111–120 of 148 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Schrodinger predicted the double helix structure of DNA decades before it was observed to be fair.
Maybe he did and maybe he didn't, but what's the value of a completely speculative prediction?
> She supposedly sat on the image for months without realizing its significance, only for Watson to understand it at a glance. That's not the lore as I learned it. The lore is that Franklin sat on the data for months before analyzing it (she wanted to collect more data). Then W+C visited her lab and saw the data, but did not instantly understand it. Instead, the lore is that they figured out the structure of the DNA…
Schrodinger predicted the double helix structure of DNA decades before it was observed to be fair.
https://www.encyclopedia.com/science-and-technology/biology-...
> She supposedly sat on the image for months without realizing its significance, only for Watson to understand it at a glance. That's not the lore as I learned it. The lore is that Franklin sat on the data for months before analyzing it (she wanted to collect more data). Then W+C visited her lab and saw the data, but did not instantly understand it. Instead, the lore is that they figured out the structure of the DNA…
Schrodinger predicted the double helix structure of DNA decades before it was observed to be fair.
Franklin... died of ovarian cancer in 1958 at just 37 This is news to me. I've heard before that supposedly her work was "stolen" by men in the field. I have always thought it more likely that she thought she needed more evidence or something like that. Women seem to have trouble getting good mentors and, like Vinny in My Cousin Vinny , may be weak when it comes to procedure -- aka the culture of the appropriate way…
Was she excluded from that world of informal exchanges due to pride, personality, or sexism? I can guess myself. That blurb doesn't necessarily mean that she was bad at networking.
It also strikes me as an unfortunate happenstance and not a conscious and intentional plot to deny women career advancement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The value we place on the skills that IQ tests measure It's not even that. Imagine there is an isolated population on a remote island that is legitimately very low on general intelligence, "nobody can ever learn to count past ten" kinda low, yet undeniably human. What would be a reasonable policy toward such people?
To apologise for such a unidimensional interpretation of intelligence? Maybe they harness their intelligence to survival in their environment. What would the measure of such an intelligence be? What if you've never been posed a logical puzzle before, or even had a written language, just oral tradition. Are we saying that the western definition of intelligence discounts all other forms of mentation and application of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Was she excluded from that world of informal exchanges due to pride, personality, or sexism? I can guess myself. That blurb doesn't necessarily mean that she was bad at networking.
Men being uncomfortable making small talk with female colleagues for fear of it being misinterpreted by someone strikes me as a serious barrier to female professionals successfully networking. It also strikes me as an unfortunate happenstance and not a conscious and intentional plot to deny women career advancement.
It was the height of the housewife era. Women were actively discouraged from working and there was a massive amount of clear and outright sexism towards those who chose to have a career. It seems much more likely to me that they didn't consider her an equal part of the team and that's why she was left out of the story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Men being uncomfortable making small talk with female colleagues for fear of it being misinterpreted by someone strikes me as a serious barrier to female professionals successfully networking. It also strikes me as an unfortunate happenstance and not a conscious and intentional plot to deny women career advancement.
We're talking about the 50s. There was almost no fear of repercussions from being inappropriate towards women in the workplace. You might run into an angry husband or brother, and that was about it. It was the height of the housewife era. Women were actively discouraged from working and there was a massive amount of clear and outright sexism towards those who chose to have a career. It seems much more likely to me th…
The height of the housewife era was funded in part by the high savings rates during WW2 when many married couples were de facto DINKs -- dual income, no kids -- because she was Rosie the Riveter, he was serving in the military overseas and, as Lucille Ball once said, you can't exactly get pregnant by phoning it in.
Furthermore, most scenarios contain myriad factors and I'm much more interested in finding a path forward than in figuring out who to blame for the past.
It's telling that the controversy only surrounds Franklin's contributions, not Wilkins', presumably because of her gender and the need to promote women's historical contribution to science. I understand the desire to do that, as the theory goes that girls can only be interested in science if they know of women who have excelled previously. (I'm not sure I completely buy this, but I'm not about to die on that hill.)
However, I'm glad this article was published, as it gives some balance to what has become (as per) a deeply biased and divisive discussion, mostly, I have to say, by the myth-making and narratives of one side.
To add a personal anecdote, I'll note that my son was straight-up taught (by his female science teacher) that Watson and Crick did not discover the structure of DNA but stole it from Franklin. I'm still not sure I've completely disabused him of this idea.
My take away from the article is that Watson and Crick were the ones who finally cracked the puzzle, but that Franklin and Wilkins' (and others') findings were a key part. It's telling that the controversy only surrounds Franklin's contributions, not Wilkins', presumably because of her gender and the need to promote women's historical contribution to science. I understand the desire to do that, as the theory goes tha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please then provide some references to the e literature you’ve read supporting your claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof as the saying goes.
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/doc/10.1.1.372.6092 Meta-analysis of the results of over six million participants tested for cognitive ability or aptitude that found a difference in average scores between Black and White individuals of 1.1 standard deviations. And if you are curious about the relationship between IQ and genetics this Wikipedia page has a ton of cited research: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritabili…