I think one of the most striking things about this guy's essay was all the people claiming it was immaturely written...

I think one of the most striking things about this guy's essay was all the people claiming it was immaturely written, or a rant, or written by an obvious idiot. When multiple biology professors have claimed it's pretty much all accurate and consistent with accepted research and the guy himself went to Harvard and also did research at MIT and Princeton and graduated near the top of his class at UIUC.

It really puts in to perspective what an actual smart guy is like and what people have been claiming intelligence is. Smart people don't "critique". They don't feel the need to fill their works with half assed broad brush wide ranging cultural commentary. They are never snarky. They haven't studied English literature or critical theory. They don't mention that they read the Greeks or Nietzche or pretend that all good ideas started with them. They don't feel the need to package everything in to a narrative- they see discrete points as worthwhile.

Other urls found in this thread:

thelastpsychiatrist.com/2014/03/who_can_know_how_much_randi_zu.html
assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_psychology#Personality_traits
news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14952787
medium.com/@Cernovich/full-james-damore-memo-uncensored-memo-with-charts-and-cites-339f3d2d05f
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

STEMfags don't have a liberal arts education? Wow.

I believe that there are approximately 10 people who have actually read his memo while the rest of us rely on our partisan hacks of choice to tell us what to think about it.

Here we see the current state of our societies. Outrage after outrage, fuelled by two increasingly fanatic sides. I hope it will result into nothing, but for the coming years I will still be tortured by the anti-intellectual drivel and emotional madness that drives the media.

Popular media and giving the plebians a platform were a mistake. Will read it out of interest anyway.

And even less read Trump's leaked phone transcripts. Everyone would rather die in ignorance.

I think that the extreme brevity and lightness of his memo was more due to being terrified of the powers that be potentially coming down on him than any belief in the superiority of clear and simple thought. Not that it did him any good though.

It's about five minutes worth of reading and probably the most inoffensive centrist piece of cuckery you'll ever see.
>m-m-maybe prioritizing hires by race is racist and hurts the company
>no I'm sorry
>pls don't hurt me my kangz and kweenz
>but i have some science
>we still like science don't we
>a tech company can't be 90% Human Resources staff diversity hires
>did I mention I'm not racist or sexist
>pls no buly

...

Quick gesalt?

This whole situation is an example of true anti-intellectualism. We tend to think that it's about how "being dumb/ignorant is good" or how everyone thinks they know more than actual researchers.

In reality, anti-intellectualism starts from the top and goes down: not only do the peers of a researcher talk down to his ideas, they refuse to even engage with them seriously. The public, even with access to what he originally said, is somehow unable to critically and/or objectively consider the original view, preferring instead to just follow the trends of those who they deify as intellectuals -- who are, in actuality, just talking heads not worth trusting for even a second.

The biggest fault of the information era is the power given to "summarizers", who frequently do nothing more than summarize publicly-available information and disseminate it.

>people who howl with the wolves don't even know what they're talking about
Every time. By definition, if they're joining a mass movement to signal virtue, it's not after having used high-quality analytical skills, good faith, nor personal judgement. These people aren't even individuals. They're cogs and drones.

Yes, the memo is incredibly mild and prudent, but for hardcore "liberals" (who haven't read it by the way, so why bother being mild?) it's still too much.

>When multiple biology professors have claimed
on quillette, breitbart associated blog, but let's give it a chance, one of them

>Again, though, most of these sex differences are moderate in size and in my view are unlikely to be all that relevant to the Google workplace

but then he goes to agree with the memo, because google is..turning to orwellian nightmare or something? o la la

It's not like it's a secret or hard to read. I found and read it just the other day. It's written in plain English and the ideas are organized in a simple, logical way. He obviously put a lot of effort into making it both readable and inoffensive, to try and make his opinion accessible to more than just those who already agree with him. It is essentially an olive branch. It does not surprise me it has been spurned.

His obvious mistake was making any claim whatsoever about gender, and there are a lot of them. He flat out says "women are neurotic." He was probably too unselfaware to realize what he had written and why any workplace would have fired him for such things. Some people are booksmart but completely socially retarded: let this be a lesson to any who think they can share their uncensored opinions in the workplace without being reprimanded.

Google had to fire him : lack of retaliation would have been "proof" of a racist/gender bias culture within Google - this being a weapon of choice for any employee willing to sue Google on such motives.

His most important point which no one in the media addressed is that the gender imbalance is not the result of "injustice". Maybe it just happens that the ratio of male to female engineers will be 70/30.

