The Dangers of Anti-Intellectual Propaganda

[zinfamous]

Because the modern discussion is that gender and gender identity is only a construct of the society and that is wrong. Spreading this misinformation only servers to make a complex topic even more confusing. When this wrong idea gets built into society as fact then it causes people to lose their connection with reality and how their mind works. Its one thing if people are ignorant about a topic, but its another issue when people believe wrong ideas and build more ideas atop. Its a key reason we have so many depressed people in society. But society's standards people can have everything and still be deeply depressed. It comes as a shock when these people lash out because too often people have lost touch with reality and what influences them.

Plus, it was a super dumb thing to say. He is a learned person that by almost all metrics is smarter than I will ever be, and so it annoys me to see that be wasted.

*Also thank you for responding. I felt it was more or less putting you in the middle as a tool for my argument, but, I do respect your opinion on this as well as believing that you are far more educated about this topic.

Yet you have decided, for no apparent reason, that the "correct" answer is that this is only a construct of Biology. You pound your fist about this, yet you have no reason to insist that this is true.

Why do you think this way? You haven't presented any kind of evidence to support this roundly-rejected notion of yours.

 

[realibrad]

you posted articles that again point to biological basis for sex, not gender. Traits that can, CAN, typically define some as biologically male or female. Gender is different. It's more about personality than it is a physical phenotype.

That, and you aren't ever going to find a conclusion that "nurture" doesn't have the same, if not more of an effect on these constructs than simple biology. Such is our current understanding of human systems.

Except they were also about personality traits. I mean, the very first one was literally this.

http://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/106/36/15268.full.pdf

"Gender differences in financial risk aversion and career choices are affected by testosterone"

This one shows other traits and how they are affected by testosterone.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28771393

"Our findings suggest a mechanism underlying testosterone's diverse effects on humans' judgments and decision making and provide novel, clear, and testable predictions."

If you did not want to read it fine, but don't pretend that you did and that it said something else. Biology and the underlying functions have an influence on personality and gender identity.

 

[realibrad]

Yet you have decided, for no apparent reason, that the "correct" answer is that this is only a construct of Biology. You pound your fist about this, yet you have no reason to insist that this is true.

Why do you think this way? You haven't presented any kind of evidence to support this roundly-rejected notion of yours.

Bullshit, I never said it was biology only. I clearly said this...

" All of the research agrees that biology is a massive contributor to gender identity."

and

"This is not something that is questioned in science. Its well known that biology drives gender identity. Its not the only thing, but your statement is factually wrong."

and

"Gender is not only a social construct and biology has a heavy influence on people and their gender identity."

How can you honestly say that I think its only about biology? Literally everything I have said to you said its a mix, and yet you somehow have it in your mind I said something else. How did that misinformation get into your mind when I have never said anything even close to ambiguous that could lead you to that idea? It appears you have built something in your mind that is not based in reality.

 

[theeedude]

Anti-intellectualism is a punishment by itself. Look at anti-intellectual countries or US Republican states. They have to compete for the crappiest jobs purely on cheap labor and skimping protection for their workers and the environment, or fleecing their constituents to bribe employers into moving. And they still lose. It's a whole lot better to be welcoming to the best and brightest, and have companies knocking on your door.

 

[Greenman]

Anti-intellectualism is a punishment by itself. Look at anti-intellectual countries or US Republican states. They have to compete for the crappiest jobs purely on cheap labor and skimping protection for their workers and the environment, or fleecing their constituents to bribe employers into moving. And they still lose. It's a whole lot better to be welcoming to the best and brightest, and have companies knocking on your door.

https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...that’s-a-conspiracy-theorist’s-dream.2537185/

 

[repoman0]

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/california-green-lights-initiative-that’s-a-conspiracy-theorist’s-dream.2537185/

Indeed, the country is full of retards, even in the best states. Hell in my very own town here in MA something like 10% of residents voted for Dump. I had no idea there were that many suckers here, but they're out there somewhere. Those same types of people could push for an idiotic ballot initiative like this and get noticed, though it would of course fail.

