Who cares about diversity? • Hacker News Board

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#261

Post by DiggyJohnson » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 7:45 PM UTC

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…

I genuinely find this criticism of yours to be almost-inexcusably vapid in its own right. You're criticizing tone, not content. And your bolded, italicized dagger-marked point doesn't make sense to me without context.

Other than style and tone, what is your issue with the content of this writer's position? What are your suggestions for how it could be amended?

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#262

Post by kelseyfrog » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 7:45 PM UTC

registeredcorn wrote: post #239

kelseyfrog wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Tone? No, my concerns are purely with the rubber-stamped form of the argument. It's as ineffective in this incarnation as it is in its other forms.

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#263

Post by zozbot234 » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 7:46 PM UTC

bheadmaster wrote: post #173

zozbot234 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> 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. There's a difference between disagreeing about something in theory, and acting maliciously in order to exclude someone from your group because they disagree with you. As you said, the whole idea of tolerance boils down to tolerating disagreements. Someone who do…

> There's a difference between disagreeing about something in theory, and acting maliciously in order to exclude someone from your group

The main difference is that preventing malicious actions is generally feasible, via tweaking institutional rules (such as by outright forbidding tests of religious/ideological conformity like the ones OP discusses). That's still not enforcing anything in any substantial sense; it's just a direct tweak to the "rules of the game", meant to drive improved outcomes.

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#264

Post by tptacek » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 7:46 PM UTC

matt-attack wrote: post #245

tptacek wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This argument is written and reasoned like that of a high school sophomore" is, believe it or not, not an ad-hominem argument.

Nonetheless, critiquing the writing style rather than the substance makes it seem like you've lost the argument from the start.

I would say that the more important critique I have is of the reasoning style.

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#265

Post by DiggyJohnson » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 7:47 PM UTC

registeredcorn wrote: post #250

tptacek wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

Please, continue.

Do you disagree with these points? Do you think GP sharing their position is damaging to their person? What are you getting at? Why the snark?

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#266

Post by jfim » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 7:47 PM UTC

pcwalton wrote: post #150

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…

> 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…

The bar for publishing in a blog is much lower than an academic paper.

I don't know much about this particular professor, but part of converging towards the truth is to start somewhere which might be incorrect, then debate the flaws of that and come up with a better reasoning. Avoiding discussing or publishing thoughts that are not fully baked would be detrimental to that process, I believe.

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#267

Post by tptacek » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 7:48 PM UTC

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #235

tptacek wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

No part of my argument depends on invalidating your most intuitive definition of the term "diversity".

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#268

Post by tptacek » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 7:49 PM UTC

DiggyJohnson wrote: post #261

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…

I genuinely find this criticism of yours to be almost-inexcusably vapid in its own right. You're criticizing tone, not content. And your bolded, italicized dagger-marked point doesn't make sense to me without context. Other than style and tone, what is your issue with the content of this writer's position? What are your suggestions for how it could be amended?

No, I'm criticizing tone and content. And I don't think "vapid" is a word you get to use here: I probably read this person's blog more carefully than most of his supporters on the thread did.

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#269

Post by matt-attack » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 7:49 PM UTC

PuppyTailWags wrote: post #257

matt-attack wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonetheless, critiquing the writing style rather than the substance makes it seem like you've lost the argument from the start.

Critiquing the style of a persuasive essay makes a lot of sense to me, however, because it accurately points out a flaw that will make it less successful according to this specific reader.

I'd suggest that if a reader is less successful at grasping the crux of an essay due solely to the writing style, that merely points out a failing of the reader. Digesting essays of varying styles is an important skill that one needs as an academic. That skill needs to be fostered.

Re: Who cares about diversity?

#270

Post by hammock » Mon, Sep 12, 2022, 7:49 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #231

cxr wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 t…

>largely defined in terms relevant to competing groups of rich white people

If this frame is bad, what is the alternative?