> You use the word "pseudoscience" to describe the training, so it's unlikely that you're receptive to this anecdote Au contraire... I wish I had time to rebut

> You use the word "pseudoscience" to describe the training, so it's unlikely that you're receptive to this anecdote Au contraire... I wish I had time to rebut this but I've got some interviews slated for the next 3 hours. I appreciate your perspective, though. I guess the only argument I can come up with of at the short moment I have left is that similar arguments are made about religion in general, even ones that the mainstream would consider to be "cults." This doesn't actually debate the point you made about my pseudoscience claim, but what I'm saying is that I might agree with you in that sense you were describing regardless of whether unconscious bias training is scientifically valid or not. (although I think there are other problems with it even if some good can come of it)