Luckily, a good company choosing to move into a new location doesn't actually expect the place to be completely free of these types of people, they just need a welcoming environment and solid talent pool to draw from. Then as more good jobs move in, more good people move in and the anti-intellectuals get pushed out. It's a simple positive feedback loop.

 

[theeedude]

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/california-green-lights-initiative-that’s-a-conspiracy-theorist’s-dream.2537185/

California hasn't green lighted this initiative, misleading title. They green lighted collecting signatures to bring it to a vote, which is a right of the people here.

 

[realibrad]

Indeed, the country is full of retards, even in the best states. Hell in my very own town here in MA something like 10% of residents voted for Dump. I had no idea there were that many suckers here, but they're out there somewhere. Those same types of people could push for an idiotic ballot initiative like this and get noticed, though it would of course fail.

Luckily, a good company choosing to move into a new location doesn't actually expect the place to be completely free of these types of people, they just need a welcoming environment and solid talent pool to draw from. Then as more good jobs move in, more good people move in and the anti-intellectuals get pushed out. It's a simple positive feedback loop.

Something seems to be breaking that loop. Normally we debate ideas and the bad ones get beaten down, but that does not seem to happen as often now.

 

[realibrad]

California hasn't green lighted this initiative, misleading title. They green lighted collecting signatures to bring it to a vote, which is a right of the people here.

They are allowing the initiative to continue is what its saying. They could have tried to stop it, but are letting it go.

 

[repoman0]

Something seems to be breaking that loop. Normally we debate ideas and the bad ones get beaten down, but that does not seem to happen as often now.

On a national level, that certainly seems to be true. I feel a bit insulated from it because things couldn't operate much more effectively and efficiently on a local level here.

 

[repoman0]

They are allowing the initiative to continue is what its saying. They could have tried to stop it, but are letting it go.

Why should they stop it? Let the people speak. Hopefully Californians are smart enough overall to vote it down 10:1 and settle the issue for good.

 

[Moonbeam]

Except they were also about personality traits. I mean, the very first one was literally this.

http://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/106/36/15268.full.pdf

"Gender differences in financial risk aversion and career choices are affected by testosterone"

This one shows other traits and how they are affected by testosterone.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28771393

"Our findings suggest a mechanism underlying testosterone's diverse effects on humans' judgments and decision making and provide novel, clear, and testable predictions."

If you did not want to read it fine, but don't pretend that you did and that it said something else. Biology and the underlying functions have an influence on personality and gender identity.

A word to the wise:

If you get a job at Google you might not want to post this kind of stuff on any form of internal company owned messaging means. Since the first firing google has only doubled down on their opinion of its appropriateness.

 

[theeedude]

They are allowing the initiative to continue is what its saying. They could have tried to stop it, but are letting it go.

Stopped it under what authority? Their job is simply to verify that election rules are being followed, not decide on the merits of the initiative. We have rule of law in our state.

 

[realibrad]

A word to the wise:

If you get a job at Google you might not want to post this kind of stuff on any form of internal company owned messaging means. Since the first firing google has only doubled down on their opinion of its appropriateness.

Yes well, I do not think Google is on my horizon sadly. I do not have the cognitive abilities to get to that level. Sadly, its also true that peer reviewed research is frowned upon at Google. They company may have good intent, but, they are wrong about this topic.

 

[theeedude]

A word to the wise:

If you get a job at Google you might not want to post this kind of stuff on any form of internal company owned messaging means. Since the first firing google has only doubled down on their opinion of its appropriateness.

Don't shit where you eat. Get a job at Koch Industries and post on internal boards that you think Socialism is great, then update us on career progress.

 

[realibrad]

On a national level, that certainly seems to be true. I feel a bit insulated from it because things couldn't operate much more effectively and efficiently on a local level here.

