Earlier quoted context omitted.
Men are much more likely to have a very low IQ and this is uncontroversial. Are they socialized this way or is increased variability only in one direction.
No, that is extraordinarily controversial.
[deleted]
Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
241–248 of 248 posts
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#242Isn't Quillette a right-wing propaganda outlet? I have them blocked on Twitter.
Extraordinary.
"I don't know a particular thing, but I'm censoring it anyway and (because?) I heard it was "right-wing"."
Read their (succinct) about page to find out more (http://quillette.com/about/), and consider reading their articles for yourself, especially before echoing any disinformation you've acquired from your trusty sources.
Your comment adds nothing to the discussion. Mine only serves to help guide you in thinking for yourself.
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#243Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair point, demand is too strong a term. He specifically attacked funding for programs for minorities or women, and any hiring practises with emphasis on diversity, as being "based on false assumptions generated by our biases" (supposedly the creeping "leftist" ideology that's taking over Google) and that they "can actually increase race and gender tensions" without backing this up. I'm not going to argue against tha…
What he was saying was that if these biological differences are real, then we ought to expect unequal representation in engineering of women. And therefore, diversity programs that aim for equal representation are misguided and doomed to failure.
You use the word "therefore", but it is in the connecting logic between your first and second sentences that Damore brings in a lot more than biological differences. For example, he claims that the opinions of staff at Google are clouded by leftist ideology, and that this determines the manner in which it attempts to increase workplace diversity.
Again, I am neither advocating for or against the truth of this. I'm pointing out that Damore did more than simply highlight biological differences. I think that's important because the shallow way it is discussed - e.g. in the linked article - only leads to divisiveness.
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
What he was saying was that if these biological differences are real, then we ought to expect unequal representation in engineering of women. And therefore, diversity programs that aim for equal representation are misguided and doomed to failure.
You use the word "therefore", but it is in the connecting logic between your first and second sentences that Damore brings in a lot more than biological differences. For example, he claims that the opinions of staff at Google are clouded by leftist ideology, and that this determines the manner in which it attempts to increase workplace diversity. Again, I am neither advocating for or against the truth of this. I'm po…
So, you think that his statements garnered controversy because he proposed policy amendments and didn't simply leave things at "innate biological differences might explain these disparities better than bias"? I think that's a pretty profound misreading of the situation.
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#246This seems new, and passed over in all the comments so far: > None of them had ever heard of a paper in any field being disappeared after formal publication. Rejected prior to publication? Of course. Retracted? Yes, but only after an investigation, the results of which would then be made public by way of explanation. But simply disappeared? Never. If a formally refereed and published paper can later be erased from th…
Looks like there's no hard copy. It's totally online.[0] I checked https://web.archive.org/ but the 2017/10/23 snapshot ends at p. 1539,[1] and the 2017/12/01 snapshot has the substitute paper.[2] Ajay Kumar, Niteesh Sahni, and Dinesh Singh Invariance under finite Blaschke factors on BMOA 1641 So unless someone grabbed it, it's toast. Except for the preprint, anyway. 0) http://nyjm.albany.edu/nyjm.html 1) https://web…
It's still available on the site, AND I've grabbed it. http://nyjm.albany.edu/j/2017/23-72v-orig.pdf
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#247Skim the preprint https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.04184 , especially section 7. The article is not fit for publication in a mathematical journal, it is cosplaying as math. To cite: > The following simple proposition may be well known, but since no reference is known to the author, a proof is included for completeness. >Proposition 7.1. N(µ, σ1) is more variable than N(µ, σ2) if and only if σ1 > σ2. >Proof: [lots of lines]…
arXiv contains more recent versions of the paper, it's probably a good idea to check the versions closer to the publication date. In my uneducated opinion they are even less mathy than v9.
In addition, the NYJM version of the paper is also still available: http://nyjm.albany.edu/j/2017/23-72v-orig.pdf
Re: Academic Activists Send a Published Paper Down the Memory Hole
#248Here's a blog post discussing this:
https://gowers.wordpress.com/2018/09/09/has-an-uncomfortable...
Here's a "Statement addressing unfounded allegations." by the Mathematical Intelligencer:
https://math.uchicago.edu/~wilkinso/Statement.html
And here's a "Statement in response to Ted Hill's unfounded allegations." by the New York Journal of Mathematics: