4 ms·

Even though RTI queries to major IITs reveal that almost all faculty comes from un-reserved category, one needs more evidence (than this RTI data) to show that

Even though RTI queries to major IITs reveal that almost all faculty comes from un-reserved category, one needs more evidence (than this RTI data) to show that caste discrimination occurred. If there is an opening for two faculty positions in the IITM CS department esp in machine learning and AI, if 20 people are applied, two are selected, and two happened to be from un-reserved category. Does it prove caste-discrimination? Well, look at the profiles of twenty candidates and see their research record and also academic pedigree, see whether one can pick up two candidates from reserved category (that is, SC, ST and OBC). If one can show that, yes, indeed caste-discrimination is occurred: both candidates A (reserved category) and B (un-reserved category) are excellent both academically and research-wise, only B is chosen, yes, one can say that the committee should have picked A. Btw, I am not a product of IITs or any elite institution in the West/East. So, I am of opinion that best candidates should be picked up irrespective of one's caste. Sometimes, what is 'best' can be under dispute: for instance, a UCLA Ph.D with many publications in STOC/FOCS is picked up over a CMU Ph.D with many publications in tier-2 conferences. Again, what is tier-1, what is tier-2, etc are driven by the CS community, not by the so-called upper-castes from India. Same goes for pedigree: why Ph.D students from top-tier CS departments have better shot at getting faculty jobs than those from tier-2 institutions? Why CS people from American universities have better shot than those who got Ph.D from IIT Ropar/Tirupati? Again, it is community-driven, not by upper castes.

rhaway84773 3y ago
It may not prove caste discrimination during the hiring process (I’m not sure that’s even claimed by the author). It does however strongly suggest and maybe even prove the existence of caste discrimination at a societal level. Why are the “best candidates” so disproportionately upper castes? That’s not a trick question. We know that the upper castes have suppressed lower castes. You may want to argue it doesn’t exist today, but the data very clearly show even if that’s true, the historical impact of that discrimination on the lives of people living today is high.
542458 3y ago
Even if the delta was the result of a lack of candidates from disadvantaged castes, to me that suggests that the discrimination already happened earlier, weeding out the disadvantaged castes before they could even become qualified candidates.
- raincom 3y ago
  Equality of Opportunity vs. Equality of Outcome is a common dispute in these discussions. It also depends on the context: Equality of Opportunity at the n th step totally depends on Equality of Outcome at the n-1 th step. Who is responsible for every step in this process? Whoever responsible for this, it should not cause undue burden for other people, as it is not a zero-sum game.
- andai 3y ago
  What if differences in outcome are due to genetics? Do we then genetically engineer each group (this tech will soon be widespread) until all group outcomes are equalized? Serious question btw, I have heard someone applauding this (and seeing it as likely to occur as an emergent phenomenon due to free market competition). (As a humorous side-note: I heard someone say in an interview, "I hope that differences in intelligence are genetic, because then it means we can do something about it with technology. If not, we'd be doomed! When has a social policy ever produced the desired outcome?")
  - cududa 3y ago
    I mean the vast majority of studies indicate environmental factors like access to healthy food, a strong family, educational opportunities, and the literal environment are what drives difference in outcomes, not "genetic inferiority". Maybe someone from a lower (poorer) caste was raised on a diet of food grown in polluted/ tainted fields, grew up with poor air quality, and their water comes through lead pipes or other means that permanently hinder their potential. You're arguing pure eugenics and apparently find it funny.
    - andai 3y ago

rhaway84773 3y ago

It may not prove caste discrimination during the hiring process (I’m not sure that’s even claimed by the author). It does however strongly suggest and maybe even prove the existence of caste discrimination at a societal level. Why are the “best candidates” so disproportionately upper castes? That’s not a trick question. We know that the upper castes have suppressed lower castes. You may want to argue it doesn’t exist today, but the data very clearly show even if that’s true, the historical impact of that discrimination on the lives of people living today is high.

542458 3y ago

Even if the delta was the result of a lack of candidates from disadvantaged castes, to me that suggests that the discrimination already happened earlier, weeding out the disadvantaged castes before they could even become qualified candidates.

raincom 3y ago
Equality of Opportunity vs. Equality of Outcome is a common dispute in these discussions. It also depends on the context: Equality of Opportunity at the n th step totally depends on Equality of Outcome at the n-1 th step. Who is responsible for every step in this process? Whoever responsible for this, it should not cause undue burden for other people, as it is not a zero-sum game.
andai 3y ago
What if differences in outcome are due to genetics? Do we then genetically engineer each group (this tech will soon be widespread) until all group outcomes are equalized? Serious question btw, I have heard someone applauding this (and seeing it as likely to occur as an emergent phenomenon due to free market competition). (As a humorous side-note: I heard someone say in an interview, "I hope that differences in intelligence are genetic, because then it means we can do something about it with technology. If not, we'd be doomed! When has a social policy ever produced the desired outcome?")
- cududa 3y ago
  I mean the vast majority of studies indicate environmental factors like access to healthy food, a strong family, educational opportunities, and the literal environment are what drives difference in outcomes, not "genetic inferiority". Maybe someone from a lower (poorer) caste was raised on a diet of food grown in polluted/ tainted fields, grew up with poor air quality, and their water comes through lead pipes or other means that permanently hinder their potential. You're arguing pure eugenics and apparently find it funny.
  - andai 3y ago