Welcome to CA baby! If you had read the article, you would have seen this."Activists in California can now move forward collecting signatures for an expansive ballot initiative that encompasses a world of non-evidence-based and fringe notions, according to California Secretary of State Alex Padilla."

The hyperlink takes you here.

http://www.sos.ca.gov/administratio...ries/proposed-initiative-enters-circulation6/

"The Attorney General prepares the legal title and summary that is required to appear on initiative petitions. When the official language is complete, the Attorney General forwards it to the proponent and to the Secretary of State, and the initiative may be circulated for signatures. The Secretary of State then provides calendar deadlines to the proponent and to county elections officials. The Attorney General’s official title and summary for the measure is as follows:"

That is what the article was about. Enjoy.

 

[realibrad]

On a national level, that certainly seems to be true. I feel a bit insulated from it because things couldn't operate much more effectively and efficiently on a local level here.

MA on the whole has had nice growth even after 2008. Constant revenue tends to smooth out government. Couple that with rational people and things can work quite well.

 

[Jhhnn]

They are allowing the initiative to continue is what its saying. They could have tried to stop it, but are letting it go.

What the Hell does "could have tried to stop it" actually mean?

Ballot initiatives just have to follow a certain form. They don't have to make sense to anybody other than the people proposing them. And of course there are whack jobs in CA- it's the most populous state.

 

[theeedude]

The whole point of initiative process is that people can get a vote on stuff over the objections of state government. This is not a Republican state where people get disenfranchised or gerrymandered to block their will and make them serfs of the legislature.

 

[Moonbeam]

Bullshit, I never said it was biology only. I clearly said this...

" All of the research agrees that biology is a massive contributor to gender identity."

and

"This is not something that is questioned in science. Its well known that biology drives gender identity. Its not the only thing, but your statement is factually wrong."

and

"Gender is not only a social construct and biology has a heavy influence on people and their gender identity."

How can you honestly say that I think its only about biology? Literally everything I have said to you said its a mix, and yet you somehow have it in your mind I said something else. How did that misinformation get into your mind when I have never said anything even close to ambiguous that could lead you to that idea? It appears you have built something in your mind that is not based in reality.

Yes well, I do not think Google is on my horizon sadly. I do not have the cognitive abilities to get to that level. Sadly, its also true that peer reviewed research is frowned upon at Google. They company may have good intent, but, they are wrong about this topic.

That's not fair. You force me to admit to having the cognitive abilities to get to their level since not only did those heightened cognitive abilities produce the decision to fire that they came to but I can also follow and see the correctness of their reasoning. You see the point is not the correctness or error of the peer reviewed science, but the motivation behind its use on a company owned platform. Imagine a general has sounded a retreat and in the middle of all of this you start spouting scientifically based claims that the battlefront is in the opposite direction. The issue isn't where the front is, but to get the fuck out of there. This is what I mean by getting stuck in the weeds. There are occasions where that can get you shot.

 

[zinfamous]

Except they were also about personality traits. I mean, the very first one was literally this.

http://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/106/36/15268.full.pdf

"Gender differences in financial risk aversion and career choices are affected by testosterone"

This one shows other traits and how they are affected by testosterone.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28771393

"Our findings suggest a mechanism underlying testosterone's diverse effects on humans' judgments and decision making and provide novel, clear, and testable predictions."

If you did not want to read it fine, but don't pretend that you did and that it said something else. Biology and the underlying functions have an influence on personality and gender identity.

You know we've "disrupted" the whole hormone system now, right? But on top of that, many of these effects we now know aren't really germline inheretence, but are in fact determined in utero, and often directly effected by diet and lifestyle habits of the mother...which do effect an epigentic biological influence on the fetus. I believe these epigenetic influences can also go germline in the fetus. It's always a mixed bag.


Also, I don't care if you once used the phrase "MASSIVELY INFLUECE" a some proxy for "gee, sure there could be something else..." because it doesn't really matter when you find yourself constantly rejecting the notion, from others, that "something else" is also quite important. It suddenly isn't a factor when you don't want it to be.

