[deleted]
Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society
41–50 of 906 posts
Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
No that's bullshit. If you ask me to say "I hate hitler and bin laden" for no reason I would have a similar reaction as well. How can people put up with this filth? It repulses and disgusts me so much when kindness, compassion and even justice are absorbed by this bureaucratic ideological machine where people say and do things out if insincerity, just as lip service to fall in line politically. How do people feel com…
How do you feel about standing for the national anthem? Does that repulse you too?
If you made it mandatory, yep, repulsive. Like that pledge of allegiance thing.
Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you feel about standing for the national anthem? Does that repulse you too?
You are generally free not to stand for the national anthem. Suppose the SPSS (the professional society Haidt left in protest) had instead made a rule that they would play the national anthem at the start of every conference and anyone who didn’t stand wouldn’t be allowed to present their research. If he had left in protest of that, would you assume he’s an unpatriotic asshole who hates America or that he’s standing…
It seems that much of the US felt that way about Kaepernick.
Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Don’t believe the propaganda. “Anti-racism” is actually about racism against Asians. “Equity” is actually about lowering the standards and destroying meritocracy. “Inclusion” is actually about excluding people that have different political or moral opinions (e.g. that don’t want to be racist against Asians or that support meritocracy).
No post body was provided.
Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society
#45Quoted post unavailable.
I understand your objection to the Kochs, but I'm not sure that it invalidates the facts in question?
Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s not the thesis of the book.
Absolutely it is and presented clearly as so. The book presents 5 questions to settle the question of "Am I racist?" __always giving primacy to the individual over the collective, or group; __always embracing the concept of individual rights to help me judge problematic social interactions; __never assessing quantities of stuff in gauging whether a policy is racist; __always attempting to embrace the “color-blind rul…
These questions and what you said are two different things. You don’t need to treat any group poorly and none of those questions suggest you do. You made a leap that doesn’t logically follow.
Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are generally free not to stand for the national anthem. Suppose the SPSS (the professional society Haidt left in protest) had instead made a rule that they would play the national anthem at the start of every conference and anyone who didn’t stand wouldn’t be allowed to present their research. If he had left in protest of that, would you assume he’s an unpatriotic asshole who hates America or that he’s standing…
It seems that much of the US felt that way about Kaepernick.
Yes, you might get some criticism for it, just like Haidt is.
A private organization like the NFL or the SPSS might not let you be a member if you don’t follow their rules. That’s within the bounds of free speech.
We only have freedoms by continually asserting them and sometimes sacrificing some social capital to use them.
Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s not true. Why do you think that?
But the SPSP requirement went a step further, dropping "diversity" in favor of "anti-racism," a term frequently associated with Boston University's Ibram X. Kendi, author of How to Be an Antiracist and other works. Among the book's passages is a widely shared one highlighted by Haidt: "The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discriminati…
In this thread I’ve noticed people have jumped from these principles, which do seem true to very specific statements about race that don’t seem true. Interesting.
Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely it is and presented clearly as so. The book presents 5 questions to settle the question of "Am I racist?" __always giving primacy to the individual over the collective, or group; __always embracing the concept of individual rights to help me judge problematic social interactions; __never assessing quantities of stuff in gauging whether a policy is racist; __always attempting to embrace the “color-blind rul…
These questions and what you said are two different things. You don’t need to treat any group poorly and none of those questions suggest you do. You made a leap that doesn’t logically follow.
You clearly have not read the book or even the quoted parts of it in the article. This quote is highlighted by Haidt who even supports and says there is a place for anti-racism.
> "The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination."
The book makes its point of view as plain as day. I haven't made any kinds of leap whatsoever.
Haidt only drew the line at his work being compelled to promote anti-racism because that's contradictory to the aim for truth and why we do research in the first place.
Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
> newly adopted requirement that everybody presenting research at the group's conferences explain how their submission advances "equity, inclusion, and anti-racism goals." Diversity is fine. But every single piece of research has to be related to diversity? Is it not possible to do research on anything else that maybe doesn’t have anything to do with identity issues? This is not a statement about promoting diversity,…
>> Is it not possible to do research on anything else that maybe doesn’t have anything to do with identity issues? It's the Society for Personality and Social Psychology ... You may as well ask is not possible to submit to the Association for Computing Machinery a piece of research unrelated to computing.
No, it's more like requiring everyone submitting papers to the ACM to explain how their research will result in a more equitable society. That'd exclude a ton of research topics: how is a faster rendering technique going to result in anti-racist outcomes? I guess you cant submit that paper.