what’s happening with my grade and credit score, told me not to worry and gave me his word, i don’t know him, never met him before but makes me feel comfortable with is word and experience, i had to share this as am sure that most here, looking for the right hacker and have not seen yet,,, please try and contact Joe (DIGITALDAWGPOUNDHACKERGROUP@GMAIL.COM) on any service of help you need from him as hacker.. it a testimony you have the right to give yours too by helping others to know there is still high rate good hackers that are highly experienced, he responds on email, text messages and whatsapp… Name: Joe Engressia. Phone Number: +1(732) 639–1527.
testASW2 5y ago
testing
sokoloff 5y ago
I feel genuinely conflicted about these topics. Part of me says “I agree with the letter authors completely. People should experience equal opportunity, equal Justice, and equal responsibility.” Another part of me says “that’s literally impossible (or incompatible) with different families raising their children with different circumstances.” Overall, I lean pretty strongly towards individual families raising their children as best they can with all the benefits and drawbacks that come from that system. But I think it’s fantasy to believe that that results in even approximately equal opportunities. My kids will get way more comp.sci and math from me and more biology from my wife than average. Other kids will get more music, art, writing, foreign language, sports or other exposure from their family. If it turns out that one of those is more valuable, well the different kids didn’t have equal opportunities. Other kids worried about nutrition, whether one parent would beat the other, or grow up with a parent in jail. Clearly not equal opportunity.
- anonair 5y ago
  yes, but the system, where we tend to equalize the outcomes is easier to abuse.
- tim333 5y ago
  One of the problems with wokeness is I think it started as perfectly reasonable stuff like you mention, but then the activists / priests of wokeness let power go to their heads and get more concerned with having anyone who criticises them fired than helping the underprivileged.
  - throwawaymanbot 5y ago
    So wokeness is SYSTEMD ???
- RattleyCooper 5y ago
  >If it turns out that one of those is more valuable, well the different kids didn’t have equal opportunities. Other kids worried about nutrition, whether one parent would beat the other, or grow up with a parent in jail. Clearly not equal opportunity. You confuse equal opportunity with equal circumstances. All we can do is give people equal opportunity under law, so that nobody is restricted from opportunity from a legal perspective. Trying to solve the problem of equal circumstances will always result in the violation of human rights. We should do our best to give people the tools and education they need to succeed so that these other factors do not influence their life as much, and they can overcome the obstacles that they've been presented with.
BearOso 5y ago
I vote completely progressive, but I agree there are demons on the left, just like on the right. The point at which common sense flies out the window and emotion becomes the driving force, it's extremism or cultism, not politics.
- markus_zhang 5y ago
  I think when whatever becomes a political movement (as it has to be one to attract awareness), it eventually brings in more bureaucracy to the point that "administrators" rule the movement.
- b9a2cab5 5y ago
  If you vote "completely" anything you are part of the problem. I vote for issues, not candidates or parties or political ideologies.
  - akfanta 5y ago
    Politics are the modern day religions. You are either with the cult or you are the enemy. Really is a funny circle.
jbschirtzs 5y ago
When we lose the power to express our thoughts from a differing perspective, we have lost our powers of free speech. Facts are facts. They do not care whether we like them or not.
jorgBaller 5y ago
MIT is a top university in the world and it makes no sense to remove support for MIT
sillycross 5y ago
> He (Abbot) proposed instead an alternative framework called Merit, Fairness, and Equality (MFE) whereby university applicants are treated as individuals and evaluated through a rigorous and unbiased process based on their merit and qualifications alone I am in full support with this, though it seems to me this is too idealized to be practical in practice. How can one reach a fair judgement of a student only based on a 1000-word essay in his/her application (which might not even be written by him/herself)? However, I'm still saddened by that the MIT response to this incident is simply "it is Abbot's right of free expression to say whatever he wants", but nothing about what he actually said, or whether it at least makes some sense. It's as if MIT treated Abbot as an unknowing child whose nonsense words shall be tolerated, which is disturbing. Below is part of the mail list letter I received: > Freedom of expression is a fundamental value of the Institute. > I believe that, as an institution of higher learning, we must ensure that different points of view – even views that some or all of us may reject – are allowed to be heard and debated at MIT. Open dialogue is how we make each other wiser and smarter. > This commitment to free expression can carry a human cost. The speech of those we strongly disagree with can anger us. It can disgust us. It can even make members of our own community feel unwelcome and illegitimate on our campus or in their field of study. > I am convinced that, as an institution, we must be prepared to endure such painful outcomes as the price of protecting free expression – the principle is that important.
