71–80 of 194 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Such invitations are often extended by organizations in the university, not the university itself. Those organizations can definitely be politically far afield from the university median. The test of a declaration like this will be how the school responds when another organization on campus reacts to such an invitation by protesting it.
[flagged]
Most responses to this will be positive, and they should be. Typically, the real evaluation is the market (will more students and professors be drawn to MIT?). However, there is already a tremendous demand for admission (from students) and competitive hiring processes (for professors). So...how many other comparable institutions will follow suit? Will universities in California adopt, oppose, or ignore?
Universities in California are going in precisely the other direction by mandating ideological purity tests aka "diversity statements" for staff. https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2019/11/24/uc-davis-math-prof...
I never thought about that before but that is an interesting point. It is not truly diversive if you can't include certain philosophies and ideologies.
Quoted post unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Universities in California are going in precisely the other direction by mandating ideological purity tests aka "diversity statements" for staff. https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2019/11/24/uc-davis-math-prof...
>mandating ideological purity tests Are we saying that its bad? I mean, I think it's bad, but it is in fact "progressive" so I dunno what the consensus is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again, that's not about belief, that's about the reality that the student body is diverse, the school wants the student body to be diverse, and the classroom itself will accordingly be diverse. What specifically about the rubric is the most troubling to you? By the way, as someone who hires faculty and reads many such statements (I have to ask, have you read any DEI statements? Do you have examples which you find esp…
> a discussion about how current efforts are dubiously effective would be a welcome and would help your application at my institution. A required statement as part of applying for any faculty position or promotion is simply not the appropriate place for such a discussion. You're expecting what amounts to a serious research effort in social science. This kind of intervention in effective leverage points of a complex s…
Why? We want to hire faculty who have experience managing a diverse classroom. We want a diverse classroom because our student body is diverse. Our student body is diverse because our applicants are diverse. Diversity is part of this whole thing, and experience as faculty teaching diverse classrooms tells us that it's not something that can be treated as an afterthought.
> You're expecting what amounts to a serious research effort in social science.
No, we are expecting a cogent discussion of the issues which one encounters through teaching diverse classrooms. It's a matter of experience, and yes sometimes it amounts to years of experience to understand the complex and subtle role that diversity plays in the classroom. But as I said in another post, the failure mode here isn't typically an inability to articulate a deep understanding of this area, it's an inability to articulate any understanding or thought whatsoever to these problems. Even just discussing the problems is more than enough to get you past any cutoff or filter I've encountered.
We have reached a point where it has been a mainstream position to view the idea of defending free speech as disagreeable, or even deeply offensive. This statement is so weak that it is necessary to consider this climate to even understand how this can be published as a statement. After explicitly saying that illegal speech is not free speech, it lists 6 exceptions for things that are not free speech either, includin…
I disagree.
There is a very vocal, very small minority that's ruining it for everyone else.
Certainly not mainstream.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just as a side note. The link to this post was flagged after being submitted to HN yesterday within a very short time frame. You might want to consider your karma points and preemptively remove it and pay your dues to the community by apologizing for not adhering to group speak. I very much stand on the left side of the political spectrum, while the linked blogpost clearly comes from the liberal to right spectrum. Bu…
I think you're mistaking groupthink for people who are simply tired of seeing the same old culture war debate on HN repeated over and over again. Plenty HN discussions about exactly this subject in the past have shown that: 1. Unlike some subjects, HN commenters have widely differing opinions here. The free speech hardliners and the anti disinformation/bigotry/*ism hardliners are both well represented, and many on bo…
I do not judge people I interact with based on their gender, skin color, race, or such irrelevancies. I judge them by how they behave toward me. In the process, many stereotypical "old white men" come off very badly. Although I am almost an old white man myself. I wish for a world where it doesn't matter what gender someone identifies by or what that person is doing in bed, on the couch, at the kitchen table, or anywhere else with anyone else.
And of course I know that this argument is misused to sweep systematic discrimination of social groups under the carpet. That's why I'm not in favor of judging members of such groups only on the basis of performance criteria that favor people who were born and raised in a privileged situation by a lucky coincidence.
Nevertheless, I find it important to deal with the argument that, in a better world, we should not judge anyone by such criteria. It should not play a role in an ideal world.
And I believe that with our ever increasing diversification we are playing into the hands of those who want a divided, disunited society/opposition.
Divide et impera has always been a very successful strategy and it has always been successful to play individual sub-groups off against each other, even though they have much more in common than what divides them.
So I personally consider it a gain to deal with dissenting opinions. And be it in the worst case only to sharpen and polish my own arguments.
Most responses to this will be positive, and they should be. Typically, the real evaluation is the market (will more students and professors be drawn to MIT?). However, there is already a tremendous demand for admission (from students) and competitive hiring processes (for professors). So...how many other comparable institutions will follow suit? Will universities in California adopt, oppose, or ignore?
Or even better, students with the right attitude towards this issue will flock to MIT, creating the right long term culture for the institution.
They should make applicant write a compulsory essay on the topic of free speech.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because they are supposed to be top researchers in their field. And I doubt you'll find a world-wide renowned scientist in biology who believes sex is merely a social construct. So these goals are at least partially incompatible. Universities should be about research, science, teaching and teaching students to educate themselves. Following the dogma of DEI is incompatible with teaching students to educate themselves.
I think you’ve misinterpreted the common meme. The common meme is that gender or race are social constructs. I haven’t heard the meme sex is a social construct.