It's a weird position to claim to have: "I never claimed that I believe the argument that I constantly defend!" But there you are.

The lens you have chosen, and will forever be the bugaboo in this crusade of yours, is that you have chosen to be GoogleGuy's brave knight. GoogleGuy knows all, therefore he is the sage guiding me on this moral quest for righteousness and...science! sorta.... You seem to bring this into every fucking thread, and I don't think you are going to really convince any biologist or social scientist that GoogleGuy speaks for them. GoogleGuy needs to stick to coding and "hard science." Biology is a bit too chaotic for him. The math really is funny, and frankly--knowledge of these systems is incredibly dynamic. You make absolute assertions based on knowledge that, if only 2 or 3 years old...can sometimes be seen as horribly outdated in this world.

 

[realibrad]

That's not fair. You force me to admit to having the cognitive abilities to get to their level since not only did those heightened cognitive abilities produce the decision to fire that they came to but I can also follow and see the correctness of their reasoning. You see the point is not the correctness or error of the peer reviewed science, but the motivation behind its use on a company owned platform. Imagine a general has sounded a retreat and in the middle of all of this you start spouting scientifically based claims that the battlefront is in the opposite direction. The issue isn't where the front is, but to get the fuck out of there. This is what I mean by getting stuck in the weeds. There are occasions where that can get you shot.

No, there are two things you need to be at google long term. Ability to do the work and the willingness to agree with the culture. I do not have the ability to do the work, but the cognitive ability part has nothing to do with the culture. You just drew a conclusion that does not logically follow.

As for the motivation of the data and platform, it was used by him the same way others used it. In fact, what he posted had been up on there for quite some time and had been talked about. It only became an issue once it got leaked out and picked up by the media. Its been shown that google promotes sections on it's forums for discussion of topics like this and its regularly used. He did not break company policy by posting and his data was factually backed.

As for your analogy, that too is flawed. Google is not on a battlefield where actions about political discussion must take place as quickly as possible and without discussion. The whole point of that part of the forum was to discuss things. In your hypothetical it would make little sense to have a discussion as it might get you killed, but that is not analogous to what happened at Google.

 

[realibrad]

You know we've "disrupted" the whole hormone system now, right? But on top of that, many of these effects we now know aren't really germline inheretence, but are in fact determined in utero, and often directly effected by diet and lifestyle habits of the mother...which do effect an epigentic biological influence on the fetus. I believe these epigenetic influences can also go germline in the fetus. It's always a mixed bag.

Yet many still are affected. Your stance was that gender was 100% social, and that is wrong. Its also not 100% biological and anyone that makes that claim is just as wrong as you were.

Also, I don't care if you once used the phrase "MASSIVELY INFLUECE"a some proxy for "gee, sure there could be something else..." because it doesn't really matter when you find yourself constantly rejecting the notion, from others, that "something else" is also quite important. It suddenly isn't a factor when you don't want it to be.

You are doing it again. When did I reject the idea that there were other influences outside of biology? I have had previous discussions about how its not all biology. You are building a conspiracy if you think I hedged myself by adding in "influence". I said it because I believe it, as well as the idea being baked by evidence.

It's a weird position to claim to have: "I never claimed that I believe the argument that I constantly defend!" But there you are.

Wow, you really do believe that I think its only biology. This is strange because its in opposition to everything I have ever said about this topic. Here, Ill give an example of me defending that its not just nature.

"Hmm, I don't know if I would take such an absolute stance. I think some of their identity stems from nurture and not just nature. I mean, look at children that are raised in a violent sexist home, and then see how that effects them on average. I think what the kid is raised around can have an influence on him. Personally I don't care about sexuality and gender identity beyond what makes them happy, but I also think that there are influences from both nature and nurture."

https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...ag-club-for-kids.2532750/page-6#post-39246925

If I really did think it was only biology, why would I defend that its not all biology and that nurture also has an effect on how kids turn out? Was I building something to one day be able to use it, or was I just giving my opinion?