jimbob45 5y ago
We’re seemingly six months away from any and all diversity movements being dismissed as anti-white propaganda. It seems high time for the NAACP/BLM/ACLU to begin to walk back their extremist rhetoric before they’re deemed terrorist groups like they themselves have deemed so many other groups before.
- ergot_vacation 5y ago
  They ARE anti-white propaganda. This isn't hyperbole, it's simply descriptive of the facts. Maybe they weren't at some point, but a new crop has taken over the reigns, and pretty much all of those groups have embraced wokeness, intersectionality, "white man bad" etc. Hell, forget "diversity groups": we live in world where Google deliberately tampers with Image Search results to downplay white people and promote literally anyone else. We're DROWNING in anti-white propaganda. And yes, sooner or later, there's going to be a backlash.
  - ahefner 5y ago
    Sooner or later? You don't think the past 4-5 years, particularly the Trump presidency, isn't part of that backlash? It's only going to escalate.
doomrobo 5y ago
> MIT’s leadership apparently took umbrage at his statement of these simple facts: that George Floyd “had not lived a virtuous life” (based on his multiple criminal convictions) Surely the authors know that "statement of facts" has the ability to completely alter the interpretation of the rest of the content. Key questions are: why is this fact relevant in this context, what is the author conveying by bringing this in? Etc. To take a radical example, if one reads an article about a recent mass shooting followed by "statements of fact" about the declining population of whites in America, then one would reasonably conclude that the author is a white supremacist who implicitly supports the shooter. Non-white supremacists don't talk about the great replacement. So the question is why would someone bring up the criminal record of an unarmed Black man who was extrajudicially killed by an officer of the state? What does this fact do for the reader? It's not hard to imagine what many would conclude. Editorial narrative is something I learned about in middle school, why are the authors feigning ignorance about its existence?
- robbmorganf 5y ago
  Clarification: when you say "reader", do you mean the reader of this linked article, or the reader of the chaplain's statement?
  - doomrobo 5y ago
    reader of the chaplain's statement
- paul_f 5y ago
  Counter that it was an inappropriate argument, don't fire the person who made it. Seems overkill at an institution that used to take pride in intellectual freedom.
- roenxi 5y ago
  A core purpose of a church is to identify and evaluate: 1. What a virtuous life is. 2. How to live one. 3. What examples exist of people who have lived one. 4. How practically achievable a virtuous life is. The chaplain is doing his job here. He is supposed to identify that Floyd hasn't lived a virtuous life, but he is still part of a greater community and that a virtuous person would help Floyd live the best life he can. > Non-white supremacists don't talk about the great replacement. You bought it up.
robbmorganf 5y ago
> Third, intellectual ability and achievement are the principal requirements for admission as a student or faculty member to any university. This is the crux of the issue as I see it. The author sees achievement as a proxy for ability, and therefore achievement-meritocracy is the only acceptable system. By contrast, MIT sees ability as only one factor among many that create achievement. If one takes the further axiom that ability is independent of protected categories like race and gender, then achievement-meritocracy does not recruit the most able students. Hence, affirmative action and reducing oppression. Mathematically, author believes achievement=f(ability) so ability=f^{-1}(achievement) while MIT believes achievement=f(ability,identity, background) so ability=f^{-1}(achievement,identity,background)
- mrjangles 5y ago
  See, here is the thing. What you said is completely true, some people grow up in a really shitty environment and the achievements of children needs to be compared with the achievements of those around them. However, without going into details, I have spent enough time at one of these ivy league universities to see first hand how it works it practice. The black people I met who benefited from these affirmative action policies were some of the richest most privileged human beings in the country. These policies are in no way actually implemented to help disadvantaged people. A simple test would be your family income, for example. But MIT openly avoids this. These universities definitely don't want "those lower class people" corrupting them with their lower class ideas. They just want to feel virtuous, and the best way to do that is to have people there that "look the part" whether or not they are actually disadvantaged.
  - robbmorganf 5y ago
    I think income-diversity is a valid and very appropriate criticism of MIT and other schools. I agree that not enough able but poor students are admitted. Without diminishing MIT's responsibility, I also think the rest of the education system needs to take responsibility for the same problem. In many cases, a very smart kid with low income is afforded poor secondary education, so if they were admitted to MIT, they might not have the preparation to thrive. MIT's disparate impact on low income kids is unacceptable, but the solution requires cooperation from high schools.
