Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dervish
I don't know if what he said is true or not, but it doesn't seem so far beyond the pale that it's worthy of crucifying the guy. I mean, I've seen on PBS (yes I watch it sometimes) and even those far lefties realize there are anatomical differences between the brains of women and those of men. They pointed out the differences in X-Rays on TV. Why is it so heretical simply to suggest that those might translate into differing aptitudes?

If you're a liberal, you're virtually REQUIRED to believe that women and blacks cannot compete without special assistance (and are thus believed to be inherently "different"); why is this such a scandal?

3 posted on 02/16/2005 6:00:30 PM PST by Still Thinking (Disregard the law of unintended consequences at your own risk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Still Thinking

It is the thought police at work. They are agenda driven.

How can one have science in the absence of willingness to question?


6 posted on 02/16/2005 6:10:35 PM PST by dervish (Europe should pay for NATO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Still Thinking
I don't know if what he said is true or not, but it doesn't seem so far beyond the pale that it's worthy of crucifying the guy.

As I understand it, Summers said something like this: Women are underrepresented in the sciences and math. That may be because (1) they are side-tracked by childrearing, (2) there are innate differences between the sexes, (3) they are discriminated against, or (4) something else. Whatever it is, we should investigate the cause to address the issue.

The statement of possible causes uses the word OR and ends with ALL OTHER. It is, by definition, true. Moreover, there are respectable findings that male and female brains differ. Also, the standard deviation of male IQs is known to be higher than that of females, leading to more super-bright men and more super-stupid men. The super-bright ones might, conceivably, become professors of science or math.

So why crucify the guy over this innocuous statement?

I think the reason is that Summers is the one highly placed person in higher education who sees the risks that the post-structuralists pose to America's system of education -- our trump card in the post-industrial, knowledge-work economy. Now that they small blood in the water -- even over such a seemingly minor issue -- they'd like to try to take him down before he exposes and halts their treasonous efforts.

They cannot be permitted to succeed or it will be generations before anyone in higher education is willing to tackle them again (by which time the U.S. will have lost its economic advantage -- the implicit objective of the post-structuralists).

17 posted on 02/16/2005 7:22:19 PM PST by Sarastro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson