The Yale Problem Begins in High School • Hacker News Board

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#81

Post by bmelton » Wed, Nov 25, 2015, 6:19 PM UTC

jegutman wrote: post #71

sremani wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brandon Eich episode speaks volumes, esp. since he was at the winning side of the Popular Vote. Tinder did not walk away for CA after Prop 8 was won. I really do not know a single state including CA and OR, where gay marriage actually garnered Popular majority. Now the debate about whether something like that should be up for Vote is different and one I have no much domain knowledge. The fact was Brandon Eich's polit…

"I really do not know a single state including CA and OR, where gay marriage actually garnered Popular majority." It's interestingly how strong your opinion is when it could be easily improved upon by just reading wikipedia[3]. Here are states that actually passed SSM by popular referendum: * Maine [1] * Washington State[2] * Maryland [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maine_Question_1,_2012 [2] https://en.wikipedia.o…

Not OP, but I read his remark to mean "at the time Prop 8 was passed". To that argument, if that was indeed his intent, I believe he would have been correct.

Post Prop 8, we've seen some massive enlightenment on the subject.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#82

Post by Cthulhu_ » Wed, Nov 25, 2015, 6:20 PM UTC

kod wrote: post #21

dudul wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. It is baffling to me that nobody seems to seriously consider that this war on men/boys is what creates this weird and uncomfortable social dynamic. Masculinity is not something to be feared or ashamed of, teaching that is what creates dysfunctional men.

No, social norms that - you're not allowed to show emotion (unless it's anger) - you must get all of your emotional needs met through first your mother, and then your girlfriend / wife are what creates dysfunctional men.

And the current anti-men fad the article speaks about is only enforcing that, only extending it with "You're not allowed to have an opinion because you are a (white) (non-transsexual) (straight) man. The SJW movement isn't making the world a better place, it's trying to take political correctness to its extremes, which is its own form of oppression with the side-effects of people in certain demographics becoming afraid to speak up (see article).

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#83

Post by curiousgeorgio » Wed, Nov 25, 2015, 6:21 PM UTC

twoodfin wrote: post #28

dragonwriter wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that other people are free to speak against you does not mean that you can't speak freely. Free speech does not mean freedom from having your speech acts criticized (quite the opposite; it includes freedom of others to criticize your speech acts.) And, yes, it means that your speech acts may affect your ability to hold a job where you are one of the major public faces of an organization (such as its CEO) and…

Sure, it's a free country for everybody. But, IMHO, the threshold for taking arguments outside the political arena and into the realm of boycotts and demands for resignations should be a lot higher than it seems to be today. Otherwise vibrant, productive arguments don't happen, since everyone's concentrating on bankrupting the other side of money, "platforms", or legitimacy.

This is the reason I keep two HN accounts - I fear that any political comments I make here could jeopardize my professional life (about which I contribute fairly often).

Online, that's a fairly easy thing to manage. In real life, it means I really have to walk on eggshells a lot, and I seldom participate in voicing my opinions (or supporting certain causes) in which I'd otherwise participate, solely out of fear. In many cases, you can keep your personal views and professional life isolated, but not always. Maybe it's an irrational fear, but then again, in today's political climate it seems foolish not to worry about that.

And if that need to self-censor isn't cause for concern, I don't know what is.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#84

Post by Cthulhu_ » Wed, Nov 25, 2015, 6:21 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #22

dudul wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But colleges buying into their craziness and lunacy is.

> But colleges buying into their craziness and lunacy is. No, its not. On either left-wing or right-wing causes.

Yes it would be. Imagine the outcry if a school hung up a sign going "No blacks allowed".

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#85

Post by ccernaf » Wed, Nov 25, 2015, 6:21 PM UTC

bmelton wrote: post #47

ccernaf wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty disappointed in the article and the comments, and how like Reddit this website is turning out to be. I'm not going to make any judgements (though I really really am), but this same article has been posted to 10 subreddits, among them such gems as: SJWsAtWork, ThisIsNotASafeSpace, sjsucks, and sjwhate.

Not affiliated (except that I follow him on Twitter), but the author, Jonathan Haidt, is one of America's pre-eminent social psychologists. He is (or at least was) a liberal who has engaged in some very serious social psychology that gives massive insight into how people tick, especially where those ticks are related to or concerning political party affiliations. If the idea is to dismiss him as an anti-SJW, or anti-…

I don't doubt at all Haidt is qualified.

My complaint was more to your second point, that "If the complaint is that his work is spreading to, or being adopted by the anti-SJW crowd, that's hardly his fault." I do see a problem with how one-sided the comments on the page (Heterodox Academy) are, and I do think that he should have stepped in. Then, when I came to Hacker News, I saw similar comments, and that was disheartening.

My distaste really came from comments like these, on the main page: "My white male sons are now 30 and 28. I’m so happy they escaped public high school relatively unscathed, but I could see the beginnings of the nonsense, led by a faculty of activist females and male eunuchs. Public schooling in this country may have begun with noble intent; kids are now truly being inculcated rather than educated." and "You state this like it is an article of faith that women would be totally rad in STEM if only men would stop holding them back. What makes this “sketchy”? There is an abundance of evidence that men and women are different and think differently. There is almost no evidence that women will change that position based on upbringing." and then on hnews itself: "#KillAll(White)Men is literally calling for ethnic / gender purging." (though it was downvoted).

It would be great to have a conversation with Dr. Haidt, but I was turned off by how both Heterodox and Hacker News turned into "amen" forums. There were two students who posted on Heterodox, and they had some interesting points, some of which disagreed with Dr. Haidt.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#86

Post by DrJokepu » Wed, Nov 25, 2015, 6:22 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #33

DrJokepu wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a frequently repeated argument and I find it less and less convincing. It is true that America's constitution only guarantees the congress will not abridge the freedom of speech. However, an argument could be made that in a free society there's a fundamental right to have a dissenting opinion or voice; a right that is not codified by the constitution because it's simply irrelevant to a constitution. It seems…

> However, an argument could be made that in a free society there's a fundamental right to have a dissenting opinion or voice Of course, there is a fundamental right to have (and express) a dissenting opinion or voice. There is also a fundamental right to have (and express) displeasure with an opinion or voice, whether dissenting or not. And there is no fundamental entitlement to a job whose responsibilities include…

I mean, yes, you're right, but surely, if voicing a dissenting opinion will damage or outright destroy your career, then unless you're extremely privileged and can afford to take the hit, you can't really do it, even if technically you have the right, can you?

Technological advances such as social media make vilifying dissenting views (and the people who express them) cheaper and more effective than ever before. There must be some kind of a balance between the right to dissent and the right to "have a displeasure with an opinion" as you said, and I feel like the way things are going now, it doesn't look like we have found that balance. Ultimately a healthy society will need both.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#87

Post by ossreality » Wed, Nov 25, 2015, 6:22 PM UTC

I love that this side never gets flagged off the front page.

I also love that there is absolutely no mention of the content that led to a student asking if the content was meant to excuse rape.

Boy gee, I sure wonder why that was left out.

And holy shit do I love that every single last person I've seen whining about safe spaces have been straight white men that have never had to seek out such a space in the entire god damn lives.

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#88

Post by albedoa » Wed, Nov 25, 2015, 6:23 PM UTC

tosseraccount wrote: post #13

Look how Silicon Valley folks treated Brandon Eich when he made a donation to the majority side in a California proposition. It's not just academia where you can't speak freely.

The conversations about Brandon Eich and his views regrettably died down before the Donald Sterling incident. I am still curious today where defenders of Eich fall in the controversy over Sterling.

Will anyone who defends Eich or is critical of his detractors come out and say that Sterling should not have received the wrath of the media and public and should not have been punished for expressing his views?

Or does your position shift based on the opinion being expressed by either man? Are there materialistic differences between these men and their beliefs?

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#89

Post by Balgair » Wed, Nov 25, 2015, 6:23 PM UTC

douche wrote: post #27

jseliger wrote: post #12

I've taught at two colleges and based on my (purely) anecdotal experiences and attention to the climate, I'd say that the number of students and faculty interested in stifling or censoring ideas is small but also very, very noisy. They also have no sense of humor and college administrators as a group have no sense of humor or perspective, and they're chronically worried about accusations of indifference or insensitiv…

Yup, that parallels my experience pretty closely, as an undergraduate at an Ivy League college that was in the news recently. There might have been about a hundred people on campus that were actively interested in protesting things (what things?, all the things ). For the most part, everybody else is there to go to class, learn, do their own thing, and drink too much beer on the weekends/Wednesdays/Mondays, etc. This…

My wife went to one of the 7 sisters. She said 'This happens every 3-5 years with regularity. Just wait for the cocaine to run out. Things will quiet down after that'

Re: The Yale Problem Begins in High School

#90

Post by ossreality » Wed, Nov 25, 2015, 6:24 PM UTC

tosseraccount wrote: post #13

Look how Silicon Valley folks treated Brandon Eich when he made a donation to the majority side in a California proposition. It's not just academia where you can't speak freely.

HOW DOES NO ONE UNDERSTAND WHAT FREE SPEECH ACTUALLY MEANS?!

Free speech, to anyone who leans conservative, means their right to say offensive bullshit free of any consequences. Someone else uses their agency or free speech to exclude your disgusting speech? WELL GUESS WHAT? That's free speech too.