romwell 5y ago
Tsk tsk tsk if that ain't some rich assholes trying to cancel MIT over MIT doing something that doesn't align with the rich asshole's views on what's ethical. The "something" being not funding people who do shit that doesn't align with MIT's views on what's ethical. Is there a word for self-referential irony?
- mrjangles 5y ago
  "Canceling" is when you refuse to give someone the same respect and opportunities as you do every other human being on the planet. Deciding not to donate thousands of dollars of your own money to someone is not "canceling".
  - romwell 5y ago
    Did you read the article? They specifically brought up the example of Chaplain being fired as "canceling". Also, your definition needs doesn't match common usage, or what happens. Here's a better one: Canceling (n.): holding a public person accountable for their actions by withdrawing monetary support. This can be done by not extending a contract; by termination of employment, contract, or the privilege of access to particular public platforms from which they profit, if the funding is provided on a contractual basis; and - wait for it - - by ceasing donations. Which is what the authors are doing.
- romwell 5y ago
  But wait, it gets better! One of the authors makes a living from taxpayer-funded endeavors (NIH, FDA). I imagine that if, eventually, he does enough to piss off people who pay him (say, Black taxpayers) to lose his funding, he'd whine about being cancelled so loudly, we won't need SETI. "Not on my dime!” goes both ways, huh. The other author is ungooglable, so they either work for the gov, or don't have to work at all. Poking aside, the questions to ask are: * Who are the people these two chaps see as being hurt by MIT's so-called "wokeness"? I.e., whom are they trying to help with their withdrawal of funds? * Who are the people MIT sees as behind hurt by the people they stopped working with? I.e. whom is MIT trying to help with their options? * Whom do the actions of MIT / people "canceled" by MIT actually hurt? What's the impact? The answer to these questions is left as an exercise to the reader, and will tell everything about the situation at hand.
ergot_vacation 5y ago
How long can a country endure if it continues to cripple learning, muzzle truth and persecute some of its most talented and capable individuals in the name of childish, incoherent ideology? Not long. The stage of history doesn't care how many followers you have on Twitter, or how many people's lives you can destroy in the name of your religion masquerading as science. In the coming years, the US MUST LEAD. It must shake the slop from itself and rise to the role of world leader again, not just with guns but with minds, because the battlefield of the future is a battlefield of the mind. If it does not rise, China or Russia will be glad to. Either "wokeness" dies, or the US dies. It's that simple.
- motioncuty 5y ago
  "How long can a country endure if it continues to cripple learning, muzzle truth and persecute some of its most talented and capable individuals in the name of childish, incoherent ideology? Not long" Are you talking about modern "wokeness" or are you talking about the while history of the United States as a primarily Christian state? Because I still feel more crippled, muzzled, and persecuted by us Christian morality/ideology than any recent up surgance in "wokeness".
- 0des 5y ago
  Society is a pendulum. Give it time. We move in decades.
  - swiley 5y ago
    We're rapidly running out of time.
    - 0des 5y ago
      Interesting take, can you elaborate on that?
      - CodeGlitch 5y ago
        Not parent poster but I would guess that there's now hundreds of thousands of students going through institutions like MIT who are being indoctrinated, who will be coming to a work force near you real soon. They will be demanding (and I've seen this already first hand) for everyone to fall into line with the wokeness. Spineless leaders will listen to them and fear them, and as we have seen already, do as they demand.
amluto 5y ago
Did MIT actually fire Father Daniel Moloney? Quoting the very top of the linked article about him: > Two days later, the Archdiocese of Boston forced him to resign because of it.
- totalZero 5y ago
  MIT did not, or at least it was not reported as such by Boston-area news outlets. From CBS Boston: The Archdiocese of Boston asked Rev. Moloney to resign as Catholic Chaplain at MIT and he agreed. “The personal opinions echoed in his comments regarding the murder of George Floyd do not reflect the positions of the Archdiocese,” spokesperson Terrence Donilon told WBZ- TV in a statement Wednesday. https://boston.cbslocal.com/2020/06/17/mit-catholic-chaplain-daniel-moloney-resigns-george-floyd-comments/ https://boston.cbslocal.com/2020/06/17/mit-catholic-chaplain...
prirun 5y ago
I have never understood why there is an expectation to treat everyone equally when people are very unequal, from their birth circumstances, which obviously they can't control, to their behavior as adults, which people do have control over. People don't treat me like Michael Jordon because, guess what? I cannot do the things he does. It would be rather silly for me to get all in a huff because I don't get the treatment that celebrities get. Another example: a single teenage girl has a baby when she's 15 and two married computer engineers have a baby. Does anyone really expect that those two kids will have equal opportunities? Is it our society's job to ensure that they do? Should we limit one kid's opportunities if society can't provide them to the other kid too? It sucks that some kids are born into less advantageous circumstances, but it's the way the world works. Sometimes it's because parents make bad decisions, sometimes social systems are unfair, sometimes it's neither; luck of the draw. It's funny to me that everyone seems to think diversity is a good thing, yet at the same time want everyone to be the same.
