The danger of discriminatory hiring practices is both in hiring a less qualified candidate and in the potential for racially centered bitterness - ie: creating an "us vs them" division. Never mind that I would rather the focus be on the idealistic "we", collectively.
I would also like to see programs specifically set up to advocate and elevate those who pursue science in underserved communities. ie: perhaps universities helping establish programs in the K-12 educational environment. The hope would be that a greater number of individuals from those communities become a natural part of the qualified candidate pool.
I believe your concern on the basis of non-discrimination is grounded but would be interested in your ideas on how to create more opportunities for science education in underserved communities. Of course, that may be a bigger question of how to best improve educational opportunities - money, programs, and available educators, in such communities. Science being one very important facet of broader education.
Note that in the last half century the STEM types of people, with data and reality based thinking -- science --, have lifted more people out of poverty and a Hobbsian lifestyle (the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.) than all of previous history, but now the people who "believe" are ruling the world again, which just a change in the Deity from god to DEI.
What, if anything, has the soft sciences contributed to humanity beyond more effective propaganda and advertising? Have they solved any problems? Will they create another "dark ages" with their beliefs and inquisitions?
Anyone who believes that they know something about an individual when it, he, she, etc. knows their race, gender, intersectional position, etc. while knowing nothing about that individuals desires, knowledge, abilities, IQ, or character can't "see" the reality of N dimensional problems when described in N-x dimensions. They don't see that conic sections don't give you an accurate vision of a cone unless you use all three dimensions.
I guess if the solution to bad science is more science, then the solution to discrimination is more discrimination?
The danger of discriminatory hiring practices is both in hiring a less qualified candidate and in the potential for racially centered bitterness - ie: creating an "us vs them" division. Never mind that I would rather the focus be on the idealistic "we", collectively.
I would also like to see programs specifically set up to advocate and elevate those who pursue science in underserved communities. ie: perhaps universities helping establish programs in the K-12 educational environment. The hope would be that a greater number of individuals from those communities become a natural part of the qualified candidate pool.
I believe your concern on the basis of non-discrimination is grounded but would be interested in your ideas on how to create more opportunities for science education in underserved communities. Of course, that may be a bigger question of how to best improve educational opportunities - money, programs, and available educators, in such communities. Science being one very important facet of broader education.
The non-STEM crazy has taken over.
Note that in the last half century the STEM types of people, with data and reality based thinking -- science --, have lifted more people out of poverty and a Hobbsian lifestyle (the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.) than all of previous history, but now the people who "believe" are ruling the world again, which just a change in the Deity from god to DEI.
What, if anything, has the soft sciences contributed to humanity beyond more effective propaganda and advertising? Have they solved any problems? Will they create another "dark ages" with their beliefs and inquisitions?
Anyone who believes that they know something about an individual when it, he, she, etc. knows their race, gender, intersectional position, etc. while knowing nothing about that individuals desires, knowledge, abilities, IQ, or character can't "see" the reality of N dimensional problems when described in N-x dimensions. They don't see that conic sections don't give you an accurate vision of a cone unless you use all three dimensions.