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

MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

whyevolutionistrue.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 807 posts

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#591

Post by HideousKojima »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #482
Aurornis wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve heard this same argument for DEI statements every time the topic has been debated: They sidestep arguments about DEI statements and instead retreat to safer arguments about how advancing DEI is a good thing. On one hand, I get it. Arguing for DEI in an abstract sense is much easier than arguing for specific interventions. On the other hand, this is the textbook example of a Motte-and-bailey fallacy, where the de…

> On the other hand, this is the textbook example of a Motte-and-bailey fallacy In a textbook, it would be called "equivocation". > where the debater conflates two topics Yep. I continue to be somewhat disturbed by the fact that giving a new name to a problem we've recognized for thousands of years has apparently increased awareness. Did people not realize equivocation was bad before Scott Alexander?

The original SSC article about Motte-and-Bailey used "strategic equivocation" as an alternate name, not just plain old equivocation. I.e. intentionally equivocating whenever is convenient for some political/social/whatever goal

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#592

Post by kortilla »

rr808 wrote: post #458
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #81

In the spirit of trying to learn something from the community: while I can certainly understand the rationale and goals behind DEI programs (many of which I agree with, others not), I honestly can't understand these "DEI statements" at all. They always seemed very "1984" to me, and almost designed to engender resentment in a way that would ultimately backfire. So perhaps I'm in a like-minded echo chamber, but is ther…

I dont like the DEI industry, but affirmative action is good. Slavery ended 150 years ago and its disgraceful that so many African-Americans still live zero wealth, poor jobs, with second rate schools and healthcare. Many/most corporate jobs really dont require a lot of unique skills, its good that employers have a preference to hire under represented minorities, hopefully it'll help improve society for all of us.

Tons of people had it shitty much more recently who aren’t black.

Means testing already covers all of the “zero wealth, poor jobs, and second rate schools and healthcare”. Being a minority has jack shit to do with that.

Any of the disadvantages the minorities have should be tested for directly and those should be targeted. That way all disadvantaged populations benefit and we’re not giving unfair advantages to the minority who grew up wealthy.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#593

Post by philwelch »

xyst wrote: post #337

What the hell is a “DEI” statement anyways? The site is a bit light on what this means, only a bunch of satirical and sarcastic posts. Almost feels like it was generated by LLM. Is it something like this? “I helped a group of first generation, low income students apply to college and obtain $50,000 in grants” Not sure what’s wrong with this…

During the red scare, there was a movement to try and force professors to sign loyalty oaths stating that they weren’t communist. Imagine that this went one step further: rather than signing a loyalty pledge, they required professors to compose their own loyalty statements. And that they would be judged on the ideological correctness of their statement. For instance, it wouldn’t be enough to pledge not to be communist; they would also had to pledge to be actively anti-communist. This didn’t happen during the red scare, but if you s/communist/racist, it is happening now.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#594

Post by squokko »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #81

In the spirit of trying to learn something from the community: while I can certainly understand the rationale and goals behind DEI programs (many of which I agree with, others not), I honestly can't understand these "DEI statements" at all. They always seemed very "1984" to me, and almost designed to engender resentment in a way that would ultimately backfire. So perhaps I'm in a like-minded echo chamber, but is ther…

There was a very simple reason for them: to hire more non-Asian minority faculty. Just as with SAT scores, if you evaluate candidates numerically, Asian faculty will take ~50% of the spots and Black faculty will take ~1% of the spots. But if you add a job requirement of "has helped do DEI woo for Black students" then it's a lot easier to justify hiring the Black candidate.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#595

Post by [deleted] »

fsckboy wrote: post #574
justinclift wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For that, does "asians" mean people from the middle of asia (ie middle east), or people from south east asia (ie oriental)? Asking because the term has different meanings in say the UK (asian -> from middle east) vs Australia (asian -> from south east asia).

> people from south east asia (ie oriental) it is actually more common from the European and Middle Eastern context to call the (Turkish and Levantine and Arabian) Middle East "oriental"; in Israel, "oriental food" is hummus and felafel; the Orient Express train went to Istanbul. East Asian is the term for ... east Asians and of course the SE Asians you mentioned, and South Asian is the term for "India+Pakistan+" peo…

[deleted]

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#596

Post by alpaca128 »

kanbara wrote: post #503
jiggawatts wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> seemed very "1984" to me In Australia, there was a recent introduction of "Acknowledgement of Country" at both the federal and state government level. Universities and other large institutions are also "doing their part". For example, in video call meetings with more than 'n' people, a manager will read out a statement for a minute at the start of the call acknowledging the "traditional custodians of the land upon…

it’s great that you as a person of european descent can be annoyed that people in the office have to make statements about traditional ownership of the land. You know how aboriginal australians live, and yet you think that changing attitudes towards the past—and reason why certain groups are disadvantaged—doesn’t help? it’s not a “sin” — it was genocide over land that did not belong to the Crown. it’s a good thing th…

If reading a mandatory statement is ever changing attitudes then it's not in the direction you want. Doing this serves no real purpose, and I bet if you asked any of the affected people they'd prefer more than forced empty words.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#597

Post by kortilla »

rayiner wrote: post #400
tptacek wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's "their" country? It's yours too. Be the dog-free workplace you want to see in the world.

I don’t subscribe to that view of nationhood. It’s a constant source of discomfort (not just at the office, but visiting people’s houses or visiting my in laws) but it’s not my place to impose on the people whose ancestors built this country. I feel bad enough that I won’t let my wife have a dog, but I have to draw the line somewhere.

If it’s just cultural have you thought of “getting the fuck over it” and letting your wife get a dog? You seem like a logical person, unless you specifically have an issue with them that isn’t cultural baggage, just embrace the ability to have dogs.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#598

Post by hnben »

nucleardog wrote: post #559
resolutebat wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Context for others who missed this particular storm in a teacup: https://freespeechunion.org/harvard-professor-needed-armed-p... On the question of non-lethal uses of force, the study found “sometimes quite large” racial differences in police use of force, even after accounting for “a large set of controls designed to account for important contextual and behavioural factors at the time of the police-civilian interact…

Any media coverage that isn’t from a niche right wing news site yelling about the woke kids?

ground-news says "low factuality" and "100% right wing coverage". https://ground.news/article/all-hell-broke-loose-when-racist...

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#600

Post by squigz »

inglor_cz wrote: post #142
worik wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am unsure about most of those countries but Japan and Israel have a reputation for being extremely racist Prejudice of any form is unhelpful. Racism is particularly nasty

DEI is prejudice squared. Individuals are stuffed into tight racial and gender boxes in a big bout of social engineering. It is better than stuffing them into boxcars and deporting them, but ultimately the logic behind those treatments is the same. You are not John Doe, you are White or Black or whatever, a Lego brick that can be replaced by another Lego brick of the same color and the bureaucratic system will be hap…

> I can't think of a better way to deepen and perpetuate absurd divisions among people than the identity obsession and pseudo-quotas that the modern American progressive movement is pushing.

I can: going back to ignoring the division that was already being perpetuated.

Post reply on HN