- blueboo 5y ago
  Here’s what you’ve never understood: the principle of judging folks accomplishments while taking into account their opportunities. No one thinks everyone is the same. But not all SAT scores are created equal.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
acomjean 5y ago
When I was in college Louis Farrakhan [1] came to speak. There was a great debate if he should come (state school/funds and a pretty high speaking fee.) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Farrakhan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Farrakhan He spoke, huge protest outside (I covered the protests for the college paper) As a suburban white kid i learned a lot about things I wasn’t exposed to. I listened to a recording of him speaking a while I processes the pictures in the dark room. His oratory was mesmerizing. Universities should be places where interesting opinions are shared and debated. If the person is relevant and not crazy they should be heard. Let the protests happen or ask them questions. As for the other complaint, big companies have sexual harassment and diversity training. Probably not a terrible idea, just get everyone on the same page and it’s also an big time institutional protective move (CYA). All these students got into MIT so they’re already doing pretty pretty good.. I work at a university so I might be a bit biased, but they’re not terrible places to donate to. My group shares all its science data with the community and does a lot of stuff that’s pretty non-commercial. I had someone in pharma tell me they’re always grabbing all the public data..
- brodouevencode 5y ago
  It certainly depends on the university/school. I saw the writing on the wall in 2010 and left a nine year career in the university behind. The focus was to "get asses in seats" (the president's words, not mine). Then on top of that certain segments of the faculty had become intolerant of certain student groups and would frequently punish students for their world views, even those that are now classified in higher intersectional categories. Yes this is all anecdotal, but we're seeing it play out with our own eyes in public now. I give to my alma mater but less so than to charities and institutions of which have missions that are clearly and plainly defined. I don't think the entire university model is corrupt or broken but we have to be careful.
RNCTX 5y ago
> Third, intellectual ability and achievement are the principal requirements for admission as a student or faculty member to any university. We know from the lawsuit against Harvard brought by Asian applicants that the principle requirements for admission are having a parent alumni or donor, since discovery in that case revealed that the majority of all admissions were legacies. I don't think the quoted suggestion has ever existed. Selective universities who wish to rebuke any assumed nefarious intent behind their admission policies and procedures are welcome to publish data showing us that the bulk of their admissions are not legacy admissions. Until then, I say Harvard describes them all. After all, the new norm is that accusation denotes guilt, right?
howolduis 5y ago
some old racist catholic guy sent a well-written letter about a clear murder? yah... fuck off...
totalZero 5y ago
I can't dispute most of their concerns. However, an argument can be made that it was appropriate for Fr. Moloney to leave his role as chaplain. That he chose to state unsentimental judgments about a murdered person was perhaps unusual for a chaplain.
g42gregory 5y ago
I see so many Asian parents, many first generation immigrants to the United States, working several jobs, working their tales off to put their kids through good schools. Spending time with their kids, disciplining their kids, which is not easy and not pleasant for the parents. Marriages are hard for everyone, with disagreements, fights, bitterness, sacrifices. And yet, all these Asian parents stay together and endure for their kids. And this is the reward these Asian parents get from the society? For their kids to be put at the end of the line? I am glad the authors had the courage to speak up.
- ksec 5y ago
  Sorry am I missing some context / recent news here? I reread the blog / letter and I dont see how that relate to Asian parents.
  - iso1337 5y ago
    “Wokeness” treats Asians as white adjacent and often dismisses the real issues they face because of an idea that other people suffer more. Eg see efforts to use BIPOC instead of POC. Those communities do suffer more, but that doesn’t invalidate the issues other people face. The Asian community is kind of split on this. A lot of the older generations think like the poster but some younger second generation Asians are more “woke”. Also see active efforts in California and in universities to reduce “overrepresentation” of Asians. In some ways it feels like you’re being punished for being too successful.
    - ksec 5y ago
      Thank You this make lots more sense.
  - davemp 5y ago
    Affirmative action quotas have historically put Asian minorities at a significant disadvantage in college admissions.

