3 ms·

It raises the question. Begging the question is a logical fallacy. The most straightforward factor is that men and women are actually different. Many studies

It raises the question. Begging the question is a logical fallacy. The most straightforward factor is that men and women are actually different. Many studies have shown that innate gender preferences manifest in infancy. I knew I was different from most girls when I was very young. The vast majority of other women I've met at work and at conferences have been similar. We were into "boy stuff". That's perfectly fine. But it doesn't mean the girls who are not into "boy stuff" are broken and need to be fixed.

tptacek 12y ago
This argument is so vague that it could be used to justify virtually any gender discrimination. If this issue is so simple and straightforward as to be disposed of in a 90 word comment, why aren't you able to connect any specific difference between men and women to the computer science field, or to explain why women are so comfortable in other STEM fields? That aside: yes, I was intending to suggest that your previous argument was fallacious. I don't believe the premise of your argument was valid. But even had it been, it would still not answer the question it pretends to answer.
- imanaccount247 12y ago
  We're comfortable in CS too. That's the point. I don't see how you figure I was begging the question, but at this point I also don't care. Being told I don't know what it is like to be a woman by men gets pretty old.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    You can feel free to substitute, with my apology, any other shorthand representing the sharp difference in female participation in CS as opposed to other STEM fields. I didn't choose that word carefully and am not wedded to it. Would it then be possible to respond substantively to my comment?
  - FD3SA 12y ago
    This exchange between imanaccount247 and tctapek is incredibly fascinating. One the one hand, we have a female who has a very accurate understanding of evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology, genetics, and logic. Her arguments are logically coherent and validated by centuries of empirical science. On the other hand, we have a male who has violated Occam's Razor so many times that he has completely annihilated any hope of a coherent hypothesis. His arguments imply conspiracy theories behind the formation of family, society, government, and history itself. All reason is abandoned, and science ignored. Now the question is...does it really matter which position the male took vs. the female? One of these arguments is far more coherent than the other. Which position an individual supports reveals far more about the person than about the true nature of sexual dimorphism, since the laws of the universe do not suddenly change to cater to the opinions of a few misinformed primates. EDIT: Hello tctapek! Thanks for the downvote. In case you one day want to educate yourself about the science behind human biology (and its numerous resultant consequences), here are a few books you'll no doubt find elucidating: 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Queen:_Sex_and_the_Evolution_of_Human_Nature http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Queen:_Sex_and_the_Evol... 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_Animal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_Animal For some advanced reading, you can move onto the Extended Phenotype by Dawkins, and the references contained therein. Enjoy, and remember, the world is yours to discover! Science will always be waiting. EDIT 2: If you lack the patience for all that, here (http://edge.org/memberbio/helena_cronin http://edge.org/memberbio/helena_cronin) is an expert in the field who explains all of imanaccount247's assertions in video format. Enjoy!
    - trhway 12y ago
      >On the other hand, we have a male who has violated Occam's Razor so many times that he has completely annihilated any hope of a coherent hypothesis. His arguments imply conspiracy theories behind the formation of family, society, government, and history itself. All reason is abandoned, and science ignored. It is typical position of an "enlightened reasonable conservative". A very successful and stable position in modern society (and on this site in particular). At first look one may think that extremal morons are the ones presenting main obstacle to progress, yet looking just a bit more one can see that it is the reasonable conservatives in the middle who form the humongous main unmovable mass. >One the one hand, we have a female who has a very accurate understanding of evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology, genetics, and logic. Her arguments are logically coherent and validated by centuries of empirical science. all these coherent arguments are just like waves splashing against the stone. No chance. It isn't a game of logic and reason, even though it may look so.
saraid216 12y ago
I knew I was different from most boys when I was very young, too. Naturally, I too grew up to be a programmer. So I guess programming must be a girl thing, according to this logic.

tptacek 12y ago

This argument is so vague that it could be used to justify virtually any gender discrimination. If this issue is so simple and straightforward as to be disposed of in a 90 word comment, why aren't you able to connect any specific difference between men and women to the computer science field, or to explain why women are so comfortable in other STEM fields? That aside: yes, I was intending to suggest that your previous argument was fallacious. I don't believe the premise of your argument was valid. But even had it been, it would still not answer the question it pretends to answer.

imanaccount247 12y ago
We're comfortable in CS too. That's the point. I don't see how you figure I was begging the question, but at this point I also don't care. Being told I don't know what it is like to be a woman by men gets pretty old.
- tptacek 12y ago
  You can feel free to substitute, with my apology, any other shorthand representing the sharp difference in female participation in CS as opposed to other STEM fields. I didn't choose that word carefully and am not wedded to it. Would it then be possible to respond substantively to my comment?
- FD3SA 12y ago
  This exchange between imanaccount247 and tctapek is incredibly fascinating. One the one hand, we have a female who has a very accurate understanding of evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology, genetics, and logic. Her arguments are logically coherent and validated by centuries of empirical science. On the other hand, we have a male who has violated Occam's Razor so many times that he has completely annihilated any hope of a coherent hypothesis. His arguments imply conspiracy theories behind the formation of family, society, government, and history itself. All reason is abandoned, and science ignored. Now the question is...does it really matter which position the male took vs. the female? One of these arguments is far more coherent than the other. Which position an individual supports reveals far more about the person than about the true nature of sexual dimorphism, since the laws of the universe do not suddenly change to cater to the opinions of a few misinformed primates. EDIT: Hello tctapek! Thanks for the downvote. In case you one day want to educate yourself about the science behind human biology (and its numerous resultant consequences), here are a few books you'll no doubt find elucidating: 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Queen:_Sex_and_the_Evolution_of_Human_Nature http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Queen:_Sex_and_the_Evol... 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_Animal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_Animal For some advanced reading, you can move onto the Extended Phenotype by Dawkins, and the references contained therein. Enjoy, and remember, the world is yours to discover! Science will always be waiting. EDIT 2: If you lack the patience for all that, here (http://edge.org/memberbio/helena_cronin http://edge.org/memberbio/helena_cronin) is an expert in the field who explains all of imanaccount247's assertions in video format. Enjoy!
  - trhway 12y ago
    >On the other hand, we have a male who has violated Occam's Razor so many times that he has completely annihilated any hope of a coherent hypothesis. His arguments imply conspiracy theories behind the formation of family, society, government, and history itself. All reason is abandoned, and science ignored. It is typical position of an "enlightened reasonable conservative". A very successful and stable position in modern society (and on this site in particular). At first look one may think that extremal morons are the ones presenting main obstacle to progress, yet looking just a bit more one can see that it is the reasonable conservatives in the middle who form the humongous main unmovable mass. >One the one hand, we have a female who has a very accurate understanding of evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology, genetics, and logic. Her arguments are logically coherent and validated by centuries of empirical science. all these coherent arguments are just like waves splashing against the stone. No chance. It isn't a game of logic and reason, even though it may look so.

saraid216 12y ago

I knew I was different from most boys when I was very young, too. Naturally, I too grew up to be a programmer. So I guess programming must be a girl thing, according to this logic.