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

51–60 of 906 posts

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

#51

Post by kenjackson »

imgabe wrote: post #47
kenjackson wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems that much of the US felt that way about Kaepernick.

Yes, you might get some criticism for it, just like Haidt is. A private organization like the NFL or the SPSS might not let you be a member if you don’t follow their rules. That’s within the bounds of free speech. We only have freedoms by continually asserting them and sometimes sacrificing some social capital to use them.

I get that. I was just trying to understand from the original person I was responding to if they found the National Anthem “requirements” as repulsive.

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

#52

Post by whythre »

SamReidHughes wrote: post #19
imgabe wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> newly adopted requirement that everybody presenting research at the group's conferences explain how their submission advances "equity, inclusion, and anti-racism goals." Diversity is fine. But every single piece of research has to be related to diversity? Is it not possible to do research on anything else that maybe doesn’t have anything to do with identity issues? This is not a statement about promoting diversity,…

It's not so much off-topic research. The research output of much of social psychology tends to hurt the cause of DEI. They want to stop that.

That sounds gross and corrupt.

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

#53

Post by whythre »

Manuel_D wrote: post #50
defrost wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Is it not possible to do research on anything else that maybe doesn’t have anything to do with identity issues? It's the Society for Personality and Social Psychology ... You may as well ask is not possible to submit to the Association for Computing Machinery a piece of research unrelated to computing.

No, it's more like requiring everyone submitting papers to the ACM to explain how their research will result in a more equitable society. That'd exclude a ton of research topics: how is a faster rendering technique going to result in anti-racist outcomes? I guess you cant submit that paper.

Or you just bend over backwards to make it fit ideologically.

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

#54

Post by rippercushions »

rnk wrote: post #3
armagon wrote: post #2

I applaud Mr. Haidt for standing up for what he believes in.

Quoted post unavailable.

"Anti-racist" here requires signing up to the following creed:

> "The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination."

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

#55

Post by kenjackson »

busterarm wrote: post #49
kenjackson wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These questions and what you said are two different things. You don’t need to treat any group poorly and none of those questions suggest you do. You made a leap that doesn’t logically follow.

You clearly have not read the book or even the quoted parts of it in the article. This quote is highlighted by Haidt who even supports and says there is a place for anti-racism. > "The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination." The book makes its point of view…

Your characterization of poor treatment seems like a leap. I guess the question for you is: if I discriminate against you in the post in such a way it creates inequity, but never attempt to correct it but merely say from this point forward no one can discriminate — is everyone being treated fairly?

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

#56

Post by throwawayallday »

rnk wrote: post #3
armagon wrote: post #2

I applaud Mr. Haidt for standing up for what he believes in.

Quoted post unavailable.

>He quit that group because he can't sign a statement that he is anti-racist, and supports diversity and inclusion?

Can you reply to my comment with the anti-racist and supportive of diversity and inclusion phrase "it's OK to be White"?

>I'm from the american south. It was full of racists when I lived there, who were all against diversity, hated the idea of needing to hire minorities to be teachers, things like that. There was no need to hire them, everything was fine. It didn't matter that all the school principals were white men, there was no point to a kid seeing a black man or woman as the principal I heard.

I'm from the american west. It was full of racists when I lived there, who were all against diversity, hated the idea of needing to hire whites to be teachers, things like that. There was no need to hire them, everything was fine. It didn't matter that all the school principals were women of color, there was no point to a kid seeing a white man or woman as the principal I heard.

>That's all I can take way from the usually white men who see some incredible threat from saying there's a benefit in including more voices. I can only see this as people threatened by including other voices that might disagree with their own.

That's all I can take way from the usually women of color who see some incredible threat from saying there's a benefit in including more voices. I can only see this as people threatened by including other voices that might disagree with their own.

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

#57

Post by imgabe »

SamReidHughes wrote: post #19
imgabe wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> newly adopted requirement that everybody presenting research at the group's conferences explain how their submission advances "equity, inclusion, and anti-racism goals." Diversity is fine. But every single piece of research has to be related to diversity? Is it not possible to do research on anything else that maybe doesn’t have anything to do with identity issues? This is not a statement about promoting diversity,…

It's not so much off-topic research. The research output of much of social psychology tends to hurt the cause of DEI. They want to stop that.

Research should not be dependent on whether or not it hurts any cause.

If the research is poorly done, exclude it for that reason.

If not, maybe re-examine what your cause is in light of the research.

Copernicus's research into the Earth revolving around the Sun hurt the Catcholic church's cause of being the ultimate source of truth for all humanity. They wanted to put a stop to that...

Starting with the answer and rejecting anything that doesn't support it is not how research is supposed to work.

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

#58

Post by [deleted] »

whythre wrote: post #53
Manuel_D wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's more like requiring everyone submitting papers to the ACM to explain how their research will result in a more equitable society. That'd exclude a ton of research topics: how is a faster rendering technique going to result in anti-racist outcomes? I guess you cant submit that paper.

Or you just bend over backwards to make it fit ideologically.

[deleted]

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

#59

Post by rippercushions »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #44
tomp wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t believe the propaganda. “Anti-racism” is actually about racism against Asians. “Equity” is actually about lowering the standards and destroying meritocracy. “Inclusion” is actually about excluding people that have different political or moral opinions (e.g. that don’t want to be racist against Asians or that support meritocracy).

Quoted post unavailable.

I believe GP is referencing American university admissions, where DEI-flavored racial quotas tend to disadvantage Asians when compared to a race-blind system based purely on standardized tests.

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

#60

Post by busterarm »

kenjackson wrote: post #55
busterarm wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You clearly have not read the book or even the quoted parts of it in the article. This quote is highlighted by Haidt who even supports and says there is a place for anti-racism. > "The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination." The book makes its point of view…

Your characterization of poor treatment seems like a leap. I guess the question for you is: if I discriminate against you in the post in such a way it creates inequity, but never attempt to correct it but merely say from this point forward no one can discriminate — is everyone being treated fairly?

You say it's a leap but then you present an argument where only way to achieve "fairness" is to engage in discrimination the other way. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE BOOK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CALLS FOR!

Life isn't and will never be fair. The fairness you seem to be seeking is "eye for an eye". You know what does make life fair though? We're all headed for worms and dirt eventually. None of us escape that. That's how you square the inequalities of what happens in between.

I can't engage with you any more on this. The doublethink required to accept your argument is off the charts.

Post reply on HN