Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neeka who wrote (101328)	2/20/2005 7:58:35 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793817

RE Summers: I think this is why it's such a hot button issue. LindyBill posted it here already & Nadine also hit on this issue..... ..."I think it's worse than (sic) you say, and Larry Summers is in deep doo-doo. He pretty much laid out the entire case against the "diversity" racket. He even included the most telling argument of all, the one that says: "Look, if, as you claim, there is this pool of super-talented people who are being passed over because of 'discrimination,' then why doesn't some academic entrepreneur sweep them all up and create a super-department out of them?" These things must not be said. Once you open these doors, there is no telling where thought will lead you. The diversity business is huge -- just look at its glossy magazine, DIVERSITY INC. It will not be mocked. Summers is toast." Message 21062749 ...."Far from demanding the evidence, the women mathematicians didn't want to discuss the evidence. They just got the vapors and began hyperventilating to the press. They must know if they follow the question at all, that there is a great deal of evidence backing differing paths of mental development and interests between the sexes. The most likely explanation now seems to be that women generally have from infancy a greater interest and competence in inter-personal relations than men do, which naturally might lead them away from purely abstract fields like mathematics towards more people-intensive fields. So any discussion of the evidence would only get in the way of the outraged hyperventilating." Message 21061713

To: Neeka who wrote (101328)	2/21/2005 12:11:56 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793817

when is it acceptable to speak the "unspeakable?" And who decides what is unspeakable? Is there such a thing as the unthinkable, and where do we cross the line over into the realm of the unthinkable? If these boundaries are real, how, where and why do they exist? When you are in a room full of intelligent people, you have to make certain not say foolish stuff. The question in question concerning the innate abilities of women wrt science and mathematics is in every way the same as if he were to say: Since there are no Jewish men playing basketball at the NBA level - the 4 or 5 standard deviation level - then is it fair to suggest there may be some innate reasons for it? Those questions are no longer postulated because we have come a long ways from the German science of the early 20th century. It is no longer asked not because Jewish men may be offended by those suggestions. It is not because it is not politically correct. By now, if you don't understand, I think it would be very difficult to explain it to you. But, I can't resist. I will give you a clue. Is it because there is no genetic science (not now, nor will there ever be) that links Jewish men with the ability to play basketball?