3 ms·

That's an extremely shallow criticism of the article. It uses the Myth/Fact device which is quite common in articles, read then as Point/Counterpoint or somethi

by almost 14y ago

That's an extremely shallow criticism of the article. It uses the Myth/Fact device which is quite common in articles, read then as Point/Counterpoint or something if you must. But let's talk about the content, not the style.

smsm42 14y ago
Common != right. Spam is common too :) If you write an opinion piece, there's nothing shameful in that, but it's not a fact. Word "fact" used to have meaning...
- andreasvc 14y ago
  If you'd take a look you'd find that most any word is used extremely loosely. That's why dictionaries contain vague circumscriptions of words, often listing as many as 20 overlapping and/or separate word senses. Which is not to deny that people operate with the idea that words have a definite, literal meaning (perhaps even neatly delineated with necessary and sufficient conditions), it's just not the reality. So yes, when a particular use of a word is common, it's very hard to argue it's not right, because there are no facts to point at, only an idea in someone's head (but who's to say who is right?), or some historical data (but languages change, and prima facie that's neither good nor bad).
UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
The article is so shallow its self that I didn't feel it deserved my time for a deep criticism. The author just stop justifying their points after the first couple. It is like they starting writing a really good piece, then got two "myths" in and then switched to random opinion mode.
- almost 14y ago
  The underlying issues do deserve discussion though whether or not the quality of writing (in a blog post) meets your personal standards.
  - UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
    Of course they do. Sexism is a very real issue. It is an issue that directly impacts people's lives. However I've been to this rodeo before many times, and unfortunately if you get drawn into a discussion that is, at the foundation, based on personal opinion/perspective then you never get anywhere. You need to try and stick to the science. When the study that the author used as their first point was published there was some great discussion that focused around the science of sexism.

by almost 14y ago

smsm42 14y ago

Common != right. Spam is common too :) If you write an opinion piece, there's nothing shameful in that, but it's not a fact. Word "fact" used to have meaning...

andreasvc 14y ago
If you'd take a look you'd find that most any word is used extremely loosely. That's why dictionaries contain vague circumscriptions of words, often listing as many as 20 overlapping and/or separate word senses. Which is not to deny that people operate with the idea that words have a definite, literal meaning (perhaps even neatly delineated with necessary and sufficient conditions), it's just not the reality. So yes, when a particular use of a word is common, it's very hard to argue it's not right, because there are no facts to point at, only an idea in someone's head (but who's to say who is right?), or some historical data (but languages change, and prima facie that's neither good nor bad).

UnoriginalGuy 14y ago

The article is so shallow its self that I didn't feel it deserved my time for a deep criticism. The author just stop justifying their points after the first couple. It is like they starting writing a really good piece, then got two "myths" in and then switched to random opinion mode.

almost 14y ago
The underlying issues do deserve discussion though whether or not the quality of writing (in a blog post) meets your personal standards.
- UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
  Of course they do. Sexism is a very real issue. It is an issue that directly impacts people's lives. However I've been to this rodeo before many times, and unfortunately if you get drawn into a discussion that is, at the foundation, based on personal opinion/perspective then you never get anywhere. You need to try and stick to the science. When the study that the author used as their first point was published there was some great discussion that focused around the science of sexism.