3 ms·
You can't control for the social conditioning of gender. This is so fundamentally obvious I don't think you are taking the science seriously.
by __alexs 10mo ago
You can't control for the social conditioning of gender. This is so fundamentally obvious I don't think you are taking the science seriously.
- psyopsy 10mo agoCongrats! You've made your position unfalsifiable. When the data consistently shows gaps widening as social strictures loosen, and your response is to blame an invisible, unmeasurable "conditioning," you aren't doing science at all. But you are insulating your belief from any possible counter-evidence.
- __alexs 10mo agoNo I'm just clear that the current state of science makes it impossible to draw the conclusion that you are. Note that this outcome goes both ways. We can neither confirm that biology is the main driver nor confirm that it isn't. Life is not as certain as you want it to be.
- psyopsy 10mo agoYou started with “not well explained by biology.” All of the evidence is solidly on one side, so you’ve retreated to “we can neither confirm nor deny.” I guess that’s progress?
- __alexs 10mo agoAgain, those statements are not contradictory.
- psyopsy 10mo agoThey're not contradictory in a vacuum. But in this sequence, they show you're backpedaling. You opened with a firm claim, and when confronted with actual data, you retreated to 'we can't know.' Pretending that perfect certainty is required here is just a dodge.