166 points by RickJWagner 5y ago

>We graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology more than 50 years ago Therein lays part of the problem. Yale and MIT and Harvard allow the sons and daughter of wealthy people in for donations. George W Bush got in to Yale because of his dad not his academic record which history shows to be below average. But their problem is with for example making the huge campus safe for women? Laughable.

GoodJokes 5y ago

The merit system that the Chicago professor suffers is really laughable and speaks more to his general critical thinking than anything. ACTUAL critical race theory explores how institutions, especially in America, do have the original sin of benefitting certain people over another. So, this whole judgement of merit and fairness has to come from somewhere. An institution. How people are evaluated isn’t straight forward, and straightforward evaluations are rife with embedded racism, sexism, classism, etc.

theHIDninja 5y ago

I am convinced that the relationship between American universities and its public are entirely untenable. There is no reason to give them any money as their goals are not to educate people. I have no sympathy for anybody that goes to a university and accrues a massive amount of debt anymore. The general assumption now is that people who went to these toxic places did so fully knowing that they will be lied to about economic prospects and brainwashed into believing a certain brand of racist wokeism. I do not offer any solutions to this. The only solution I can see involves some form of violent and total destruction of these institutions. It would also require a building of new that absolutely forbid all parties involved with the old institions from even contacting the people involved with the new ones. I do not know what this will entail. There is no means of peaceful transfer of power away from these virtue signalling sycophants and toxic soulless wretches.

ivanjef 5y ago

Am Dr Ivan Jefferey, Medical Field, Lab Scientist, Had a big problem with my grades and needed help for who to help me change it, Joe Engressia was the right hacker after my bad experience with fake hackers, Not only changing my grades, he help increase my score, explain to him what you want And see him do it as you want it done. His contact & Email: Text/WhatsApp:+1(732) 639–1527 / digitaldawgpoundhackergroup@gmail.com digitaldawgpoundhackergroup.blogspot.com

ivanjef 5y ago

I’m Dr Ivan Jefferrey I want to say a Grateful thank you to Joe after different experience of fake hacker i have met,, a friend recommend him to me with faith i contact him and explain my self, on what’s happening with my grade and credit score, told me not to worry and gave me his word, i don’t know him, never met him before but makes me feel comfortable with is word and experience, i had to share this as am sure that most here, looking for the right hacker and have not seen yet,,, please try and contact Joe (DIGITALDAWGPOUNDHACKERGROUP@GMAIL.COM) on any service of help you need from him as hacker.. it a testimony you have the right to give yours too by helping others to know there is still high rate good hackers that are highly experienced, he responds on email, text messages and whatsapp… Name: Joe Engressia. Phone Number: +1(732) 639–1527.

testASW2 5y ago

testing

sokoloff 5y ago

I feel genuinely conflicted about these topics. Part of me says “I agree with the letter authors completely. People should experience equal opportunity, equal Justice, and equal responsibility.” Another part of me says “that’s literally impossible (or incompatible) with different families raising their children with different circumstances.” Overall, I lean pretty strongly towards individual families raising their children as best they can with all the benefits and drawbacks that come from that system. But I think it’s fantasy to believe that that results in even approximately equal opportunities. My kids will get way more comp.sci and math from me and more biology from my wife than average. Other kids will get more music, art, writing, foreign language, sports or other exposure from their family. If it turns out that one of those is more valuable, well the different kids didn’t have equal opportunities. Other kids worried about nutrition, whether one parent would beat the other, or grow up with a parent in jail. Clearly not equal opportunity.

anonair 5y ago
yes, but the system, where we tend to equalize the outcomes is easier to abuse.
tim333 5y ago
One of the problems with wokeness is I think it started as perfectly reasonable stuff like you mention, but then the activists / priests of wokeness let power go to their heads and get more concerned with having anyone who criticises them fired than helping the underprivileged.
- throwawaymanbot 5y ago
  So wokeness is SYSTEMD ???
RattleyCooper 5y ago
>If it turns out that one of those is more valuable, well the different kids didn’t have equal opportunities. Other kids worried about nutrition, whether one parent would beat the other, or grow up with a parent in jail. Clearly not equal opportunity. You confuse equal opportunity with equal circumstances. All we can do is give people equal opportunity under law, so that nobody is restricted from opportunity from a legal perspective. Trying to solve the problem of equal circumstances will always result in the violation of human rights. We should do our best to give people the tools and education they need to succeed so that these other factors do not influence their life as much, and they can overcome the obstacles that they've been presented with.

BearOso 5y ago

I vote completely progressive, but I agree there are demons on the left, just like on the right. The point at which common sense flies out the window and emotion becomes the driving force, it's extremism or cultism, not politics.

markus_zhang 5y ago
I think when whatever becomes a political movement (as it has to be one to attract awareness), it eventually brings in more bureaucracy to the point that "administrators" rule the movement.
b9a2cab5 5y ago
If you vote "completely" anything you are part of the problem. I vote for issues, not candidates or parties or political ideologies.
- akfanta 5y ago
  Politics are the modern day religions. You are either with the cult or you are the enemy. Really is a funny circle.

jbschirtzs 5y ago

When we lose the power to express our thoughts from a differing perspective, we have lost our powers of free speech. Facts are facts. They do not care whether we like them or not.