The lens you have chosen, and will forever be the bugaboo in this crusade of yours, is that you have chosen to be GoogleGuy's brave knight. GoogleGuy knows all, therefore he is the sage guiding me on this moral quest for righteousness and...science! sorta.... You seem to bring this into every fucking thread, and I don't think you are going to really convince any biologist or social scientist that GoogleGuy speaks for them. GoogleGuy needs to stick to coding and "hard science." Biology is a bit too chaotic for him. The math really is funny, and frankly--knowledge of these systems is incredibly dynamic. You make absolute assertions based on knowledge that, if only 2 or 3 years old...can sometimes be seen as horribly outdated in this world.

He is not a brave knight and does not know all but he is damn smart. Degrees in biology, chem, and physics. That said, what he posted was factually backed. I have no comment on anything beyond that because that is all I have ever talked about. If you think biology is too chaotic for him, then we need to review how he got a masters in biology from Harvard. You are speaking from ignorance here.

To sum up, I don't think gender is 100% nature or nurture but mixture. I have given evidence of my stance on this for comments well before this thread. Mr. Damore is highly educated in biology so your believe that its beyond him is absurd and amusing.

 

[Amused]

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/california-green-lights-initiative-that’s-a-conspiracy-theorist’s-dream.2537185/

CA always has bat shit insane prop propsals out for signatures. It's the nature of the CA prop system to allow all correctly formatted prop proposals to try and collect enough signatures to get on the ballot. The only "approval" process is the correct forms are filled out correctly.

 

[Moonbeam]

realibrad: No

M: Not the most productive way to begin an argument. The fact I don't mind doesn't mean others may not take offense.

r: , there are two things you need to be at google long term. Ability to do the work and the willingness to agree with the culture.

M: I disagree. You do not need to a willingness to agree with the culture. You can't dictate people's opinion. You can take action as a company if you do something the company sees as inimical to its culture. Remember the culture at Google seems to be creating an atmosphere where typical biases against women are not voiced in a way that would cause stress or an atmosphere they would perceive as a threat to women working there,

r: I do not have the ability to do the work, but the cognitive ability part has nothing to do with the culture. You just drew a conclusion that does not logically follow.

M: I see little difference between a company culture and a company mission statement, goals that are articulated and expected to be perceived and executed by employees. Pinheads are prone to miss this social context, sort of an Asperger's thingi, I believe more prevalent in males.

r: As for the motivation of the data and platform, it was used by him the same way others used it. In fact, what he posted had been up on there for quite some time and had been talked about. It only became an issue once it got leaked out and picked up by the media. Its been shown that google promotes sections on it's forums for discussion of topics like this and its regularly used. He did not break company policy by posting and his data was factually backed.

M: You dismiss the fact he got fired and the company still standing behind doing so. It seems quite possible to make a scientific case that Blacks are intellectually inferior to whites and Whites inferior to Asians just by looking at race and IQ scores, a case that with some frequency is made in academic circles. But it will get you fired from a university for making such a case no matter how much you point at one set of data. That is because the likelihood that it is racial bigotry that drives such a claim is more likely than not that it was driven by scientific fidelity to data. You are making a similar case but you don't see it.

r: As for your analogy, that too is flawed. Google is not on a battlefield where actions about political discussion must take place as quickly as possible and without discussion. The whole point of that part of the forum was to discuss things. In your hypothetical it would make little sense to have a discussion as it might get you killed, but that is not analogous to what happened at Google.

M: There are no analogies that are not flawed in some ways. My analogy was an accurate easily visually accessible way to show a parallel to your sort of thinking. You bore in and nitpick when you need to step back and see a bigger picture.

Change your perspective. Imagine that I am right and see if you can figure out a way to see that. Do it for yourself. I don't have to have you agree with me to be happy. I am not worried the world is about to collapse if you don't agree with me. I am not wedded to a need to be right.