Google employee echo chamber dude
Re: Google employee echo chamber dude
insulting people doesn't change the truth value of the propositions
Re: Google employee echo chamber dude
What good is truth when people tune it out because you're offensive?
Re: Google employee echo chamber dude
i have seen the error of my ways and will restate what i have learned so as to influence the good people of the wotmud community in a positive direction:
the nature nurture debate isn't really a debate, since it's been settled for quite some time that both are intertwined in a complex manner that makes it hard to tease out which aspects of behavior are influenced by which more. for an example of a trait that easy to figure out: intelligence is mostly genetic, nurture doesn't really change how quickly one can learn, how fast they can learn, or what they are capable of learning (an example of how the environment can impact intelligence is really poor nutrition during infancy and young adulthood which can permanently alter intellectual abilities). a good environment that fosters a love of learning and education can change how educated someone is though. but usually someone is about as smart as their parents are and about as smart as their siblings are. of course people confuse intelligence for impulse control or wisdom, but their basic cognitive abilities aren't much different even though there can be largely different levels of success within families.
although nature and nurture are incredibly intertwined and the genes an individual has and the environment that they experienced can't easily be separated, when we look at differences between the two sexes and the outcomes that occur across cultures and eras (taking some of the environmental factors out) we can begin to see differences among the groups.
some of these differences that result between the two groups can either come down to hormone levels (like testosterone) or brain connectivity (women having slightly more gray matter than men).
just because there are differences biologically between the two sexes doesn't mean you treat individuals of either group as if they as an individual can't become a brilliant mathematician if it's a female (not misogynist just being respectful of gendered terms) or a loving, caring father if it's a male.
at some point raising awareness and trying to push for a certain gender to have higher representation in certain domains might not be a wise use of resources due to the nature of group differences. where that level of trying to impact negative cultural biases against women in stem becomes a waste of money i'm not sure, but it does at some point.
the nature nurture debate isn't really a debate, since it's been settled for quite some time that both are intertwined in a complex manner that makes it hard to tease out which aspects of behavior are influenced by which more. for an example of a trait that easy to figure out: intelligence is mostly genetic, nurture doesn't really change how quickly one can learn, how fast they can learn, or what they are capable of learning (an example of how the environment can impact intelligence is really poor nutrition during infancy and young adulthood which can permanently alter intellectual abilities). a good environment that fosters a love of learning and education can change how educated someone is though. but usually someone is about as smart as their parents are and about as smart as their siblings are. of course people confuse intelligence for impulse control or wisdom, but their basic cognitive abilities aren't much different even though there can be largely different levels of success within families.
although nature and nurture are incredibly intertwined and the genes an individual has and the environment that they experienced can't easily be separated, when we look at differences between the two sexes and the outcomes that occur across cultures and eras (taking some of the environmental factors out) we can begin to see differences among the groups.
some of these differences that result between the two groups can either come down to hormone levels (like testosterone) or brain connectivity (women having slightly more gray matter than men).
just because there are differences biologically between the two sexes doesn't mean you treat individuals of either group as if they as an individual can't become a brilliant mathematician if it's a female (not misogynist just being respectful of gendered terms) or a loving, caring father if it's a male.
at some point raising awareness and trying to push for a certain gender to have higher representation in certain domains might not be a wise use of resources due to the nature of group differences. where that level of trying to impact negative cultural biases against women in stem becomes a waste of money i'm not sure, but it does at some point.
Last edited by Drakmyr on Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Firimei Lang
- Posts: 1268
- Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 6:09 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Google employee echo chamber dude
What you said really.. it is amazing what people will use to justify their voiced opinions. They are like arseholes, everyone has them.Ashlee wrote:Reads a hell of a lot like a misogynist who has a few brain cells to rub together went through great lengths to justify his misogyny, generally in reliance on confirmation bias and generalized statements that find no factual support beyond stereotypes. Also sounds like the same "pseudo-science" that white supremacists spout to justify hating racial minorities.
-
Firimei Lang
- Posts: 1268
- Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 6:09 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Google employee echo chamber dude
Also yes..very much yes. The Daily fail are a known right wing racist paper. The tabloid press are the worse kind.Joolis wrote:DailyMail, did not read.
