Reply to post: This Article

Your top five dreadful people the Google manifesto has pulled out of the woodwork

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

This Article

If it's not sarcasm, then well it's a really bias and poorly concluded article compare to the other informative El Reg Articles.

Here are a few points that are bias or poorly concluded.

"He does a spectacularly bad job of it. Mostly because he is wrong and acting out of bitterness and ignorance – never a great start point."

This sentence ended with the next sentence about something else. You used your opinion to point out 'Mostly because he is wrong' and with nothing before or after to backup your claim. No examples, nothing, like a train of thought just ramp right into a dead end. This is just poorly concluded and random unless we read through the memo.

"The bigger question to ask is probably why highly intelligent, accomplished, lauded white men feel the need to draw distinctions of superiority in the first place...Just to be absolutely clear here: If you ever make a statement about what a broad group of people are like, especially in comparison to another group of people, you are going to be wrong. And the bigger that group, the more wrong you will be."

This is just plain bias. If making a statement about a group of people is wrong, then everyone who study or report psychology or biology are doom to be wrong then (which just happens to have a lot of highly intelligent, accomplished, lauded men and women).

Psychology is the study of behavior and biology is the study of living organisms, which unlike physic or chemistry does not 100% return the same results due to small variation in living things. You're not going have the same behavior, you're not going to get the same drug reaction between a 100 women and men 100% of the time.

Here's a psychology experiment on groupthink. The individuals ended up follow the group, but not all of them followed the group at the same time or in the same way due to the living things variation.

Is concluding that in general the concept of groupthink exist within a group of people wrong? I'll let you and history (1962) do the debate. Instead, a better way to state that would be conclusion on group of people should not be mixed with opinion and/or bias, like 'A lot of Japanese eat rice, vegetable and fish based on this study'. See better?

"Toby Young...pointing out that the average woman was different to the average man and that everyone had failed to noticed this..."

Read the damn memo. Starting from "Women, on average". Everyone DID failed to notice.

"It's a pretty safe bet that the women being interviewed for specific posts at Google are in fact highly qualified to do those jobs. What is so infuriating about Damore's mindset – and what Google is trying so hard to unravel – is the immediate assumption that..."

This is poorly concluded. 'a pretty safe bet' is an assumption too. You can't use an assumption to disprove assumption. That's like I assume 2+2 =190, therefore your assumption of 2+2 = 54 is wrong. You need facts to disprove assumption. You can however state that's an assumption and might not be true.

Overall, yes you did conclude that there ARE assholes (from the other people you've pointed to). But with the complete poorly concluded and bias view with the lack of referencing, it just in return makes you an asshole too.

TL;DR: I'm an asshole, who pointed out an asshole author on an asshole article being bias and poorly concluded.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019