Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Yale Problem Begins in High School

heterodoxacademy.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 526 posts

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#41

Post by wldcordeiro »

sremani wrote: post #26
rspeer wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money is not speech, it's money. People were angry at Eich because he spent money opposing a cause they supported. Brandon Eich is not an example of anything this article is about. It's much more straightforward: if you do things people don't like, those people won't like you.

Brandon Eich episode speaks volumes, esp. since he was at the winning side of the Popular Vote. Tinder did not walk away for CA after Prop 8 was won. I really do not know a single state including CA and OR, where gay marriage actually garnered Popular majority. Now the debate about whether something like that should be up for Vote is different and one I have no much domain knowledge. The fact was Brandon Eich's polit…

I was of the opinion that people should have at least given him a chance, he stated that he would respect the Mozilla policies of openness and put his personal beliefs aside and I would have liked to at least see him try.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#42

Post by nickff »

dragonwriter wrote: post #14
tosseraccount wrote: post #13

Look how Silicon Valley folks treated Brandon Eich when he made a donation to the majority side in a California proposition. It's not just academia where you can't speak freely.

The fact that other people are free to speak against you does not mean that you can't speak freely. Free speech does not mean freedom from having your speech acts criticized (quite the opposite; it includes freedom of others to criticize your speech acts.) And, yes, it means that your speech acts may affect your ability to hold a job where you are one of the major public faces of an organization (such as its CEO) and…

Would you then also argue that the Hollywood blacklist was morally unassailable?[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_blacklist

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#44

Post by jerf »

ccernaf wrote: post #18
zekkius wrote: post #11

I find the underlying premise of this article and the claim that there is a "war on boys" absurd. It's a old argument from the same old set of people who have the same old intolerant (and dying) paradigm. Not sure why it is on HN at all as the content has nothing to do with tech...

I'm pretty disappointed in the article and the comments, and how like Reddit this website is turning out to be. I'm not going to make any judgements (though I really really am), but this same article has been posted to 10 subreddits, among them such gems as: SJWsAtWork, ThisIsNotASafeSpace, sjsucks, and sjwhate.

You might to find out who you're contemptuously dismissing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt , in particular the first few paragraphs.

If you've progressed to the point where you can dismiss that guy without a thought, given his credentials and accomplishments, I submit to you that alarm bells ought to be going off in your head that you might have epistemologically closed yourself too far.

I'm not saying you're obligated to agree with him. I'm saying if you can't even engage with his arguments, it may be you that has the problem.

I can also recommend:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONUM4akzLGE "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion"

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#45

Post by richard_mcp »

I was originally going to lump this article in with other "men's rights movement" stuff until I saw the author was Jonathan Haidt. I had the honor to take Psyc 101 with Prof. Haidt years ago at the University of Virginia. He was a wonderful teacher who expected the best out of his students. He struck me as a very intelligent man who had put a lot of thought into both what he taught as well as his opinions. When he bring up his own beliefs in class he was very open to letting others voice dissenting opinions. More importantly, he always seemed willing to consider alternative views.

I know this is all anecdotal, but I put a lot of trust in his opinions and pay attention when he says something.

Unrelated, but he gave a great Ted talk in 2008 about the difference between liberals and conservatives: https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#46

Post by henshao »

ccernaf wrote: post #18
zekkius wrote: post #11

I find the underlying premise of this article and the claim that there is a "war on boys" absurd. It's a old argument from the same old set of people who have the same old intolerant (and dying) paradigm. Not sure why it is on HN at all as the content has nothing to do with tech...

I'm pretty disappointed in the article and the comments, and how like Reddit this website is turning out to be. I'm not going to make any judgements (though I really really am), but this same article has been posted to 10 subreddits, among them such gems as: SJWsAtWork, ThisIsNotASafeSpace, sjsucks, and sjwhate.

