131–140 of 906 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> 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.
Are you saying there is not a single aspect of personality that is unrelated to race? That seems pretty racist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For somebody who was born behind the Iron Curtain, this has very strong Soviet vibes. Back then, it was advisable to stuff quotes by Marx or Lenin into everything, even an article discussing milk production.
Don't worry, Marx is still fair game in Western academia! It has even become fashionable as of late to proclaim oneself a "socialist" (though generally some sort of "socialism with Scandinavian characteristics" is being implied).
Swedes will proudly claim to be capitalists with healthy social welfare programs.
The tax rates of New Yorkers and Californians are very similar to those across Scandinavia except that the Americans are getting way way less bang for their buck in services for that tax money due to state and local governments that are woefully ineffective. That and Norway/Sweden/Denmark have close to 1/3 public sector employment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
I think this is the quote you mean, which sounds very very different to yours? a newly adopted requirement that everybody presenting research at the group's conferences explain how their submission advances "equity, inclusion, and anti-racism goals."
"Now that many university presidents have agreed to implement many of the demands, I believe that the conflict between truth and social justice is likely to become unmanageable." Can someone ELI5 what is this conflict between truth and social justice Haidt refers to?
This is the Motte and Bailey technique. Attacking "Political Correctness" in a vague and non-specific way lets you sound noble. As soon as you specify what that means in practice you just sound like a nasty bully (at best), so best leave that implied. But a quick glance as the history of social science that these things are a direct response to, would reveal people "proving" that various groups are inferior in ways t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is the quote you mean, which sounds very very different to yours? a newly adopted requirement that everybody presenting research at the group's conferences explain how their submission advances "equity, inclusion, and anti-racism goals."
Quoted post unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because what often passes for equity/diversity/inclusion in these contexts is the farthest thing from what would be truly equitable or inclusive. True diversity is not fostered by EDI goals, these are purely about enforcing conformity. And dangerous conformity at that - many people ITT have pointed out that "anti-racist" has pretty much become code for anti-Asian.
As a hiring manager, DEI efforts have made hiring a lot more challening. For my team we pretty much can only hire experienced, senior candidates with specialized skillsets. We do hire and train up juniors from time to time when our team gets big enough and has the time to mentor effectively. Anyway, women and minority candidates do apply (and get hired) for our positions but at much lower percentages. To meet DEI goa…
"Now that many university presidents have agreed to implement many of the demands, I believe that the conflict between truth and social justice is likely to become unmanageable." Can someone ELI5 what is this conflict between truth and social justice Haidt refers to?
This is the Motte and Bailey technique. Attacking "Political Correctness" in a vague and non-specific way lets you sound noble. As soon as you specify what that means in practice you just sound like a nasty bully (at best), so best leave that implied. But a quick glance as the history of social science that these things are a direct response to, would reveal people "proving" that various groups are inferior in ways t…
Instead it seems to be at best discounting that there is a conflct to explain or at worse is participating in the conflict by defending one side of it.
I think a stronger case could in theory be made that the conflict is non existent but it's a harder position to advocate.
If this is the way NYU operates, it is no longer a university.