Biology, science, politics, and society
What does "universal acid" mean?
Email: universalacidblog at gmail
The Abstract Factory
AdamSmithee
Biopolitical
BotanicalGirl
Timothy Burke
Celebrity Cola
Coffee Grounds
Common Sense for the Biochemist
Cosmic Variance
Crooked Timber
Crumb Trail
Decembrist
Daniel Drezner
Evolgen
Flags and Lollipops
Foreign Dispatches
Gene Expression
Keats' Telescope
Kevin Drum
Majikthise
Marginal Revolution
Frank McGahon
Mike the Mad Biologist
Mixing Memory
Nomadic Thoughts
Obsidian Wings
Pandagon
Nate Paxton
Nature Erratum
Pharyngula
Philosophy, et cetera
Brad Plumer
Confessions of a Quackbuster
RatBlog
Respectful Insolence
Teardrop Souffle
Webiocosm
Will Wilkinson
Matthew Yglesias
Young Female Scientist
Zero Hour
Larry Summers has apologized for offending people with his remarks on women in science. Here is his official statement (pdf).
posted by Andrew @ 9:47 AM
3 Comments:
Andrew,
I hate to point this out, but the idea that Summers should apologize for suggesting that research might shed light on this is definitely an example of irrational political correctness used to suppress free inquiry. There is nothing wrong with research, even if it might (I emphasize might) lead to answers that make us feel uncomfortable.
It is interesting that you would assert that Summers should apologize for merely proposing that intellectual inquiry and research proceed on a question, but then would suggest in other posts that more offensive concepts, such as Marxist history, deserve to be part of intellectual discourse. Further, there seems to be some disconnect between your defense of the Implicit Association research, which is highly speculative, and your suggestion that research on Mr. Summer's idea does not even deserve to be done.
Posted by David Welker
This is an astonishing misrepresentation of my position. In fact, I am pretty much convinced that gender differences do exist, that research in the field is valuable, and that innate gender differences may contribute (note: contribute!) to the gender gap in science.
My point in the previous post was to say that we should bracket that whole debate and focus on discrimination. The unfortunate and presumably unintended effect of Summers' comments was to discount the importance of discrimination, and this is what he has quite rightly apologized for. (You'll notice in his apology that he never recanted the idea that there might be innate sex differences or that research in this field could be useful.)
Posted by Andrew
Okay, maybe I spoke too quickly - I'm not 100% convinced, but the evidence that I've seen looks pretty good to me. And I would never advocate cutting off a line of scientific research just because it is ideologically suspect.
Posted by Andrew
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home