Live data from Hacker News

The Yale Problem Begins in High School

heterodoxacademy.org

131–140 of 526 posts

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#131
post #89
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, that parallels my experience pretty closely, as an undergraduate at an Ivy League college that was in the news recently. There might have been about a hundred people on campus that were actively interested in protesting things (what things?, all the things ). For the most part, everybody else is there to go to class, learn, do their own thing, and drink too much beer on the weekends/Wednesdays/Mondays, etc. This…

My wife went to one of the 7 sisters. She said 'This happens every 3-5 years with regularity. Just wait for the cocaine to run out. Things will quiet down after that'

Amusing joke and I've run across similar ones (South Park, for one, had two old guys grumbling about how long it took "PC" to run its course last time) but on a more serious note, I wonder how much of it is just the nature of young, relatively wealthy/privileged people to want to "change the world" and find a cause.

I'm a bit past college age these days but in the mid/late 90's when I was at university, there were plenty of "causes" that students took up (myself included) to various degrees and in retrospect, a lot of it came down to the newly-found freedom of adulthood combined with the idealism of youth and the lack of wider awareness that comes with a bit more exposure to the world at large.

I think it's a good thing that young people are able to see some of the real injustice in the world that some of us older folks have learned to accept (or at least take for granted) and have the drive to want to improve things. At the same time, cultural attitudes don't change through force or under threat. Additionally, there's still a bit of that youthful naivete where just because something is a huge deal for you, you may not realize the bigger issues at play or know which "battles" to choose yet.

I'm sure my attitudes will keep evolving over time but just between my college years and 20 years later, I think about how some things seemed so important and unfair back then but I've since found that there are usually bigger issues or at least more subtle and effective ways to address the problems you recognize in ways other than shouting matches or mob-mentality public shaming.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#132
post #27

I've taught at two colleges and based on my (purely) anecdotal experiences and attention to the climate, I'd say that the number of students and faculty interested in stifling or censoring ideas is small but also very, very noisy. They also have no sense of humor and college administrators as a group have no sense of humor or perspective, and they're chronically worried about accusations of indifference or insensitiv…

Yup, that parallels my experience pretty closely, as an undergraduate at an Ivy League college that was in the news recently. There might have been about a hundred people on campus that were actively interested in protesting things (what things?, all the things ). For the most part, everybody else is there to go to class, learn, do their own thing, and drink too much beer on the weekends/Wednesdays/Mondays, etc. This…

The most conservative group in the world is the avant-garde. They never change.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#133

These people act this way because they are elitist. They think they know what should be better than anyone else and therefore there is no need for debate or for rights like free speech. I find that quite ironic because presumably, these people subscribe to left leaning ideologies. But maybe there isn't so much of a contradiction. They are simply more elitist than they are anything else. They don't really stand for eq…

The interesting part is not why these people do this, but why they are winning.

Because certain parts of the media have a disturbing attachment to such beliefs (despite their jobs being closely tied to freedom of speech and expression) and these types appealed to their views perfectly. Perhaps because of a certain 'holier than thou' attitude towards the general public.

It might also be because for an authority figure, this sort of thing is a great distraction. It takes the focus away from wealth inequality and corporatism and aims it at other normal people with the 'wrong' opinions.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#134
post #61
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, that parallels my experience pretty closely, as an undergraduate at an Ivy League college that was in the news recently. There might have been about a hundred people on campus that were actively interested in protesting things (what things?, all the things ). For the most part, everybody else is there to go to class, learn, do their own thing, and drink too much beer on the weekends/Wednesdays/Mondays, etc. This…

This might be the first time I have seen someone from an Ivy league college not mention the name (intentionally). Why not just say X/Y/Z?

Don't they say that it is always Penn when they don't mention the school?

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#135
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The extreme of both sides of this debate, as illustrated in your post and in the actions of the most egregious student complaints at Yale, lack the nuance needed to find a healthy compromise. Those subreddits are "less than agreeable" because they advocate outlandish responses to perhaps slightly less outlandish beliefs.

