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

Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

reason.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 906 posts

Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

#621

Post by jvanderbot »

rhaksw wrote: post #173

Free Speech for Me--But Not for Thee: How the American Left and Right Relentlessly Censor Each Other (1992) [1] is a good read on how we got to a point where our ability to communicate across ideologies appears to be broken in many ways. For example, in 1963 Yale disinvited George Wallace, who was popular in the deep south, as a speaker. As a result, observers were deprived of a chance to hear opposing speakers' argu…

I'm surprised Haidt's own Righteous Mind is not the first recommendation for reading about the widening political divide. It's fantastic.

Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

#622

Post by killdozer »

rhaksw wrote: post #173

Free Speech for Me--But Not for Thee: How the American Left and Right Relentlessly Censor Each Other (1992) [1] is a good read on how we got to a point where our ability to communicate across ideologies appears to be broken in many ways. For example, in 1963 Yale disinvited George Wallace, who was popular in the deep south, as a speaker. As a result, observers were deprived of a chance to hear opposing speakers' argu…

` Yale disinvited George Wallace, who was popular in the deep south` Wow that's crazy, why was this Wallace figure so popular in the deep south? I vaguely remember there being some minor political movement around the 50s and 60s but I can't quite place my finger on it.

Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

#623

Post by that_guy_iain »

brightball wrote: post #572

He’s right to do so. Statements that your research must be presented with a filter based on how it will advance political goals calls into question the integrity of all research. When people don’t “trust the science” this will be why. But further, I’d never seen the statement from antiracist before…wow. The idea that the only cure for discrimination is discrimination is akin to saying the only cure for violence is vi…

> He’s right to do so. Statements that your research must be presented with a filter based on how it will advance political goals calls into question the integrity of all research. When people don’t “trust the science” this will be why.

When I started to read it, I thought it would be about making a statement about how we should be diverse. Not that he would have to present only science that is about diversity.

The second I read there would be a litmus test for studies I was right onboard with him quitting.

Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

#624

Post by rayiner »

brightball wrote: post #572

He’s right to do so. Statements that your research must be presented with a filter based on how it will advance political goals calls into question the integrity of all research. When people don’t “trust the science” this will be why. But further, I’d never seen the statement from antiracist before…wow. The idea that the only cure for discrimination is discrimination is akin to saying the only cure for violence is vi…

> But further, I’d never seen the statement from antiracist before…wow. The idea that the only cure for discrimination is discrimination is akin to saying the only cure for violence is violence. It’s abject insanity that such a notion is being advanced in society.

Kendi is just advocating for a system of racial preferences administered by "good white people." That's been a hobby horse of a segment of the political left since the Nixon administration. Decades later, it still remains unpopular even among the minorities it is supposed to help: https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2019/05/08/americans-see-adv.... But center left think tanks and advocacy organizations won't let it go. Even the most liberal state in the country defeating it resoundingly won't dissuade them: https://www.americanprogress.org/article/california-not-bell.... So keep expecting it to pop up in different guises until they manage to get their way.

Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

#625

Post by lupire »

darawk wrote: post #548
bjourne wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you separate potential racism from cultural differences? By conducting studies where you study the effect of the race variable. This has been done many times over in multiple countries and the results have shown that colored people and racial minorities are discriminated against. But despite the vast amount of empirical data, people still refuse to believe that racial discrimination is a factor in the job ma…

People love to cite this study as an example of absolute proof of discrimination, but it isn't. There is an obvious rational non-racist explanation for the outcome in question, and it is affirmative action. A black person, a white person, and an asian person with the exact same credentials mean extremely different things in terms of absolute rather than relative competence level, as a consequence of affirmative actio…

That's good information for me to consider when hiring for my firm, Standardized Test Taking, Inc.

Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

#626

Post by bjourne »

mhuffman wrote: post #517
bjourne wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you separate potential racism from cultural differences? By conducting studies where you study the effect of the race variable. This has been done many times over in multiple countries and the results have shown that colored people and racial minorities are discriminated against. But despite the vast amount of empirical data, people still refuse to believe that racial discrimination is a factor in the job ma…

>despite the vast amount of empirical data Well, your examples seem pretty cherry-picked and not necessarily generally empirical (ie. lots of embedded subjectivity). Now your first link is more interesting and is usually the one that everyone pulls out as "absolute proof" that discrimination is live and well in modern hiring against Black people. I wonder, though, how much of this is in the bias of the experimenters…

I have just one question; how many Israeli Palestinians and Indian dalits are named Air Jordan?

Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

#627

Post by seti0Cha »

pessimizer wrote: post #508
namelessoracle wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only time stopping viruses has ever worked is via vaccines. Exposing people to it and letting them build immunity to it.

One common characteristic amongst the people involved in today's standard angry mobs is a total inability to defend their opinion, and a total unwillingness to engage. Instead, they snipe by repeating things they sort of remember someone else saying and post memes, then disappear when engaged. A kind of personal deplatforming, where they don't allow contrary opinions to have access to their ears. The way you learn ho…

With the beneficial side effect of sometimes revealing that you are in fact wrong, thereby allowing you to improve your understanding. It’s sad and telling that people don’t seem to consider this possibility.

Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

#628

Post by toomim »

anon_123g987 wrote: post #561
sacrosancty wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I "just Googled" it: > In recent decades, as understanding of human genetics has advanced, claims of inherent differences in intelligence between races have been broadly rejected by scientists on both theoretical and empirical grounds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence The article is full of references of primary sources that support this claim.

That is the #9 most controversial article in wikipedia, historically: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/the-ten-most-contr...

It is heavily censored with wikipedia's left-leaning bias. Go read the talk page to see it in action.

Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

#629

Post by amanaplanacanal »

mkmk3 wrote: post #349
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have always made a distinction between things that are not the fault of the individual (skin color, gender, ethnicity) and things that are (speech and actions). Which seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Religion (/dressed up ideologies)?

This one is in flux, I suspect. In the past, people were born into their religion, and today, at least in the west, it is becoming more common for people to choose their religion. So I guess this is the exception that proves the rule.

Re: Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society

#630

Post by meowtimemania »

beowulfey wrote: post #579
darawk wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Affirmative action policies mechanically have this consequence. Asians have the highest test scores (among the racial groupings commonly used for AA policies), and affirmative action policies effectively z-score test scores by racial group for the purpose of admittance. The effect I described is a mechanical consequence of these two facts, it doesn't require any further assump…

Let me try again. You receive three resumes for a job application, for three humans of three different races. They have the exact same credentials. You immediately assume one of the three is the brightest of them, because your understanding of Affirmative Action Policies says this particular race has the highest likelihood of having higher overall test scores. One of the other two could have had the highest possible…

I think what GP said was logical. Imagine Harvard has 3 entrance criteria, and the criteria a student receives depends on the first letter of their first name:

* A name: must be in top 1% of test scores

* B name: must be in top 5% of test scores

* C name: must be in top 10% of test scores

The following 3 students are admitted:

* Allison (is in top 1%)

* Brian (is in top 4%)

* Caitlin (is in top 1%)

We can only safely assume that Allison is in the top 1% because her criteria certifies it. Even though Caitlin in actuality is in the top 1%, because her entrance criteria is more lax, we are not sure.

I think this is one downside of affirmative action, people are unsure if a person passes based on affirmative action or purely on merit. Now we consider the upsides and downsides of affirmative action, and decide whether it should be implemented.

Post reply on HN