>If threesomes are't your thing, try a 2nd Amendment Fan Page or 10 Things I Hate About Senators and see if your job supports your individuality. See how close to the edge you can get before Facebook itself censors you. It is tempting to see this as a "war on men" because Randi tests as a genetic female, or a war on conservatives because Randi sounds like a "capitalism with a human face"-progressive who ran pass interference for the DNC in 2008, but I hope you can see that the force would equally oppose anything that was slightly outside of the mainstream. Randi needs the job to tell her she is valuable, and the job wants frictionless employees. The war isn't on men or women, it is on individual freedom, it is regression to the mean by suppressing the mean, where mean is defined by its deviation from SFW, according to W.

thelastpsychiatrist.com/2014/03/who_can_know_how_much_randi_zu.html

Fuck off

great awkward moment when one of those alt-right youtube clowns interviewed him and Damore started talking about how the right denies science with regard to climate change and evolution. The youtube douche has this awkward look like "i thought he was 'ourguy' wtf"

It's like 10 pages of things I thought should be obvious? Like I was honestly very surprised at how everyone got angry over literally nothing. Well, not really surprised but I thought there would be a bit more, I dunno, typical alt-right stuff in there.
>He claims women are more emotional, which has benefits and downsides.
>Several women don't show up the next day at work because they are to uncomfortable.

Even the lefty paper that my roommate gets delivered was calling bullshit on the firestorm around this dude.

haven't read his memo yet, but this is pretty heartening. i'm tired of every public figure in america being a blind ideologue.

Liberal media outlets are claiming the memo says that women are biologically unsuited to engineering. But if you read the memo, the point he is trying to make is that in accounting for why there is not a 50/50 split in tech and leadership positions between men and women it isn't enough to assume it's all the product of sexist discrimination. Empirical evidence shows that on AVERAGE (sry but I have to highlight this becasue women are making it about themselves as INDIVIDUALS and completely misreading his work) men and women have distinct mental profiles. Ergo it's inappropriate to continue with these affirmative action style programs since they are attacking a non existent problem. There is no real sexist discrimination. And aggregate differences in cognition, lifestyle choices, interests, etc are not inherently problematic. And can't even be remedied by these programs without creating serious problems. Sounds reasonable to me.

It makes the attacks on him all the more bizarre because it's crystal clear from the memo that he's a liberal. Not only does he mention it outright but he devotes a good quarter of the memo to suggesting ways that we could increase the number of women in tech that don't involve discriminating against white people. I can't blame people for not reading it but the media has no excuse. They are straight up lying to people when they lead others to believe the memo is sexist in any way.

No he doesn't "flat out say" that women are neurotic. See for yourself:

assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

>Personality differences
>Women, on average, have more:

>Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance).

>-This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs.

Then he links to this to support this statement.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_psychology#Personality_traits

I do wonder if some people are capable of understanding the difference between "on average women are more neurotic" and "all women are neurotic." It's clear from the context that this is not even meant to be taken negatively in any way. He's simply laying out the facts.

Liberals are about 2 weeks away from being Nazis.
This is the worst countersignal meme I've seen, and I've seen plenty. It was made by someone that unironically believes in "American democracy" and there can't be a bigger idiot test than that.

Honestly if he had not made a biological argument against women in tech or executive positions he may have gotten his desire for a more open dialogue. His argument that conservative people in Google are "closeted" in fear because Google leans left is a bad choice of word given their public stances.

He means "neurotic" according to the OCEAN personality test, which is the scientific standard for evaluating personality.

Trump's victory renewed my belief in American democracy. It shows that the "wrong" candidate can win after all.

link to the initial essay?

Right, and what I meant was that using the word neurotic to describe women was perceived as not kosher by the Google powers that be, as anyone with sense could have guessed that it would be. As I said, he probably did not recognize that this would be the perception. He probably does think he's laying out innocent facts, but you can't just talk about some things at work and expect to still be employed. He was too socially dumb at best to work in a place where he had to interact with people.

>if he had not made a biological argument against women in tech

considering he was a biology researcher at elite institutions for most of his adult life he probably didn't realize how anti-intellectual and anti-science most americans actually are.

See first link of .

It is tame. He cites psychology today which I would avoid, though I read one of the blogs on there. He cites autism man Simon Baron-Cohen, but I take the imprinted brain theory over the extreme male brain theory.
That makes me glad, and like the guy. Many people seem to turn into conformists in order to avoid exclusion by both sides. I hope we don't lose a middle ground, though on some issues there isn't.

The biological or psychological facts are not for or against any argument by themselves so it's ridiculous for anyone to get offended over them. Why is it a bad idea to refer to conservatives as being in the closet when they can't be open about their beliefs? It's a perfectly apt description.

Go ahead and say women are neurotic according to biology. Men and women will get very offended and if you said it in a public place you will no longer be employed. Science makes not an iota of difference when it comes to emotional reaction.

>you can't just talk about some things at work and expect to still be employed.

this thought always goes through my mind when i advocate lsd use to students, afterwards i think "oh shit i'm dead", but apparently advocating the benefits of illegal mind altering drugs isn't as bad as writing a memo summarizing recent biology research as i've suffered no negative consequences

Is that the INITIAL essay?

