Mandated diversity statement drives Jonathan Haidt to quit academic society • Hacker News Board

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

#701

Post by darawk » Sun, Oct 02, 2022, 10:18 PM UTC

beowulfey wrote: post #658

darawk wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. I think it's important to distinguish between probabilities and possibilities . It is possible that any of them has the highest score. However, it is most likely that the Asian does. Let me articulate th…

This is a good example, and I appreciate you trying to explain it further. But I think we are a bit like two ships passing in the night here. As I interpret it, you are trying to explain the effect of affirmative action on the likelihood that someone from a particular background is more likely to be skilled or not. I totally understand that this is an effect of AA, and that neither of us are arguing about the merits…

> However, the point that I am trying to make is that we, as a society, should be trying to ignore these obvious statistical likelihoods when we are choosing a candidate. Those statistical likelihoods have nothing to do with the candidate themselves. If we make these kinds of interpretations, we are no longer judging a candidate based on who they are, but rather who we think they might be. And who am I to make that judgement? I'm nobody special. That's all I'm trying to say, really.

Ah, ok I see. I didn't understand your point then. I think we at least kind of agree on that point. What I was trying to say is that, I don't think that it's accurate to characterize the resume study as proving racism or racial discrimination, given the bias induced by AA. At least, providing they are not going further than correcting for that bias.

I do agree with you that in an ideal world, people would try to avoid factoring that in. But, it is important to keep in mind I think that hiring decisions are often extremely consequential for the people that make them (in a way that university admissions are not), and as a consequence, asking the decision makers there to intentionally ignore pertinent information is almost always going to be a losing proposition.

I think, even if people are correcting a bit for this bias in the hiring pipeline, AA is still providing considerable value to historically disadvantaged candidates, by helping them get access to alumni networks, and presumably a higher quality education and hopefully that will be sufficient to close the remaining skill gaps over time.

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

#702

Post by dillondoyle » Sun, Oct 02, 2022, 10:19 PM UTC

aaplok wrote: post #182

yathaid wrote: post #112

"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?

The key quote is this: "most academic work has nothing to do with diversity, so these mandatory statements force many academics to betray their quasi-fiduciary duty to the truth by spinning, twisting, or otherwise inventing some tenuous connection to diversity." In other words a researcher studying a topic unrelated to diversity will need to lie by claiming that there is a link.

No. They just need to say that the research has nothing to do with DEI. It's just like a canonical tag. This whole thread is crazy to me.

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

#703

Post by deepl_derber » Sun, Oct 02, 2022, 10:21 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #309

wcerfgba wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Censorship is all these characters need to gain new followers. No, they also need a platform to make people aware of their existence, their views, and to recast their censorship to be in their favour. The whole point of no-platforming individuals is to make a statement that their views are seen as reprehensible and to stop them from being able to air those views to an audience. Not all ideological disputes are abou…

> No, they also need a platform to make people aware of their existence, their views, and to recast their censorship to be in their favour. The whole point of no-platforming individuals is to make a statement that their views are seen as reprehensible and to stop them from being able to air those views to an audience. The only way that this works is to exert total control of the content of all communications. Otherwi…

>The only way that this works is to exert total control of the content of all communications.

Not true! Just being banned from significant swaths of social media has frequently forced many prominent Nazis/alt-righters out of business. Before Kiwifarms recently had all of their major issues, they were already finding it difficult to keep the site running as a result of continued pressure on every host they switched to.

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

#704

Post by kansface » Sun, Oct 02, 2022, 10:32 PM UTC

peter422 wrote: post #574

kansface wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The military still uses it because it is highly predictive. They also have a hard cutoff at the bottom which wasn’t always the case (see McNamara’s Folly for the history of when the army accepted literally retarded people - it didn’t end well). We also see a very strong correlation between eg IQ and occupation. It is a legitimate metric of *something*.

The U.S. marine corp promoted its first black 4 star general this year. I don’t think it’s the shining example of a race-blind institution, at least as far as leadership is concerned.

You are cherry picking data. The US military has historically been far more progressive than the country as a whole. It integrated in 1948 - long before the voting rights act or the end of Jim crow. We had a black chair of the joint chiefs long before we elected a black president. Rights and privileges were extended to gay members long before they existed elsewhere.

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

#705

Post by zmgsabst » Sun, Oct 02, 2022, 10:32 PM UTC

pas wrote: post #372

zmgsabst wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that it’s okay to discriminate against poor Whites, Jews, and Asians because some are rich is entirely racist: You’re viewing people as defined by their race, not their individual attributes and histories.