What in this article is "disappointing"? I'm curious.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#47

Post by bmelton »

ccernaf wrote: post #18
zekkius wrote: post #11

I find the underlying premise of this article and the claim that there is a "war on boys" absurd. It's a old argument from the same old set of people who have the same old intolerant (and dying) paradigm. Not sure why it is on HN at all as the content has nothing to do with tech...

I'm pretty disappointed in the article and the comments, and how like Reddit this website is turning out to be. I'm not going to make any judgements (though I really really am), but this same article has been posted to 10 subreddits, among them such gems as: SJWsAtWork, ThisIsNotASafeSpace, sjsucks, and sjwhate.

Not affiliated (except that I follow him on Twitter), but the author, Jonathan Haidt, is one of America's pre-eminent social psychologists. He is (or at least was) a liberal who has engaged in some very serious social psychology that gives massive insight into how people tick, especially where those ticks are related to or concerning political party affiliations.

If the idea is to dismiss him as an anti-SJW, or anti-free speech, then I would posit that you're simply inclined to dismiss no matter what. If the complaint is that his work is spreading to, or being adopted by the anti-SJW crowd, that's hardly his fault.

He may not be right, or he may not have done appropriate research, or he may be based (his own studies would suggest that it's inevitable that he is), but any dismissal predicated in part on that he's trolling is almost certainly knee-jerk.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#48

Post by ElComradio »

DrJokepu wrote: post #24
dragonwriter wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that other people are free to speak against you does not mean that you can't speak freely. Free speech does not mean freedom from having your speech acts criticized (quite the opposite; it includes freedom of others to criticize your speech acts.) And, yes, it means that your speech acts may affect your ability to hold a job where you are one of the major public faces of an organization (such as its CEO) and…

This is a frequently repeated argument and I find it less and less convincing. It is true that America's constitution only guarantees the congress will not abridge the freedom of speech. However, an argument could be made that in a free society there's a fundamental right to have a dissenting opinion or voice; a right that is not codified by the constitution because it's simply irrelevant to a constitution. It seems…

A way to address this might be to add "political opinions" to the list of protected classes. It is undeniably bad for a democracy (I know I know, we aren't technically a democracy) where people aren't free in practice to discuss contentious issues.

As currently stands, you can stand in the town square and promote affirmative action it would be very risky legally to fire you. But if you get up and argue for the repeal of some affirmative action legislation you can be safely fired with no objection from legal.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#49

Post by Retric »

kod wrote: post #21
dudul wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. It is baffling to me that nobody seems to seriously consider that this war on men/boys is what creates this weird and uncomfortable social dynamic. Masculinity is not something to be feared or ashamed of, teaching that is what creates dysfunctional men.

No, social norms that - you're not allowed to show emotion (unless it's anger) - you must get all of your emotional needs met through first your mother, and then your girlfriend / wife are what creates dysfunctional men.

As a tall, large framed man, I often get very strong negative reactions when I am physically fit. And I mean fit not weightlifting bulk. Keeping short hair and a clean shave while swimming regularly is a very utilitarian choice, but you get even stronger negative reactions. The way out? Growing long hair transformed rather negative skin head connotations with a far more teasing Fabio.

Our culture really looks down on the strong male archetype.

PS: Don't believe me? Try growing a natural aka full beard.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#50

Post by AngrySkillzz »

kod wrote: post #21
dudul wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. It is baffling to me that nobody seems to seriously consider that this war on men/boys is what creates this weird and uncomfortable social dynamic. Masculinity is not something to be feared or ashamed of, teaching that is what creates dysfunctional men.

No, social norms that - you're not allowed to show emotion (unless it's anger) - you must get all of your emotional needs met through first your mother, and then your girlfriend / wife are what creates dysfunctional men.

It could be both; that when young men have "traditional masculinity" exposed as bullshit (which I agree with) and pulled out from under them, they have difficulty understanding themselves in a world without such a framing device.
Post reply on HN