I think this is one of the better responses I've seen
This line really struck me as being spot on:
>There’s a difference between “let’s have a discussion” and “let me tell you what’s up, all you wrong people.”
This line really struck me as being spot on:
>There’s a difference between “let’s have a discussion” and “let me tell you what’s up, all you wrong people.”
Emphatically defending the wrong ideas in a debate forum, and seeing what points do and do not withstand scrutiny, is a very traditional and pure form of discourse. I claim that this process is even at the heart of scientific progress.
Certainly, arguing about which evidence is more important, or how to resolve apparent conflicts between various data, is perfectly fine. But if you are making arguments that you know don't hold up to evidence, you are not arguing in good faith. For that to be a legit argument, you have to motivate why that evidence should be discounted.
Of course it isn't. When establishing narratives and complex causalities, you don't use scientific (inductive) reasoning, you use abductive reasoning. You use inductive and deductive reasoning to fill in points, but you have to use abductive reasoning to reach a broader conclusion.
Indeed, but I didn't read Damore's memo as being intellectually dishonest in this way. He presented (with citations) some views that are held by most psychology researchers. And then he drew a few of his own (possibly flagrant) conclusions and speculations.
This sparked debate, and it is getting us talking. Damore wrote some great points (especially on free speech and intellectual diversity) and some terrible ones. This is the kind of free exchange of ideas that a successful and vibrant tech company should encourage.
EDIT: Apologies for answering a question before it's been asked, but to clarify my point I don't think the quality of writing is that amazing (or relevant). I'm more speaking towards the general tone and content of the memo, which is far more polite and open than most editorials I read by professionals.
> I’m also disappointed that the men I know, including most of my male colleagues, remained silent on the topic. And the ones that did participate, either seemed to support Damore or demonstrated a fundamental lack of understanding for the issues women engineers are faced with and care about.
...means she's frustrated that more men weren't saying what she was thinking. So "speak up" also means agreement.
And, as an aside, I've seen lots of men criticizing Damore. I don't know what more needed to happen. Maybe she has particular people in mind.
again critics of the author actually agree with him.
anyone who supports "let's have a discussion" can not support google who the author believes (and seems to have been proven right) does not want a discussion.
Pointed questions provide more information at the expense of goodwill.
What I'm saying is that I think people ask these kinds of questions and don't get honest answers. At least the firing of Damore was a concrete answer, though it was a partial one.