1) I have not read through the memo in a long time so I would have to understand what he means by "social constructionists".
Social constructionist could mean "someone who aims to engineer social incentives in a way that generates particular societal outcomes."
Social constructionist could also mean "someone who believes anything that exists within a person and describes his relationship to the external is a social construct."
If you are "against" the former, you are a doofus. If you are against the latter, you are perceptive and intelligent.
3) The term "innate DISPOSITIONAL difference" implies that the innate differences are oriented around DISPOSITION, not ability or talent.
On 3, disposition means interest, and people become good at what they're interested in. It's strongly correlated with ability. For "social constructionist", I'm pretty sure he meant the second definition. I'm not saying Damore is wrong. But I don't think his theories about sex-differences are firm enough to be widely accepted, and they don't belong in the work place. Porn is not necessarily wrong either, yet we don't have it at work.
It's always possible that Damore was confused about the situation. It is hard for people to fully overcome the prejudices the society inculcates in them from the time they are infants.
SG, isn't it strange that the 'prejudices the society' show up in so many other species? It's almost as if the supposedly omnipotent 'prejudices the society' don't really exist and biology actually counts. Of course, that can't be true. Biology is just a myth of racist, sexist, patriarchal, cisgendered, homophobic, transphobic, bigots.
Well, no. Humans look at non-human animals and interpret what they do in human terms. They see what they look at, but they don't usually see what they don't look at. Or, as Uncle Albert said, 'The theory tells us what we can observe.' It also tells us how to interpret it. Biology and ethology, like all other sciences, is a human construction. We may aim for objectivity, but only God (if any) gets to see things as they are. I think this is in Phil. 101, actually.
I think with the explosive development of the human brain in Evolution, and the development of language in particular, humans have partially stepped out of prehuman nature, making the adventures of rhesus monkeys maybe not tremendously relevant to the question of sex roles in computer work.
Toy preferences in juvenile primates are just one data point. There are many, many others. For example, males do better than females (in absolute or relative terms) in math in all countries. There are no exceptions.
Humans have come up with so many myths. Clearly, the Sun orbits the Earth and anyone who claims otherwise is just succumbing to a 'human construction'. Galileo Galilei was just making stuff up.
Actually, whether the Earth revolves around the Sun or vice versa is a matter of how you want to write the math. If you do Fourier analysis of the apparent motion of the classical planets from a point on the surface of the Earth, you can set up equations which will do both. Or I should say all three, because of course the Sun also moves relative to other objects Out There. Slippery. (Not considering Special Relativity here.)
SG, If you want to split hairs then the correct statement is that the Sun and Earth both orbit a common center of gravity (which just happens to be inside the Sun). Of course, the Jupiter/Sun system dominates the Earth/Sun system so using center of gravity of the Earth/Sun system isn't quite right either.
Gravity is racist. Need proof? Gravity affects blacks and whites the same. Gravity is color-blind. Since 'color-blind' is racist, Gravity is racist. Smash Gravity! Smash racism!
Of course, the truth is worse. Gravity made the world round. The roundness of the world facilitated colonialism. More proof that Gravity is racist. Smash Gravity! Smash racism!
1) I have not read through the memo in a long time so I would have to understand what he means by "social constructionists".
Social constructionist could mean "someone who aims to engineer social incentives in a way that generates particular societal outcomes."
Social constructionist could also mean "someone who believes anything that exists within a person and describes his relationship to the external is a social construct."
If you are "against" the former, you are a doofus. If you are against the latter, you are perceptive and intelligent.
3) The term "innate DISPOSITIONAL difference" implies that the innate differences are oriented around DISPOSITION, not ability or talent.
On 3, disposition means interest, and people become good at what they're interested in. It's strongly correlated with ability. For "social constructionist", I'm pretty sure he meant the second definition. I'm not saying Damore is wrong. But I don't think his theories about sex-differences are firm enough to be widely accepted, and they don't belong in the work place. Porn is not necessarily wrong either, yet we don't have it at work.
It's always possible that Damore was confused about the situation. It is hard for people to fully overcome the prejudices the society inculcates in them from the time they are infants.
SG, isn't it strange that the 'prejudices the society' show up in so many other species? It's almost as if the supposedly omnipotent 'prejudices the society' don't really exist and biology actually counts. Of course, that can't be true. Biology is just a myth of racist, sexist, patriarchal, cisgendered, homophobic, transphobic, bigots.
Well, no. Humans look at non-human animals and interpret what they do in human terms. They see what they look at, but they don't usually see what they don't look at. Or, as Uncle Albert said, 'The theory tells us what we can observe.' It also tells us how to interpret it. Biology and ethology, like all other sciences, is a human construction. We may aim for objectivity, but only God (if any) gets to see things as they are. I think this is in Phil. 101, actually.
I think with the explosive development of the human brain in Evolution, and the development of language in particular, humans have partially stepped out of prehuman nature, making the adventures of rhesus monkeys maybe not tremendously relevant to the question of sex roles in computer work.
Toy preferences in juvenile primates are just one data point. There are many, many others. For example, males do better than females (in absolute or relative terms) in math in all countries. There are no exceptions.
Yes, prior to 100 years ago, men were also much better than women at voting.
So women need more practice at math?
Society is a complex ever-changing system. We see certain correlations, but the causes are unknown and not amenable to experimentation.
Humans have come up with so many myths. Clearly, the Sun orbits the Earth and anyone who claims otherwise is just succumbing to a 'human construction'. Galileo Galilei was just making stuff up.
Actually, whether the Earth revolves around the Sun or vice versa is a matter of how you want to write the math. If you do Fourier analysis of the apparent motion of the classical planets from a point on the surface of the Earth, you can set up equations which will do both. Or I should say all three, because of course the Sun also moves relative to other objects Out There. Slippery. (Not considering Special Relativity here.)
SG, If you want to split hairs then the correct statement is that the Sun and Earth both orbit a common center of gravity (which just happens to be inside the Sun). Of course, the Jupiter/Sun system dominates the Earth/Sun system so using center of gravity of the Earth/Sun system isn't quite right either.
Gravity is racist. Need proof? Gravity affects blacks and whites the same. Gravity is color-blind. Since 'color-blind' is racist, Gravity is racist. Smash Gravity! Smash racism!
Of course, the truth is worse. Gravity made the world round. The roundness of the world facilitated colonialism. More proof that Gravity is racist. Smash Gravity! Smash racism!
I've complained to the authorities about gravity, but I haven't gotten much of a response yet. Bureaucracy, I suppose....
The problem is not 'bureaucracy' but institutional racism. Gravity is just another form of 'white supremacy'.