I skimmed it and it seemed like a response to the backlash from the initial essay.

he added an intro page at the beginning, the rest is the same

I'm not okay with treating people like children who can't handle certain words. You and other people perceived it as him calling all women neurotic but your wrong. If you can't read or you misread certain things that's your problem, not anyone elses.

His job involved hiring people, and if merely laying out facts to support a proposed change in policy that is entirely pertinent to the job he was assigned to do is enough to get fired then we're in a lot of fucking trouble as a society.

I was skimming though this thread at HN yesterday and reading some of the comments is infuriating.
news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14952787
Half of the posts are high school tier at best. Why do STEM guys lack even basic philosophy skills?


I've read it (without the references), it's a short read.
Basically at the most extreme it's what you'd expect from the "alt-light" sphere of libertarian-to-slightly-conservative Americans (Molyneux, Peterson, Milo, Sargon, ...). Or in other words what was considered common sense 10 years ago, but is now considered edgy because of SJWs.

A proper intellectual could challenge parts of that memo, but he'd challenge the SJWs even more.


I doubt he was interviewed by anyone from the alt-right. Get your terminology straight.

>believes in meritocracy
>lied about having a PHD

Wew lad

>essay

yes, it was a screed, rant, manifesto, mein kampf 2.0, but absolutely NOT an essay, oh no...

>women may be a bit emotional, you know
>REEEEE FIRE HIM NOW I'M LIKE TOTALLY OFFENDED REEEEEEEEEEE I'M SO MAD I'M TAKING A DAY OFF

He wrote another less controversial essay in the 2000s about ways to increase efficiency that has been sadly overlooked. It contained such gems as advocating increased consumption of oats to reduce time needed to produce a stool.

((((wrong)))) you are getting played faggot

I don't even know who that is. Is this about another public outrage ritual? What the hell are you Americans doing?

>oats

It's like 7 pages long with size 14 font and a lot of pictures.

I mean in a rhetorical way that they were bad choices; not that they were necessarily inaccurate or incorrect. The audience he was speaking to he acknowledges is quick to dismiss what is said based on unconscious bias. He should have not provided easy ammunition to use against him. His appeals to a more open dialogue on those biases however had potential to appeal to the language of diversity they already use.

A guy offers less retarded ways to increase the number of women in tech so of course he gets labeled a sexist by the media and the leftist lemmings.

>What the hell are you Americans doing?
They're being distracted from real problems that could challenge the system.

He was on Molyneux's podcast

Moly is not alt-right.

But virtually everyone on the "alt-right" accepts evolution and anthropomorphic caused climate change.
It's the young left that are now anti-science.

lol bizzare? where have you been? this is how the media works

...you mean Jordan Peterson? Is he "alt-right" to you?

I would agree that they might be bad choices for persuading people. I don't think that's really what he was trying to accomplish though. This is conjecture of course but I think he was trying to make certain people look stupid. He set the bait knowing that leftists would overreact and prove the points he was making, that these people are ideological totalitarians who are utterly close-minded. He was realistic in his goals. He wasn't attempting to persuade the unpersuadable bigots on the left but instead he was targeting the centrists or slightly left leaning people. As far as that goes mission accomplished. This was a test for progressives and they failed badly.

Point still stands

This

I'm watching him on Memerson right now and unsurprisingly he's getting a lot of attaboys. The whole thing is very JBP-esque.

They're fighting the SJWs, because they're convinced that this is the most important issue right now (while working double shifts to pay for the medical bills after getting shot by a nigger from across the street).

well SJWs want to import infinitely more niggers to shoot us

I' ve just read the whole memo and it seems to me that Google is shitting itself at the idea of confronting mainstream left leaning people, which it seems are now infected with sjw ideology.

I found the memo to be very well articulated, and very open minded, certainly not offensive.

But since I'm a white male, I'm an oppressor so guess it makes me an oppressor so I must be wrong somewhere.

Full memo
medium.com/@Cernovich/full-james-damore-memo-uncensored-memo-with-charts-and-cites-339f3d2d05f

>no link

Exactly, very JPB esque. I hate to say it, but "it's happening"

>calls the gender wage gap a "myth"

ouch

If everything he said up to that point was semi-reasonable, then that was probably the last straw. It's one of the few myths that people still vehemently believe is real (and, due to things like women not arguing for higher pay, "seem" to be true). I can imagine that killed any good will that left-leaning readers had, assuming they got to that point.

oh god, now that I'm reading it, the whole "Why We're Blind" is likely the most incendiary part of the essay.

I think the response to what he wrote shows that he made the right call in not going 1488 with it.

It is a myth. Two second Internet search can confirm.

plenty of left leaning people appreciate facts and don't believe in this myth.