jorgBaller 5y ago

MIT is a top university in the world and it makes no sense to remove support for MIT

sillycross 5y ago

> He (Abbot) proposed instead an alternative framework called Merit, Fairness, and Equality (MFE) whereby university applicants are treated as individuals and evaluated through a rigorous and unbiased process based on their merit and qualifications alone I am in full support with this, though it seems to me this is too idealized to be practical in practice. How can one reach a fair judgement of a student only based on a 1000-word essay in his/her application (which might not even be written by him/herself)? However, I'm still saddened by that the MIT response to this incident is simply "it is Abbot's right of free expression to say whatever he wants", but nothing about what he actually said, or whether it at least makes some sense. It's as if MIT treated Abbot as an unknowing child whose nonsense words shall be tolerated, which is disturbing. Below is part of the mail list letter I received: > Freedom of expression is a fundamental value of the Institute. > I believe that, as an institution of higher learning, we must ensure that different points of view – even views that some or all of us may reject – are allowed to be heard and debated at MIT. Open dialogue is how we make each other wiser and smarter. > This commitment to free expression can carry a human cost. The speech of those we strongly disagree with can anger us. It can disgust us. It can even make members of our own community feel unwelcome and illegitimate on our campus or in their field of study. > I am convinced that, as an institution, we must be prepared to endure such painful outcomes as the price of protecting free expression – the principle is that important.

jimbob45 5y ago

We’re seemingly six months away from any and all diversity movements being dismissed as anti-white propaganda. It seems high time for the NAACP/BLM/ACLU to begin to walk back their extremist rhetoric before they’re deemed terrorist groups like they themselves have deemed so many other groups before.

ergot_vacation 5y ago
They ARE anti-white propaganda. This isn't hyperbole, it's simply descriptive of the facts. Maybe they weren't at some point, but a new crop has taken over the reigns, and pretty much all of those groups have embraced wokeness, intersectionality, "white man bad" etc. Hell, forget "diversity groups": we live in world where Google deliberately tampers with Image Search results to downplay white people and promote literally anyone else. We're DROWNING in anti-white propaganda. And yes, sooner or later, there's going to be a backlash.
- ahefner 5y ago
  Sooner or later? You don't think the past 4-5 years, particularly the Trump presidency, isn't part of that backlash? It's only going to escalate.

doomrobo 5y ago

> MIT’s leadership apparently took umbrage at his statement of these simple facts: that George Floyd “had not lived a virtuous life” (based on his multiple criminal convictions) Surely the authors know that "statement of facts" has the ability to completely alter the interpretation of the rest of the content. Key questions are: why is this fact relevant in this context, what is the author conveying by bringing this in? Etc. To take a radical example, if one reads an article about a recent mass shooting followed by "statements of fact" about the declining population of whites in America, then one would reasonably conclude that the author is a white supremacist who implicitly supports the shooter. Non-white supremacists don't talk about the great replacement. So the question is why would someone bring up the criminal record of an unarmed Black man who was extrajudicially killed by an officer of the state? What does this fact do for the reader? It's not hard to imagine what many would conclude. Editorial narrative is something I learned about in middle school, why are the authors feigning ignorance about its existence?

robbmorganf 5y ago
Clarification: when you say "reader", do you mean the reader of this linked article, or the reader of the chaplain's statement?
- doomrobo 5y ago
  reader of the chaplain's statement
paul_f 5y ago
Counter that it was an inappropriate argument, don't fire the person who made it. Seems overkill at an institution that used to take pride in intellectual freedom.
roenxi 5y ago
A core purpose of a church is to identify and evaluate: 1. What a virtuous life is. 2. How to live one. 3. What examples exist of people who have lived one. 4. How practically achievable a virtuous life is. The chaplain is doing his job here. He is supposed to identify that Floyd hasn't lived a virtuous life, but he is still part of a greater community and that a virtuous person would help Floyd live the best life he can. > Non-white supremacists don't talk about the great replacement. You bought it up.

robbmorganf 5y ago

> Third, intellectual ability and achievement are the principal requirements for admission as a student or faculty member to any university. This is the crux of the issue as I see it. The author sees achievement as a proxy for ability, and therefore achievement-meritocracy is the only acceptable system. By contrast, MIT sees ability as only one factor among many that create achievement. If one takes the further axiom that ability is independent of protected categories like race and gender, then achievement-meritocracy does not recruit the most able students. Hence, affirmative action and reducing oppression. Mathematically, author believes achievement=f(ability) so ability=f^{-1}(achievement) while MIT believes achievement=f(ability,identity, background) so ability=f^{-1}(achievement,identity,background)

mrjangles 5y ago
See, here is the thing. What you said is completely true, some people grow up in a really shitty environment and the achievements of children needs to be compared with the achievements of those around them. However, without going into details, I have spent enough time at one of these ivy league universities to see first hand how it works it practice. The black people I met who benefited from these affirmative action policies were some of the richest most privileged human beings in the country. These policies are in no way actually implemented to help disadvantaged people. A simple test would be your family income, for example. But MIT openly avoids this. These universities definitely don't want "those lower class people" corrupting them with their lower class ideas. They just want to feel virtuous, and the best way to do that is to have people there that "look the part" whether or not they are actually disadvantaged.
- robbmorganf 5y ago
  I think income-diversity is a valid and very appropriate criticism of MIT and other schools. I agree that not enough able but poor students are admitted. Without diminishing MIT's responsibility, I also think the rest of the education system needs to take responsibility for the same problem. In many cases, a very smart kid with low income is afforded poor secondary education, so if they were admitted to MIT, they might not have the preparation to thrive. MIT's disparate impact on low income kids is unacceptable, but the solution requires cooperation from high schools.

