4 ms·

Look, if you don't want an echo chamber on this topic, maybe consider the point of diversity statements. I can't put it better than Stephen Jay Gould: "I am, s

Look, if you don't want an echo chamber on this topic, maybe consider the point of diversity statements. I can't put it better than Stephen Jay Gould: "I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops." Consider that a diversity statement is a way to evaluate if the applicant has even given a moment's thought to the fact that Gould raised, by seeking to cultivate talent among folks otherwise shut out of the top tier of academia.

exogeny 3y ago
This is a very thoughtful and sensible reply, but it's going to get lost in the storm and that is a shame. Personally I've always thought that a lot of these issues boil down to intentional misreading or lack of understanding of things unsaid. As an example, a whole bunch of people, for some reason, took "Black Lives Matter" to mean "Only Black Lives Matter", as if that was said or as if that was the point. In your example with Einstein, to me it would be perfectly valid for Gould to have said "I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. We should seek to find and develop those people." But of course I would worry that those same people who took umbrage with the example of BLM would assume that it would be done at the expense of others, or that it would be done to exclusively benefit in a zero-sum way the unheralded, unfound geniuses in Gould's example. I run a small startup, fifteen people, and yes, I believe in diversity in hiring and team composition. If all things are equal, then I will hire the person that brings a diverse perspective to my team, not on basis of identity but on basis of opinion, basis of experience, and basis of perspective. I will not pursue that diversity at the expense of hiring the best candidate, and I suspect my perspective is shared a lot more than people think, solely because the "If all things are equal" part is unsaid and it is simply too easy for the cynic or bad-faith arguer to assume otherwise.
- moose_man 3y ago
  Honestly I think it is a matter of the current state of the economy. Competition for positions is so vicious, and the people running DEI are already established and powerful. So losing out is life changing and can mean the difference between having a comfortable normal life and a constant struggle. If the system was more fair, or if losing out didn't threaten falling into the economic abyss below it wouldn't be so dire. Who delegated the authority to pick winners and losers to these administrators? This is what happened when the professional class took over the liberal side of politics. They've ignored economic equality to the point where it feels like it is life and death to get positions. Along with the nepotism of people in making these decision, it feels like they're asking everyone else to sacrifice except for them and their friends.
- bigstrat2003 3y ago
  > As an example, a whole bunch of people, for some reason, took "Black Lives Matter" to mean "Only Black Lives Matter", as if that was said or as if that was the point. That was never my issue, or the issue of anyone I encountered. My issue (and those other people's issue) was the implicit bad-faith assumption that we didn't already think black lives mattered, and needed to be scolded about it. Such rhetoric is needlessly divisive and should be avoided.
  - boolemancer 3y ago
    Why would you feel that anybody was personally scolding you by saying "black lives matter" if you already believed that black lives matter? Clearly, plenty of people, through both their actions and their words, have made it very clear that they don't believe that black lives matter, and the movement was always aimed squarely at them.
    - Jensson 3y ago
      People think that black lives matter, you trying to say they don't if they don't agree with the BLM movement is just making things worse. There is no reason to turn allies into enemies.
    - moduspol 3y ago
      > Clearly, plenty of people, through both their actions and their words, have made it very clear that they don't believe that black lives matter, and the movement was always aimed squarely at them. Correction: the movement is aimed at only a very small subset of black lives. It is not aimed at the much larger number of ones taken by other black people. But I guess "a specific subset of black lives matter, and let's not talk about the others" doesn't quite roll off the tongue.
- subjectsigma 3y ago
  I think I know why people interpreted “Black Lives Matter” as “Only Black Lives Matter,” and it was the way BLM supporters reacted to the slogan “All Lives Matter.” I’m not saying either one is right or wrong. I’m saying - if you imagine yourself as someone saying “All Lives Matter” and the response you get back is “No, you can’t say that, you can only say ‘Black Lives Matter’”… not a big logical leap to make
- fasterik 3y ago
  I don't think people are misreading it. Everyone understands what "black lives matter" means. It's a phrase that's been co-opted by a political movement with a broader set of ideological commitments. It's possible to have legitimate disagreements with the movement, about e.g. protest tactics, statistics about bias in policing, defunding the police, institutional racism, or the Israel-Palestine conflict, without disagreeing with the claim that black lives matter.
- xigoi 3y ago