> Those subreddits are "less than agreeable" because they advocate outlandish responses Do they? What "outlandish responses" might those be? You're smearing by implication. What specifically do you find so "outlandish"? As far as I can tell, people making claims like yours think that creating a consistent set of rules for all, promoting free expression of all views, and countering group libel are thoughtcrimes. What'…

I don't have to do much "smearing by implication" when the upvoted comments speak for themselves. I think there are people that do this sort of "bullying" and unproductive rabble-rousing on both sides of the debate. I personally agree with the principles of "a consistent set of rules for all, etc.," but I don't think that the road to productive debate begins with including "hate," "sucks", "fuck them", etc., as a means to evoke an emotional response.

Specific instances of outlandishness:

SJWsAtWork -- low comment traffic, a bit more agreeable than the rest.

ThisIsNotASafeSpace -- top comment on the top all time submission, very high quality discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ThisIsNotASafeSpace/comments/3t6awz...

SJSucks -- highly upvoted comment (relatively speaking) on top all time post, again, some very high quality discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/sjsucks/comments/1vs4kj/watchmen_co...

SJWhate -- this one speaks for itself, I hope:

https://www.reddit.com/r/sjwhate/comments/3u0t33/ahmed_moham...

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#136

The one thing that perplexes me more than anything is nobody ever thought free speech allows us to monitor the people who have radical ideologies and ideas that threaten our country. When you silence opposition simply because it offends somebody or some group, you lose the opportunity to monitor these people and their ideas. I want to know if there's skinheads who want to start a race war or the black panther party l…

This is one of the reason governments and police forces aren't trying to complete wipe terrorists groups and extremists off the internet. Because if their posts are publically viewable, then it's easier to watch what they're up to and stop anything dangerous occurring as a result. If they take them down, then these people simply go 'underground' and becomes it a lot more difficult to check whether they're planning anything.

Of course, there's also a downside (that a certain few people might be inspired or encouraged by extremist content they see online), but it's better for security to let such people give themselves away before anything can happen.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#137
This directly relates to us in tech. Specifically, there is a huge push to reach out to women and girls in CS. I am not opposed to females in CS at all. I will encourage males and females alike to pursue it, because I see CS as the great equalizer; the only thing that matters is what you produce.

What I can't stand are these "Women in technology" conferences and workshops to "close the (gender) gap". Why? Because if you focus on one group, then you are actively not focusing on another. Given the dichotomy defined by their stated purpose, they are actively dismissive of men (boys). That is wrong.

I don't care about the men/women ratio. People will choose whatever path they enjoy and want to work at. I do care very strongly, though, about treating people equally.

If I say this publically, then I, too, will be ostracized. That is why this article is so very important!

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> However, an argument could be made that in a free society there's a fundamental right to have a dissenting opinion or voice Of course, there is a fundamental right to have (and express) a dissenting opinion or voice. There is also a fundamental right to have (and express) displeasure with an opinion or voice, whether dissenting or not. And there is no fundamental entitlement to a job whose responsibilities include…

[deleted]

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#139

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…

Other people in this thread have already expressed my opinion far more eloquently than I could have. But I am wondering, do you think the protests that lead to the resignation of Claremont McKenna's dean is appropriate (besides the legalistic sense)? And if not, why is it different from the pressure that lead Brandon Eich to resign?

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#140

I've taught at two colleges and based on my (purely) anecdotal experiences and attention to the climate, I'd say that the number of students and faculty interested in stifling or censoring ideas is small but also very, very noisy. They also have no sense of humor and college administrators as a group have no sense of humor or perspective, and they're chronically worried about accusations of indifference or insensitiv…

The problem with "balancing viewpoints" argument is that it isn't based on a critical ethos and so it cannot progress on the basis of logos. You can have a "balanced viewpoint" and still have debates about "whether the moon is made of the body of Vince Foster or not." There are certain ideas that just don't belong in a university setting because they are bunk and this has nothing to do with diversity of opinion. It s…

Thank you, you've summed up the question of balanced journalism far better than I ever could. The current approach of sticking someone with an opposite opinion on the news, even if that opinion is clearly utter horseshit, really gets to me, but I wasn't able to properly describe why.
Post reply on HN