It's a little ridiculous to acknowledge that males and females are very different in their physical forms and capacities and to say that these forms and capacities are the product of a long standing sex-specific selection process. And at the same time say that men and women have the same psyche, and that obedience to social messages is entirely responsible for the observable differences in their respective psychological characters. Jesus Christ these ideologicals have no shame.

It is also interesting to postulate that men and women are exactly the same, while also predicating that women represent "diversity". How can they be different and the same?

>Google: we must hire more women in the workplace because they're different, and this difference is precious to us!!!!
>Damore: okay, here is why the women are different, and how we should hire more of them
>Google: OMG SO OUTRAGEOUS AND SEXIST WE'RE JUST ALL THE SAME AND YOU'RE FIRED LMAO

Is the philosophical treatise of the 21st century the workplace memo?

Does it really? Even Vox released a video explaining why the the popular catchphrase of the wage gap is actually really dumb, and the problems lie elsewhere not in salary.

>common fucking sense is now becoming improper to say
This shit is going too far. We don't need biology to know that women are generally more neurotic, more emotional, more passive, and less rational than men. It's the wisdom of fucking past millenniums being suppressed by a stupid minority of loud ideologues.

nothing that is unquantifiable matters anymore

Yeah. I'm not really that angry (it's hard to convey emotional nuance through a Balinese textile-weaving board obviously), more just amused and sad at the state of Western civilization today and its unnecessary worship of women.

Everyone accepts evolution, even the Christians. I wouldn't say everyone accepts anthropomorphic climate change however.

He's basically just a heretic isn't he? I think instinctually know that what he said is true, so they'd rather just silence him than have to deal with addressing his points

The thing is, even if you think that what he said is factually incorrect, why wouldn't you just deal with it by simply rebutting his points? Why get him fired and make this big fuss?

Thats the whole point of how the left treats issues.

Brand image + fear of possible discrimination lawsuits making an argument out of this guy not being sanctioned

>it seems to me that Google is shitting itself at the idea of confronting mainstream left leaning people, which it seems are now infected with sjw ideology.
That is their targeted demographic, and where the money is, so it only makes sense that they want to appeal to them.

I think the most striking thing about this essay was the sheer autism
Would be surprised if he wasn't a diversity hire desu

I read it, it was well thought out and all the liberal/twitter outrage is pretty much unwarranted. He just stated what everyone knows, more men are suited for programming than women, but there are quotas that people want to fill so a female with less merit might get hired over a guy who is more competent.

Who the fuck is this? Why dopes everyone know him?

>Molyneux, Peterson, Milo, Sargon,...
>One of those actually published legit books and research and is not just a blatant pseud

Yeah he is some arrogant scam artist, thats what he is.

Sure, but what "unites" them is that they're all publicly opposed to SJWs.
(I actually think that most people are opposed to SJWs, so them being grouped into some "special" category is a bit silly, but oh well.)

Sadly. Suits 'flagged' attention spans: legion.

One thing that strikes is that Damore is "a huge fan" of Peterson (he says that at the end of the interview).

So we can see this event as a successful attempt by a well rounded mind to put into practice what Peterson has been advocating for over a year now.

It is badly written, but mostly correct.

There are sex differences across numerous personality traits, and the explanation is likely evolutionary/biological - evidenced by studies showing that these sex differences are *more* prevalent in more progressive countries.

>Brand image
Much more damaged since Google fired him, which causes the entire world's media to talk about it instead of three SJWs on their blog

>fear of possible discrimination lawsuits
Punish those who leaked the memo lol

well the alt-right and /po/ attract different types desu. I mean, there are people on pol who think jesus was white and israel was full of nordics

Which is 'gay af desu', when memery bleeds into reality. That is pure simulation.

>Trump's victory renewed my belief in American democracy.
Exactly as it was meant to. The plan worked perfectly. Well done Trump, well done Hillary! You both played your roles beautifully.

I insist on brand image : in India where women are treated like pieces of shit I'm pretty sure that it is perceived as extremely progressive, and as an example of how society should be, for the IT Bangalore middle class for instance. Google brand must be considered as global, not strictly western.

Google is a jewish company. Jews view white men as their primary enemy. Jews and jewish companies therefore promote diversity in white countries to limit the power of white men. Complications arise because white men are responsible for 99% of all scientific and technological advancements. White men figure out the jewish diversity game is a sham and counter it with facts. Jews and jewish companies shut it down and attack white men.

None of this is very complicated if you understand our enemy, the jew.

You have to fundamentally misunderstand google's target demographic if you believe that. Not firing him would tarnish their image in the eyes of young, progressive urbanites. They don't care if /pol/ types hate them.

Booooooooorrrriiing. It's actual the lizard interdimensional shapeshifters. Google is one of their powerhouses of disseminating electronic soma to the masses.