romwell 5y ago

Tsk tsk tsk if that ain't some rich assholes trying to cancel MIT over MIT doing something that doesn't align with the rich asshole's views on what's ethical. The "something" being not funding people who do shit that doesn't align with MIT's views on what's ethical. Is there a word for self-referential irony?

mrjangles 5y ago
"Canceling" is when you refuse to give someone the same respect and opportunities as you do every other human being on the planet. Deciding not to donate thousands of dollars of your own money to someone is not "canceling".
- romwell 5y ago
  Did you read the article? They specifically brought up the example of Chaplain being fired as "canceling". Also, your definition needs doesn't match common usage, or what happens. Here's a better one: Canceling (n.): holding a public person accountable for their actions by withdrawing monetary support. This can be done by not extending a contract; by termination of employment, contract, or the privilege of access to particular public platforms from which they profit, if the funding is provided on a contractual basis; and - wait for it - - by ceasing donations. Which is what the authors are doing.
romwell 5y ago
But wait, it gets better! One of the authors makes a living from taxpayer-funded endeavors (NIH, FDA). I imagine that if, eventually, he does enough to piss off people who pay him (say, Black taxpayers) to lose his funding, he'd whine about being cancelled so loudly, we won't need SETI. "Not on my dime!” goes both ways, huh. The other author is ungooglable, so they either work for the gov, or don't have to work at all. Poking aside, the questions to ask are: * Who are the people these two chaps see as being hurt by MIT's so-called "wokeness"? I.e., whom are they trying to help with their withdrawal of funds? * Who are the people MIT sees as behind hurt by the people they stopped working with? I.e. whom is MIT trying to help with their options? * Whom do the actions of MIT / people "canceled" by MIT actually hurt? What's the impact? The answer to these questions is left as an exercise to the reader, and will tell everything about the situation at hand.

ergot_vacation 5y ago

How long can a country endure if it continues to cripple learning, muzzle truth and persecute some of its most talented and capable individuals in the name of childish, incoherent ideology? Not long. The stage of history doesn't care how many followers you have on Twitter, or how many people's lives you can destroy in the name of your religion masquerading as science. In the coming years, the US MUST LEAD. It must shake the slop from itself and rise to the role of world leader again, not just with guns but with minds, because the battlefield of the future is a battlefield of the mind. If it does not rise, China or Russia will be glad to. Either "wokeness" dies, or the US dies. It's that simple.

motioncuty 5y ago
"How long can a country endure if it continues to cripple learning, muzzle truth and persecute some of its most talented and capable individuals in the name of childish, incoherent ideology? Not long" Are you talking about modern "wokeness" or are you talking about the while history of the United States as a primarily Christian state? Because I still feel more crippled, muzzled, and persecuted by us Christian morality/ideology than any recent up surgance in "wokeness".
0des 5y ago
Society is a pendulum. Give it time. We move in decades.
- swiley 5y ago
  We're rapidly running out of time.
  - 0des 5y ago
    Interesting take, can you elaborate on that?
    - CodeGlitch 5y ago
      Not parent poster but I would guess that there's now hundreds of thousands of students going through institutions like MIT who are being indoctrinated, who will be coming to a work force near you real soon. They will be demanding (and I've seen this already first hand) for everyone to fall into line with the wokeness. Spineless leaders will listen to them and fear them, and as we have seen already, do as they demand.

amluto 5y ago

Did MIT actually fire Father Daniel Moloney? Quoting the very top of the linked article about him: > Two days later, the Archdiocese of Boston forced him to resign because of it.

totalZero 5y ago
MIT did not, or at least it was not reported as such by Boston-area news outlets. From CBS Boston: The Archdiocese of Boston asked Rev. Moloney to resign as Catholic Chaplain at MIT and he agreed. “The personal opinions echoed in his comments regarding the murder of George Floyd do not reflect the positions of the Archdiocese,” spokesperson Terrence Donilon told WBZ- TV in a statement Wednesday. https://boston.cbslocal.com/2020/06/17/mit-catholic-chaplain-daniel-moloney-resigns-george-floyd-comments/ https://boston.cbslocal.com/2020/06/17/mit-catholic-chaplain...

