“I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.”
Sounds about right to me. His tone is not the best, but he sticks to facts, I think.
His argument is all about dispassionately assessing a distributed data set where you appreciate and understand different strengths different people have for different reasons. Evidence shows there are gender related differences that are widely distributed across the species. The evidence further appears to show gender differentiation is not entirely social. There’s a web of causality in gender-related issues, and the social aspect is critically intertwined with genetic and other physiological factors.
If you measure gender differences statistically, you can derive generalizations that are politically unpalatable, but still accurate. these generalizations are just that. A majority of the observations can be “generalized” as to one thing or another, even though each individual observation will have its own characteristics.
In this case, I think Google is making a huge mistake firing this guy because some people’s feelings are hurt. We have to be honest about these things. Individual variation within a distribution does not invalidate appropriate assessment of the character of cohorts within the distribution.
Read the original 10-page memo and show me why it’s wrong. Not the tone and tenor of the piece. That’s simply dreadful. The guy is a clueless engineer when it comes to his attitude. But the substance is compellingly evidence based.
Read the memo. It’s widely available and I agree with a bunch of it.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber
Consider the author’s response to the criticism:
“I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.”
Sounds about right to me. His tone is not the best, but he sticks to facts, I think.
His argument is all about dispassionately assessing a distributed data set where you appreciate and understand different strengths different people have for different reasons. Evidence shows there are gender related differences that are widely distributed across the species. The evidence further appears to show gender differentiation is not entirely social. There’s a web of causality in gender-related issues, and the social aspect is critically intertwined with genetic and other physiological factors.
If you measure gender differences statistically, you can derive generalizations that are politically unpalatable, but still accurate. these generalizations are just that. A majority of the observations can be “generalized” as to one thing or another, even though each individual observation will have its own characteristics.
In this case, I think Google is making a huge mistake firing this guy because some people’s feelings are hurt. We have to be honest about these things. Individual variation within a distribution does not invalidate appropriate assessment of the character of cohorts within the distribution.
Read the original 10-page memo and show me why it’s wrong. Not the tone and tenor of the piece. That’s simply dreadful. The guy is a clueless engineer when it comes to his attitude. But the substance is compellingly evidence based.