  Saying “black lives matter” is not inherently bad. Saying “black lives matter” while disagreeing with “all lives matter” is bad.
ltbarcly3 3y ago
I'll support your theory when I hear, even one time, a DEI leader mention poor white people. I grew up in a home with a mother who was an alcoholic and drug addict, and who had a parade of abusive boyfriends. There were times we didn't have electricity or water because it was turned off. We never had a telephone in the house or a working car. I studied Math in college. Literally every single other math major I knew had parents who were in the top 10% (or higher) in wealth. Every single one. About 1/4 of the majors went to the same magnet high school in the richest county in the state. Several of them had parents that were university professors. There was NOBODY remotely like me. I had to join the Army Reserve to even be able to afford to live and go to school since I had no family help whatsoever. DEI aggressively works against people like me, because I'm a heterosexual white male. I grew up eating government peanut butter and free school lunch and waiting for the day the foodstamps would come because then there might be some food in our house instead of none, but I'm told that I'm "part of the problem". They would very happily push candidates that come from wealthy backgrounds and have parents that are rich or professors so long as they aren't white or asian or jewish. There are many programs to back-door people that are black or hispanic into PHD programs (google pre-phd programs for under-represented), but when I tried to talk to and advisor about such a program they literally laughed at me - again because I'm white and a male which means I'm "part of the problem".
- owlstuffing 3y ago
  Right on. Diversity is not about diversity.
- ckemere 3y ago
  As a university professor, I can assure you that, in fact, “received food stamps growing up” and “first generation college student” are both identities that are specifically listed in DEI programs I am familiar with, for example special NIH fellowships for PhD sty to promote a diverse academia. I’m sorry that you were misinformed.
  - zmgsabst 3y ago
    Probably because universities promote those programs exclusively on protected class, not circumstance. To the point that I believe claiming they’re focused on circumstance is a polite fiction to give cover for the institutional bigotry the Supreme Court condemned at Harvard and UNC.
Jensson 3y ago
> Consider that a diversity statement is a way to evaluate if the applicant has even given a moment's thought to the fact that Gould raised, by seeking to cultivate talent among folks otherwise shut out of the top tier of academia. But that isn't the job of a professor, they are there to cultivate the talent of people who are already privileged enough to be a part of academia.
- amluto 3y ago
  For better or for worse, universities assign a lot of their duties to the faculty. So professors really are involved in outreach to prospective students. But Gould’s point, however true, is about a situation that exists far back in the pipeline, and most faculty have absolutely no ability to airlift people out of cotton fields so they can do research.
ac130kz 3y ago
These days, with the omnipresence of internet, most people have access to most books/courses/materials/tutorials/etc if they want to, also mathematical abilities develop pretty early in life. You want to add diversity? Base it on egalitarianism as well. And by the way most top tier universities already cover all the tuition fees without a diversity statement involved, so if a person is truly a mastermind, there's no way they are left out.
latency-guy2 3y ago
Gould's statement is empty - there is no way to quantify it, so everyone assigns their own value to his statement. You may think its more than X,000,000, I think its 0. Who is right? So now it's you and me arguing past each other because there is no way to agree. And millions of other people who have to manage it. And yes, it does matter what the number is, because that is what is being done to justify X seats into many workplaces and universities. There is always a cost for training + development, and all of it can go to waste at any time.
fasterik 3y ago
The question is whether diversity statements accomplish the stated purpose. The people best equipped to write a good diversity statement are those who come from privileged, educated backgrounds and are familiar with the specific conceptual framework and jargon of DEI and social justice. It's less likely that someone who comes from a working class or non-Western background is going to be fluent in these concepts. If the goal is to hire more of those people, are DEI statements helping or hurting the goal? This is an empirical question. The recent case involving Yoel Inbar at UCLA provides evidence that DEI isn't just about measuring a candidate's ability to teach and mentor people from diverse backgrounds. There is also a component of signaling commitment to a specific political ideology. I would suggest listening to the interview he gave below, where it's pretty clear that even though he's critical of DEI statements, a stance which ultimately caused him to lose a job offer at UCLA, he's still in favor of diversity and social justice. (Interview starts at 41:30) https://verybadwizards.com/episode/episode-263-free-yoel https://verybadwizards.com/episode/episode-263-free-yoel