prirun 5y ago

I have never understood why there is an expectation to treat everyone equally when people are very unequal, from their birth circumstances, which obviously they can't control, to their behavior as adults, which people do have control over. People don't treat me like Michael Jordon because, guess what? I cannot do the things he does. It would be rather silly for me to get all in a huff because I don't get the treatment that celebrities get. Another example: a single teenage girl has a baby when she's 15 and two married computer engineers have a baby. Does anyone really expect that those two kids will have equal opportunities? Is it our society's job to ensure that they do? Should we limit one kid's opportunities if society can't provide them to the other kid too? It sucks that some kids are born into less advantageous circumstances, but it's the way the world works. Sometimes it's because parents make bad decisions, sometimes social systems are unfair, sometimes it's neither; luck of the draw. It's funny to me that everyone seems to think diversity is a good thing, yet at the same time want everyone to be the same.

blueboo 5y ago
Here’s what you’ve never understood: the principle of judging folks accomplishments while taking into account their opportunities. No one thinks everyone is the same. But not all SAT scores are created equal.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

acomjean 5y ago

When I was in college Louis Farrakhan [1] came to speak. There was a great debate if he should come (state school/funds and a pretty high speaking fee.) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Farrakhan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Farrakhan He spoke, huge protest outside (I covered the protests for the college paper) As a suburban white kid i learned a lot about things I wasn’t exposed to. I listened to a recording of him speaking a while I processes the pictures in the dark room. His oratory was mesmerizing. Universities should be places where interesting opinions are shared and debated. If the person is relevant and not crazy they should be heard. Let the protests happen or ask them questions. As for the other complaint, big companies have sexual harassment and diversity training. Probably not a terrible idea, just get everyone on the same page and it’s also an big time institutional protective move (CYA). All these students got into MIT so they’re already doing pretty pretty good.. I work at a university so I might be a bit biased, but they’re not terrible places to donate to. My group shares all its science data with the community and does a lot of stuff that’s pretty non-commercial. I had someone in pharma tell me they’re always grabbing all the public data..

brodouevencode 5y ago
It certainly depends on the university/school. I saw the writing on the wall in 2010 and left a nine year career in the university behind. The focus was to "get asses in seats" (the president's words, not mine). Then on top of that certain segments of the faculty had become intolerant of certain student groups and would frequently punish students for their world views, even those that are now classified in higher intersectional categories. Yes this is all anecdotal, but we're seeing it play out with our own eyes in public now. I give to my alma mater but less so than to charities and institutions of which have missions that are clearly and plainly defined. I don't think the entire university model is corrupt or broken but we have to be careful.

RNCTX 5y ago

> Third, intellectual ability and achievement are the principal requirements for admission as a student or faculty member to any university. We know from the lawsuit against Harvard brought by Asian applicants that the principle requirements for admission are having a parent alumni or donor, since discovery in that case revealed that the majority of all admissions were legacies. I don't think the quoted suggestion has ever existed. Selective universities who wish to rebuke any assumed nefarious intent behind their admission policies and procedures are welcome to publish data showing us that the bulk of their admissions are not legacy admissions. Until then, I say Harvard describes them all. After all, the new norm is that accusation denotes guilt, right?

howolduis 5y ago

some old racist catholic guy sent a well-written letter about a clear murder? yah... fuck off...

totalZero 5y ago

I can't dispute most of their concerns. However, an argument can be made that it was appropriate for Fr. Moloney to leave his role as chaplain. That he chose to state unsentimental judgments about a murdered person was perhaps unusual for a chaplain.

g42gregory 5y ago

I see so many Asian parents, many first generation immigrants to the United States, working several jobs, working their tales off to put their kids through good schools. Spending time with their kids, disciplining their kids, which is not easy and not pleasant for the parents. Marriages are hard for everyone, with disagreements, fights, bitterness, sacrifices. And yet, all these Asian parents stay together and endure for their kids. And this is the reward these Asian parents get from the society? For their kids to be put at the end of the line? I am glad the authors had the courage to speak up.

ksec 5y ago
Sorry am I missing some context / recent news here? I reread the blog / letter and I dont see how that relate to Asian parents.
- iso1337 5y ago
  “Wokeness” treats Asians as white adjacent and often dismisses the real issues they face because of an idea that other people suffer more. Eg see efforts to use BIPOC instead of POC. Those communities do suffer more, but that doesn’t invalidate the issues other people face. The Asian community is kind of split on this. A lot of the older generations think like the poster but some younger second generation Asians are more “woke”. Also see active efforts in California and in universities to reduce “overrepresentation” of Asians. In some ways it feels like you’re being punished for being too successful.
  - ksec 5y ago
    Thank You this make lots more sense.
- davemp 5y ago
  Affirmative action quotas have historically put Asian minorities at a significant disadvantage in college admissions.