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

Who cares about diversity?

fakenous.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 536 posts

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#231

Post by tptacek »

cxr wrote: post #135
tptacek wrote: post #89

The whole blog is like this; it's all sort of comically smug "everybody else in the entire world is wrong, and here is a 7-point axiomatic derivation proving it"†, much of it depending on specific definitions of specific words. Check-mate, atheists! There are lots of good, sharp, critical things to say about the DEI movement, most especially "institutional" DEI, but you can't meaningfully say them when you write with…

> There are lots of good, sharp, critical things to say about the DEI movement Would you mind saying them?

I can rattle some off, I guess? Institutional DEI can be elitist, furthering the interests of well-off credentialed people at the expense of those it claims to help; performative; a way of short-circuiting real debates about values that are uncomfortable or that cut against elite interests; largely defined in terms relevant to competing groups of rich white people; a surreptitious way of laundering policy arguments that have nothing to do with righting past injustices ("equity-washing"); counterproductive, in the sense of organizing and motivating opposition to social justice by adopting the language least persuasive to those who need to be persuaded, and, further, by reducing the effectiveness of organizations that would otherwise naturally work to reduce inequality. I'm sure there's a bunch more.

You're asking that question, I assume, as a bid for a show of good faith that I'm not just knee-jerking anything that opposes "diversity" efforts. That's fair enough! I don't know that we want to litigate the whole concept, though; I'm just here to point out a really bad argument.

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#232

Post by [deleted] »

zozbot234 wrote: post #74
bheadmaster wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How would a racist indian national deeply entrenched in caste culture help my company be less racist? To be fair, there are many people from traditionally chauvinistic groups who despise the very chauvinism they live in. Many of them may be intelligent and productive people. Dismissing each and every individual because of the group is the root of discrimination. Some attempts at diversity may go too far - toleratin…

You can't meaningfully enforce open-mindedness or tolerance. The very idea is an oxymoron. The whole notion of tolerance is based on the idea that we might sometimes find it expedient to work alongside people we don't agree with about everything.

[deleted]

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#233

Post by joe-collins »

jedberg wrote: post #180

So here's where I'm stuck: On the one hand I totally understand the objections to categorizing people based on things that won't affect their job performance per se -- skin color, gender, who they are attracted to, etc. But on the other hand, those people have been systematically discriminated against, well, forever. So the question is, where should the fix be applied? If the only people who have the skills to do the…

> So the question is, where should the fix be applied?

I'd posit that there is no good answer to this question, and that attempting to find or optimize one is a distraction. In very broad strokes, if you try to fix a problem too slowly, bad things keep happening; if you try to fix it too fast, you're liable to upset other things around you (e.g. the economy, delicate sensibilities, your short-term profitability, etc.). And the problem is too grossly high-dimensional to hope for any kind of consensus (or often, any analysis) at any level of detail beyond simply "yup, that's a problem".

With no hope of finding an ideal solution, the pragmatic response is to just address the problems you can see with the resources you can afford. Trust in being directionally correct.

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#234

Post by tptacek »

colpabar wrote: post #212
pcwalton wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The author isn't a rando! This is a tenured professor of philosophy at a major university. You know, writing like a high school sophomore on a message board. Man, that's disappointing. I like Prof. Huemer's writings on free will and philosophy of mind [1] a lot ("Existence Is Evidence of Immortality" is a fun one). I was unaware of his blog up until now—reading it makes me think significantly less of him. [1]: http…

If you knew someone who didn't like mushrooms, and you saw them enjoy a dish with mushrooms in it without knowing, and then after you told them they said they didn't like it at all actually, wouldn't that seem silly?

No? Sewer rat might, after all, taste like pumpkin pie. In Tokyo, my wife once very much enjoyed a piece of sushi that turned out to be whale. She's not all like, "I guess we eat whale now".

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#235

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

tptacek wrote: post #189
throwaway894345 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the idea that every term should be crystalized down to a single unambiguous meaning is, ironically, quintessentially Orwellian. Sure, but no one is advocating for a single unambiguous meaning of the term, the parent seems to be noting that concern should be paid when a word/phrase develops an opposite (or at least very contradictory) meaning, presumably in the context of a charged political environment. You may not…

Oh, this blog post is sure advocating for a single unambiguous meaning of the term "diversity"; the whole argument falls apart without that definition.

I dunno, I felt like it hewed a lot closer to the original meaning of the word diversity than it's current usage in political parlance.

I too think that diversity is more than skin deep but apparently skin is what matters today \shrug

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#236

Post by TremendousJudge »

lazyeye wrote: post #167
SR2Z wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The implication is that somehow being correct in an argument matters more than tone, which is... childish. If you want to have a productive argument (as opposed to just being an asshole screaming at passerby) you need to convince people that you are worth engaging. This means showing good faith and not being overly dismissive (i.e. tone).

You think tone matters more then being correct?

Most people do, which is why this site will ban a user for being an asshole, but not for being incorrect.

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#237

Post by colpabar »

tptacek wrote: post #151
matthewrobertso wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"sort of comically smug"

Also not an ad-hominem argument! In fact, it's even less of an ad-hominem argument than "written like a teenager" is. And it is in fact smug!

I mean I think the point is that the top comment for this article is now about the tone of the article rather than the contents. You yourself say there are valid criticisms to be made, so why not do that and compare them to the article instead?

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#238

Post by jiveturkey »

> Most fundamentally, in this context, diversity would be variety of ideas, experiences, and attitudes, especially those relevant to the things that people are learning about in school.

In the context the author wants us to assume, sure. But that is not what big-D Diversity is.

"When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less." - Humpty Dumpty

In this case, of course, this is very intentional on behalf of the author, to argue a very specific agenda. Which I guess is fair enough, except that it is quite provocative in a generally bad way for society, IMHO. The author knows better and shouldn't depend on this ... diversion (heh) to promote his point.

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#239

Post by registeredcorn »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #178
missingrib wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This tone is very common in academic philosophy. I would characterize it as being low in rhetoric and extremely blunt. I don't really see how it sounds like "a high school sophomore".

In general the argument template is "If you're not 100% committed to realizing a more extreme version of your mission statement than the status quo, then you're being hypocritical and cannot be taken seriously." We see the same thing pop up in, "You don't like capitalism, yet you still participate in it," and "You don't like cars, yet you still drive places." It's the sort of tired teenager type argument that doesn't…

If your concern is with tone, don't you think your concerns are in the wrong place?

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#240

Post by eweise »

As someone currently helping my son fill out college applications, I find this article 100% on point. For one public college, there are only two essay questions and they both deal with diversity. How does a white middle class male answer? He has an incredible fascination with weather and wants to pursue that as a major. Does he emphasize this aspect since it sets him apart from other applicants. Logically, that would be the right choice. But we know the university really is filtering out people like my son, so we will probably talk about his ancestor's immigration story and how that has affected his worldview, blah, blah blah.
Post reply on HN