exogeny 3y ago

This is a very thoughtful and sensible reply, but it's going to get lost in the storm and that is a shame. Personally I've always thought that a lot of these issues boil down to intentional misreading or lack of understanding of things unsaid. As an example, a whole bunch of people, for some reason, took "Black Lives Matter" to mean "Only Black Lives Matter", as if that was said or as if that was the point. In your example with Einstein, to me it would be perfectly valid for Gould to have said "I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. We should seek to find and develop those people." But of course I would worry that those same people who took umbrage with the example of BLM would assume that it would be done at the expense of others, or that it would be done to exclusively benefit in a zero-sum way the unheralded, unfound geniuses in Gould's example. I run a small startup, fifteen people, and yes, I believe in diversity in hiring and team composition. If all things are equal, then I will hire the person that brings a diverse perspective to my team, not on basis of identity but on basis of opinion, basis of experience, and basis of perspective. I will not pursue that diversity at the expense of hiring the best candidate, and I suspect my perspective is shared a lot more than people think, solely because the "If all things are equal" part is unsaid and it is simply too easy for the cynic or bad-faith arguer to assume otherwise.

moose_man 3y ago
Honestly I think it is a matter of the current state of the economy. Competition for positions is so vicious, and the people running DEI are already established and powerful. So losing out is life changing and can mean the difference between having a comfortable normal life and a constant struggle. If the system was more fair, or if losing out didn't threaten falling into the economic abyss below it wouldn't be so dire. Who delegated the authority to pick winners and losers to these administrators? This is what happened when the professional class took over the liberal side of politics. They've ignored economic equality to the point where it feels like it is life and death to get positions. Along with the nepotism of people in making these decision, it feels like they're asking everyone else to sacrifice except for them and their friends.
bigstrat2003 3y ago
> As an example, a whole bunch of people, for some reason, took "Black Lives Matter" to mean "Only Black Lives Matter", as if that was said or as if that was the point. That was never my issue, or the issue of anyone I encountered. My issue (and those other people's issue) was the implicit bad-faith assumption that we didn't already think black lives mattered, and needed to be scolded about it. Such rhetoric is needlessly divisive and should be avoided.
- boolemancer 3y ago
  Why would you feel that anybody was personally scolding you by saying "black lives matter" if you already believed that black lives matter? Clearly, plenty of people, through both their actions and their words, have made it very clear that they don't believe that black lives matter, and the movement was always aimed squarely at them.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    People think that black lives matter, you trying to say they don't if they don't agree with the BLM movement is just making things worse. There is no reason to turn allies into enemies.
  - moduspol 3y ago
    > Clearly, plenty of people, through both their actions and their words, have made it very clear that they don't believe that black lives matter, and the movement was always aimed squarely at them. Correction: the movement is aimed at only a very small subset of black lives. It is not aimed at the much larger number of ones taken by other black people. But I guess "a specific subset of black lives matter, and let's not talk about the others" doesn't quite roll off the tongue.
subjectsigma 3y ago
I think I know why people interpreted “Black Lives Matter” as “Only Black Lives Matter,” and it was the way BLM supporters reacted to the slogan “All Lives Matter.” I’m not saying either one is right or wrong. I’m saying - if you imagine yourself as someone saying “All Lives Matter” and the response you get back is “No, you can’t say that, you can only say ‘Black Lives Matter’”… not a big logical leap to make
fasterik 3y ago
I don't think people are misreading it. Everyone understands what "black lives matter" means. It's a phrase that's been co-opted by a political movement with a broader set of ideological commitments. It's possible to have legitimate disagreements with the movement, about e.g. protest tactics, statistics about bias in policing, defunding the police, institutional racism, or the Israel-Palestine conflict, without disagreeing with the claim that black lives matter.
xigoi 3y ago
Saying “black lives matter” is not inherently bad. Saying “black lives matter” while disagreeing with “all lives matter” is bad.