Re: Google employee echo chamber dude
here's another link for anyone who is interested on if there are sex differences or not: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/se ... ifferences
unfortunately people tend to let their politics impact their relationship with reality.
a great book about nature/nurture: https://www.amazon.com/Blank-Slate-Mode ... 0142003344
a great book about the biological underpinnings of behavior: https://www.amazon.com/Behave-Biology-H ... 1594205078
unfortunately people tend to let their politics impact their relationship with reality.
a great book about nature/nurture: https://www.amazon.com/Blank-Slate-Mode ... 0142003344
a great book about the biological underpinnings of behavior: https://www.amazon.com/Behave-Biology-H ... 1594205078
Re: Google employee echo chamber dude
Summary of my thoughts:
1. Nature vs. nurture issue is irrelevant. Either way we should be all encouraging babies/kids to receive solid, balanced education so that they are prepared to pursue whatever career they want later in life, independent of gender, race, income level, location, etc. This includes things like not giving dolls selectively to girls and trucks to boys. It also includes things like making sure kids born to lower income families also get toys and materials that inspire their development
2. We should also educate our kids to move away from a world where role models must be of the same gender and race as your kid. We should strive to make it as likely that a black girl will see a white man as a role model as her seeing a black female as one. We should teach our kids to be truly gender and race blind when it comes to role models. This will hopefully prevent discouraging of kids from pursuing a career just because they don't see "other people like them" as successful role models in that career.
3. We must acknowledge that real differences exist based on gender and income level for today's adults. Whether this was due to nature or nurture is completely irrelevant. The bottom line is that they do exist. There are less female engineers than male engineers today. There are less male nurses than female nurses today. Pursuing an arbitrary goal ratio of 50/50 (or any ratio really) seems pointless. When screening for all positions, everything should be 100% merit based - no extra help for anyone based on anything.
4. We should also acknowledge that given certain areas where there are big gender or income level imbalances, that there is a propensity for bias. Until #2 really becomes effective for new generations, people tend to favor their own gender and race over others. Instead of meeting quotas for applicant gender and race ratios, we should instead have equally represented committees for hiring people. The people making decisions about hiring and promotion should equal represent gender, race, income, location, etc. - but they should have no mandate to make sure that their ratios of hiring match any sort of arbitrary number. Their goal should be to identify candidates based on merit only. But we can help mitigate the bias problem by changing the representation of people with the power to make the decisions.
1. Nature vs. nurture issue is irrelevant. Either way we should be all encouraging babies/kids to receive solid, balanced education so that they are prepared to pursue whatever career they want later in life, independent of gender, race, income level, location, etc. This includes things like not giving dolls selectively to girls and trucks to boys. It also includes things like making sure kids born to lower income families also get toys and materials that inspire their development
2. We should also educate our kids to move away from a world where role models must be of the same gender and race as your kid. We should strive to make it as likely that a black girl will see a white man as a role model as her seeing a black female as one. We should teach our kids to be truly gender and race blind when it comes to role models. This will hopefully prevent discouraging of kids from pursuing a career just because they don't see "other people like them" as successful role models in that career.
3. We must acknowledge that real differences exist based on gender and income level for today's adults. Whether this was due to nature or nurture is completely irrelevant. The bottom line is that they do exist. There are less female engineers than male engineers today. There are less male nurses than female nurses today. Pursuing an arbitrary goal ratio of 50/50 (or any ratio really) seems pointless. When screening for all positions, everything should be 100% merit based - no extra help for anyone based on anything.
4. We should also acknowledge that given certain areas where there are big gender or income level imbalances, that there is a propensity for bias. Until #2 really becomes effective for new generations, people tend to favor their own gender and race over others. Instead of meeting quotas for applicant gender and race ratios, we should instead have equally represented committees for hiring people. The people making decisions about hiring and promotion should equal represent gender, race, income, location, etc. - but they should have no mandate to make sure that their ratios of hiring match any sort of arbitrary number. Their goal should be to identify candidates based on merit only. But we can help mitigate the bias problem by changing the representation of people with the power to make the decisions.
Re: Google employee echo chamber dude
I personally believe that we are a long way from gender equality. I think that things are "okay" and "kinda fair" and because of that, this insidious gender bias is very difficult to root out.
It's a lot different than racial bias and it's a lot more socially acceptable. I agree with Jestin's ideals, but I also believe that we are more than a single generation away from them.
It's a lot different than racial bias and it's a lot more socially acceptable. I agree with Jestin's ideals, but I also believe that we are more than a single generation away from them.
Re: Google employee echo chamber dude
lol. It's dumb firetruck pseudo-science crunching morons trying to rationalize their own inadequacies with biology that pretty much firm up my notion that it's pointless to judge intelligence on a male/female paradigm because there are enough dudes that got skull-fucked by fate/genetics/biology that it's not enough of a divergent issue to get too invested in. Nobody said anything about being incapable of seeing the differences between sexes; some of us just don't need to treat it like a crutch to elevate a limp-dick existence.Drakmyr wrote: limp wrist liberals like vaen like to believe in blank slates but they're just as delusional as the white nationalists like paj
Drakmyr wrote:insulting people doesn't change the truth value of the propositions
And no, your dung arguments did that for you. And "truth value of the propositions"? It's like you heard the term "value proposition" one time and decided to completely misuse it to try to sound smart. Swing and a miss.