5 ms·

It could be that the people do care about the values listed, but don't know an effective way to guarantee them, and that existing diversity statements are a sto

It could be that the people do care about the values listed, but don't know an effective way to guarantee them, and that existing diversity statements are a stopgap measure until something better is figured out. But no, let's jump directly to "Conclusion: By and large, they don’t care about diversity. They’re just lying, in a really transparent way, because they think it gives them a patina of legal legitimacy." Or... perhaps don't ascribe to malice that which may be adequately explained by incompetence.

hinkley 4y ago
Never ascribe to incompetence that which can be adequately explained by apathy. I’ve seen it in myself and can only speculate about others, but sometimes I’ll leave a meeting completely unconvinced by an argument and come in the next day singing a different tune. People like the echo chamber because it’s comfortable. But comfortable doesn’t lead to growth.
300bps 4y ago
The original article went into an in-depth analysis that you label as “jump directly to…”
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- polygamous_bat 4y ago
  An in depth analysis can still miss possible logical conclusions. I don't think the GP is saying they skipped possible analysis, just that they fail to consider alternatives.
phantom_of_cato 4y ago
> Or... perhaps don't ascribe to malice that which may be adequately explained by incompetence. Hanlon's razor is a heuristic which doesn't work very well in this case. Clearly, there is a lot of social pressure to at least pretend to care about diversity, so by default you'd expect at least some people to lie about it.
duxup 4y ago
I agree, the idea that they don't care and go to all this work seems absurd. Seems more likely they're just bad advocates / come up with bad policies for ideas they like. THAT does not surprise me the least. The amount of "If you get what you want here, I don't think that gets you any closer to your goal, in fact it might do the opposite." situations is pretty high out there.
- brightball 4y ago
  I've really wondered how much ESG scores affect how much companies "care" about this sort of thing.
- ectopod 4y ago
  University bureaucrats have spent decades creating new kinds of work for themselves. It is an end in itself. They don't need to care.
origin_path 4y ago
[flagged]
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - bavell 4y ago
    > It has been right wing dogma for quite a long time that education is bad You're confusing being educated with being elitist. Being elitist is what the right thinks is bad, not education.
  - origin_path 4y ago
    It's been falling steadily over time. Left wing bias in universities was far less extreme in the 60s. Given the prevalence of articles by conservatives saying they were kicked out for ideological reasons, and that this article is about the practice of forcing applicants to write a loyalty pledge to leftist dogma, it is safe to assume that this decline was largely a deliberate takeover by people who devoted themselves to excluding others over a long period of many decades.
- stuckinhell 4y ago
  I vouched for this because I think it's fairly reasonable. I think american and european universities were at the forefront of all the diversity and "woke", a decade earlier.
- jltsiren 4y ago
  - 01D 4y ago
kbuchanan 4y ago
He argued that if universities cared about diversity their positions on affirmative action would be more dynamic than is commonly accepted. e.g.: > Affirmative action would also apply more strongly to, say, immigrants from Iran, or Korea, or Israel, than to black people (or anyone else) from our own society. The examples he uses demonstrate that, in his mind, caring about diversity requires measuring circumstance. You might argue that universities are not so shallow as he's claiming, but I don't believe the article is mere mudslinging.
- mcphage 4y ago
  > their positions on affirmative action would be more dynamic than is commonly accepted People are already trying to get affirmative action programs dismantled. Making them more complicated would lead to larger surface area, and be easier to attack. > I don't believe the article is mere mudslinging. The entire argument of the article is that they don't measure diversity the same way he wants them to measure diversity, and therefore they don't care about it. It never considers that schools consider it differently, or whether his method is consistent, or whether what he proposes has been considered and dismissed.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

hinkley 4y ago

Never ascribe to incompetence that which can be adequately explained by apathy. I’ve seen it in myself and can only speculate about others, but sometimes I’ll leave a meeting completely unconvinced by an argument and come in the next day singing a different tune. People like the echo chamber because it’s comfortable. But comfortable doesn’t lead to growth.

300bps 4y ago

The original article went into an in-depth analysis that you label as “jump directly to…”

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
polygamous_bat 4y ago
An in depth analysis can still miss possible logical conclusions. I don't think the GP is saying they skipped possible analysis, just that they fail to consider alternatives.

phantom_of_cato 4y ago

> Or... perhaps don't ascribe to malice that which may be adequately explained by incompetence. Hanlon's razor is a heuristic which doesn't work very well in this case. Clearly, there is a lot of social pressure to at least pretend to care about diversity, so by default you'd expect at least some people to lie about it.

duxup 4y ago

I agree, the idea that they don't care and go to all this work seems absurd. Seems more likely they're just bad advocates / come up with bad policies for ideas they like. THAT does not surprise me the least. The amount of "If you get what you want here, I don't think that gets you any closer to your goal, in fact it might do the opposite." situations is pretty high out there.

brightball 4y ago
I've really wondered how much ESG scores affect how much companies "care" about this sort of thing.
ectopod 4y ago
University bureaucrats have spent decades creating new kinds of work for themselves. It is an end in itself. They don't need to care.

origin_path 4y ago

[flagged]

rootusrootus 4y ago
[flagged]
- bavell 4y ago
  > It has been right wing dogma for quite a long time that education is bad You're confusing being educated with being elitist. Being elitist is what the right thinks is bad, not education.
- origin_path 4y ago
  It's been falling steadily over time. Left wing bias in universities was far less extreme in the 60s. Given the prevalence of articles by conservatives saying they were kicked out for ideological reasons, and that this article is about the practice of forcing applicants to write a loyalty pledge to leftist dogma, it is safe to assume that this decline was largely a deliberate takeover by people who devoted themselves to excluding others over a long period of many decades.
stuckinhell 4y ago
I vouched for this because I think it's fairly reasonable. I think american and european universities were at the forefront of all the diversity and "woke", a decade earlier.
jltsiren 4y ago
- 01D 4y ago

kbuchanan 4y ago

He argued that if universities cared about diversity their positions on affirmative action would be more dynamic than is commonly accepted. e.g.: > Affirmative action would also apply more strongly to, say, immigrants from Iran, or Korea, or Israel, than to black people (or anyone else) from our own society. The examples he uses demonstrate that, in his mind, caring about diversity requires measuring circumstance. You might argue that universities are not so shallow as he's claiming, but I don't believe the article is mere mudslinging.

mcphage 4y ago
> their positions on affirmative action would be more dynamic than is commonly accepted People are already trying to get affirmative action programs dismantled. Making them more complicated would lead to larger surface area, and be easier to attack. > I don't believe the article is mere mudslinging. The entire argument of the article is that they don't measure diversity the same way he wants them to measure diversity, and therefore they don't care about it. It never considers that schools consider it differently, or whether his method is consistent, or whether what he proposes has been considered and dismissed.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]