casebash comments on Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA - Effective Altruism Forum

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (235)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: casebash 27 October 2017 01:14:01AM *  5 points [-]

I actually think we should discuss other hypotheses.

Firstly, "other hypotheses" includes all kinds of inoffensive explanations like the primary cause of a difference being:

  • Broader society has instilled certain social norms in people, as opposed to it being anything specific about this group
  • Founder effects - A guy gets a few of his mates to start the group, they rope in their mates, ect.
  • That the message happens to resonate among groups of people that are currently disproportionately one gender (ie. programmers)

But going further than this, I don't think we should limit discussion of different intrinsic preferences either, especially if someone makes an argument that is dependent on this being false.

Comment author: xccf 27 October 2017 04:34:00AM 7 points [-]

I think I've noticed a pattern where basically any hypothesis that's not the discrimination hypothesis gradually leaves the Overton window.

Comment author: Lila 27 October 2017 01:19:51PM 0 points [-]

Where do we draw the line? Is intrinsic abilities an acceptable topic of casual discussion? Do you think it would be humiliating for people who are being discussed as having less intrinsic ability?

Comment author: casebash 27 October 2017 02:13:23PM *  3 points [-]

I think it depends on the particular space. The rationality community should aim to have everything open to discussion because that is its purpose. The EA community should minimise these discussions in that they are rarely necessarily and quite often a distraction. In most groups I've been in, social norms can prevent the need for formal rules though.