ltbarcly3 3y ago

I'll support your theory when I hear, even one time, a DEI leader mention poor white people. I grew up in a home with a mother who was an alcoholic and drug addict, and who had a parade of abusive boyfriends. There were times we didn't have electricity or water because it was turned off. We never had a telephone in the house or a working car. I studied Math in college. Literally every single other math major I knew had parents who were in the top 10% (or higher) in wealth. Every single one. About 1/4 of the majors went to the same magnet high school in the richest county in the state. Several of them had parents that were university professors. There was NOBODY remotely like me. I had to join the Army Reserve to even be able to afford to live and go to school since I had no family help whatsoever. DEI aggressively works against people like me, because I'm a heterosexual white male. I grew up eating government peanut butter and free school lunch and waiting for the day the foodstamps would come because then there might be some food in our house instead of none, but I'm told that I'm "part of the problem". They would very happily push candidates that come from wealthy backgrounds and have parents that are rich or professors so long as they aren't white or asian or jewish. There are many programs to back-door people that are black or hispanic into PHD programs (google pre-phd programs for under-represented), but when I tried to talk to and advisor about such a program they literally laughed at me - again because I'm white and a male which means I'm "part of the problem".

owlstuffing 3y ago
Right on. Diversity is not about diversity.
ckemere 3y ago
As a university professor, I can assure you that, in fact, “received food stamps growing up” and “first generation college student” are both identities that are specifically listed in DEI programs I am familiar with, for example special NIH fellowships for PhD sty to promote a diverse academia. I’m sorry that you were misinformed.
- zmgsabst 3y ago
  Probably because universities promote those programs exclusively on protected class, not circumstance. To the point that I believe claiming they’re focused on circumstance is a polite fiction to give cover for the institutional bigotry the Supreme Court condemned at Harvard and UNC.

Jensson 3y ago

> Consider that a diversity statement is a way to evaluate if the applicant has even given a moment's thought to the fact that Gould raised, by seeking to cultivate talent among folks otherwise shut out of the top tier of academia. But that isn't the job of a professor, they are there to cultivate the talent of people who are already privileged enough to be a part of academia.

amluto 3y ago
For better or for worse, universities assign a lot of their duties to the faculty. So professors really are involved in outreach to prospective students. But Gould’s point, however true, is about a situation that exists far back in the pipeline, and most faculty have absolutely no ability to airlift people out of cotton fields so they can do research.

ac130kz 3y ago

These days, with the omnipresence of internet, most people have access to most books/courses/materials/tutorials/etc if they want to, also mathematical abilities develop pretty early in life. You want to add diversity? Base it on egalitarianism as well. And by the way most top tier universities already cover all the tuition fees without a diversity statement involved, so if a person is truly a mastermind, there's no way they are left out.

latency-guy2 3y ago

Gould's statement is empty - there is no way to quantify it, so everyone assigns their own value to his statement. You may think its more than X,000,000, I think its 0. Who is right? So now it's you and me arguing past each other because there is no way to agree. And millions of other people who have to manage it. And yes, it does matter what the number is, because that is what is being done to justify X seats into many workplaces and universities. There is always a cost for training + development, and all of it can go to waste at any time.

fasterik 3y ago

The question is whether diversity statements accomplish the stated purpose. The people best equipped to write a good diversity statement are those who come from privileged, educated backgrounds and are familiar with the specific conceptual framework and jargon of DEI and social justice. It's less likely that someone who comes from a working class or non-Western background is going to be fluent in these concepts. If the goal is to hire more of those people, are DEI statements helping or hurting the goal? This is an empirical question. The recent case involving Yoel Inbar at UCLA provides evidence that DEI isn't just about measuring a candidate's ability to teach and mentor people from diverse backgrounds. There is also a component of signaling commitment to a specific political ideology. I would suggest listening to the interview he gave below, where it's pretty clear that even though he's critical of DEI statements, a stance which ultimately caused him to lose a job offer at UCLA, he's still in favor of diversity and social justice. (Interview starts at 41:30) https://verybadwizards.com/episode/episode-263-free-yoel https://verybadwizards.com/episode/episode-263-free-yoel