71–80 of 248 posts
> Half his board, he explained unhappily, had told him that unless he pulled the article, they would all resign and “harass the journal” he had founded 25 years earlier “until it died.” Half a board of academics skulking to avoid controversy, ok. But becoming a hive of killer bees threatening to attacking their own hive ? That doesn't pass the smell test.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What we need to distinguish here is what exactly we're talking about being "settled science". Is "human CO2 emissions are causing an increased greenhouse effect and ocean acidification" settled science? Yes. Is "how much will that affect us and the planet at different time scales" settled science? Not completely, no. The climate system is incredibly hard to model. What scientists are doing in the latter regard is mak…
Well, reduce emissions and more seriously consider geoengineering. A lot of otherwise-reasonable climate researchers seem to have an unduly negative view of potential direct interventions in the climate.
I don't even understand why this is controversial. I've explained this to a number of women before and none of them have felt hurt. On the contrary, in fact, it makes them feel better. Humans always fixate on extremes. Men and women. It's a problem in our society. We always want to see the very best and we're not interested in others who are still way above average. There are thousands of women doing great science, e…
I don't even understand why this is controversial. I've explained this to a number of women before and none of them have felt hurt. On the contrary, in fact, it makes them feel better. Humans always fixate on extremes. Men and women. It's a problem in our society. We always want to see the very best and we're not interested in others who are still way above average. There are thousands of women doing great science, e…
"it's our fault that we only care about the very best"
Actually, that might also explain the cultural difference of USA vs the other parts of the world. Perhaps in the U.S. people are more obsessed with the very best, and that's why these things become controversial.
It reminds of a recent discussion here about being open about your salary. My conclusion from (based on comments of other people) it was that it is a strong taboo in the U.S., although in Norway, it is acceptable for everybody to know. And that it possibly also ties to higher emphasis on competition in the U.S.
It's interesting - it takes an outsider (or a jester) to see society's taboo.
I had not heard of Quillette until Tyler Cowen interviewed [0] Claire Lehmann, the founding editor. This article, and the precipitating events, fit perfectly into Quillette’s raison d’etre [1]. [0] - https://medium.com/conversations-with-tyler/claire-lehmann-t... [1] - https://quillette.com/about/
I don't even understand why this is controversial. I've explained this to a number of women before and none of them have felt hurt. On the contrary, in fact, it makes them feel better. Humans always fixate on extremes. Men and women. It's a problem in our society. We always want to see the very best and we're not interested in others who are still way above average. There are thousands of women doing great science, e…
It may have made the women you've talked to feel better, but personally, I'm not a fan of the idea that I'm simply less biologically capable than men in any way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is nothing original or subtle about it, and it was blatantly intended by the Mathematical Intelligencer editor to stir shit up.
All of that can be true and Amie Wilkinson's campaign of harassment would still be vile and disgusting behaviour, unworthy of an adult of any kind. She got the paper withdrawn from two different journals, and got Dr Tabachnikov to withdraw his name from the paper. What do you think of Dr Wilkinson's behaviour? Because that’s what the article is about, a campaign of harassment from a woman in a position of power.
I'd need a more authoritative account of it to form a view.
I don't even understand why this is controversial. I've explained this to a number of women before and none of them have felt hurt. On the contrary, in fact, it makes them feel better. Humans always fixate on extremes. Men and women. It's a problem in our society. We always want to see the very best and we're not interested in others who are still way above average. There are thousands of women doing great science, e…
It may have made the women you've talked to feel better, but personally, I'm not a fan of the idea that I'm simply less biologically capable than men in any way.
Nobody (serious) is saying that. First, when this is talked about, it's always about averages, which are meaningless from individual perspective.
Second, there are obvious biological traits where women are less capable than men on average, like weightlifting. There are also traits where women are more capable, like having kids.
These are facts though. You might also not be a fan of idea that "Earth revolves around Sun", but that's how it is.
On the other hand, I can understand your feeling. I am for example not a fan of idea that many humans are xenophobes.
> 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 the scientific record and replaced by a completely different article, without any discussion with the author or any announcement in the journal, what will this mean for the future of electronic journals?
I'd had the impression online journals normally had some plan for archiving. So insiders were left out of the threat model?
I had not heard of Quillette until Tyler Cowen interviewed [0] Claire Lehmann, the founding editor. This article, and the precipitating events, fit perfectly into Quillette’s raison d’etre [1]. [0] - https://medium.com/conversations-with-tyler/claire-lehmann-t... [1] - https://quillette.com/about/
I have some fundamental problems with her approach to political correctness in the Medium article. Too many to go over, but the simplest and most frustrating is the complete disregard for the experience of transgender people, stating that it's a "performance" while race is not. That itself is completely disrespectful and not understanding the core issue before arguing it.
In a sense, the minority community brings it to itself. If you highlight how you're not different, then you cannot complain that stories will be written about how you're not different - that's the whole point of highlighting it! But once the society completely accepts that you're not different, then the difference will truly not matter and there will be no story (for better or worse).