No one said that, and I don't view people as that. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

> Discriminating against already well off groups to help chronically not well-off groups (affirmative action) is of course discrimination

You said exactly that.

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

#706

Post by Spivak » Sun, Oct 02, 2022, 10:37 PM UTC

ponow wrote: post #664

throwbacktictac wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm genuinely missing your point. It sou d like you're insinuating that the lack of a "normal" name is a good reason to disqualify someone from a job opportunity. That possibly implies that the resume screen uses someone's name as a discriminating factor and I don't think that it should be.

> I don't think that it should be Why is it your choice to make? When you hire someone, you're hiring everything they bring to the table. You might be wrong in your interpretation, but it's what you've got. So perhaps you find names beyond the pale, but why not dress codes too? Names and many other characteristics involve human choices well beyond genetics. You do realize that the orchestras used to hire blind, that…

> The DIE crowd does not want fairness and equality of opportunity; they want equality of outcome

I always find it weird that people see this is a bad thing. Equality of outcome is equity. Extra time for people with learning disabilities is equity, ada regulations is equity, hearing aids, glasses, booster seats, handicaps in golf and chess, giving bus seats to the elderly are all equity. Equity is the thing we naturally strive for in basically all aspects of life. Provide aid when we can, receive aid when needed.

> They want diversity hires, not hires of the maximally strong candidates.

That's not what affirmative action is, it's recognizing both the systematic and individual disadvantages that someone experienced and, potentially, depending on what they are, realizing that they have more potential than meets the eye. It's like basing hiring decisions entirely on leetcode challenges and putting on your blinders on not realizing that the people who have the time to waste on leetcode is a skewed sample of the population.

Who is the more impressive student? Alice who had a stable suburban comfortable upbringing and went to prestigious private high school and got a 34 on her ACT, or Bob who grew up with a single father, went to a public high school in an high needs district, had to work a part time job after school and babysit his little brother every day before his dad got home and got a 29?

The above is an example of an individual disadvantage, now apply that same logic to systematic disadvantages.

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

#707

Post by zdragnar » Sun, Oct 02, 2022, 10:47 PM UTC

dillondoyle wrote: post #663

zdragnar wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom of (non) association does not extend to protected groups in public spaces. Businesses can no longer exclusively serve white people, for example, since their stores are considered public accomodations. Ideology is not a protected class, however. In the case of Haidt, they are free to not present any research at conferences unless it advances their definition of equity, and he has no choice but to go along with…

That freedom of public accommodation is under attack. If it even existed in the first place; there are plenty of laws that expressly allow discrimination in deference to 'religious beliefs.' Courts, & the Supreme Court in particular, are giving far more weight to 'christian freedom' at the expense of the rest of us. Cases include recent PrEP ruling, insane football prayer ruling that willfully ignored facts, bathroom…

Religious (non) belief is itself a protected class.

If it were not, mosques would be legally compelled to hire rabbis and churches would have to consider hiring druids for services.

Where the line ought to be drawn is nowhere near as obvious as you seem to think it should be.

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

#708

Post by naasking » Sun, Oct 02, 2022, 10:48 PM UTC

deepl_derber wrote: post #697

naasking wrote: post #640

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a robust empirical difference that's seen between races. That quote is about the notion that this difference is inherent. Rather, most scientists think it's largely environmental. They wouldn't have to attribute the difference to environmental factors if there were no actual difference. So the OP is correct in saying that even if you remove discrimination there would still be differences, because the environ…

>There is a robust empirical difference that's seen between races. There's not an objective/standardized way to even measure intelligence, so you'll forgive me if I treat the claim that there's an empirical difference in intelligence between races with a mountain of skepticism.

The OP said IQ. That's a specific measure that may or may not be related to intelligence. It does have strong correlations with academic and life success though.

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

#709

Post by OOPMan » Sun, Oct 02, 2022, 11:11 PM UTC

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…

As a South African it's wild to me that just over 30 years ago Mandela warned of the dangers of this way of thinking and yet here we are...

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

#710

Post by OOPMan » Sun, Oct 02, 2022, 11:15 PM UTC

mushbino wrote: post #588

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…

You're saying the only way to end discrimination is for the victims to forgive the perpetrators? How would that work exactly? IMO, the only way to move forward is to correct past wrongs by heavily investing in affected communities economically and afa education and health. What Haidt is being asked to do here does none of these things and is purely for show.

I would like to point out that one of the important reasons South African didn't descend into a race war at the end of the apartheid was the formation of the Truth & Reconciliation Committee for precisely this reason: to forgive and reconcile.