We interrupt this economics discussion for a cheap political shot.
 

For the liberal geeks among us:


Bumper sticker seen today on the hippie-dippie streets of Venice Beach:

FRODO FAILED
BUSH HAS THE RING


Unsurprisingly, its bearer* was a dirty, white VW Vanagon with vanity plates reading "SMEEGOL."

Carry on.





*The bumper sticker's, that is.

Summers
 

So then you're not really asking if others think that Summers was wrong. You're asking if others think that the reaction to his comments was wrong.

aV

Summers
 

I'm not asking if he was wrong on the substantive point. I'm asking whether he, as an academic, was wrong to openly consider what could possibly be true, as well as the reaction.

Summers
 

Isn't that to be expected? Summers had already pissed people off, and now it's time to pile on.

That said, I don't think the answer is necessarily outside possible knowledge. It's possible to design cross-subject and cross-cultural data to try to gain insight as to whether "inate" differences in the way minds work might be an explanation. But I would guess that some people don't want to see such a study, because they have an interest in the continuation of "antidiscrimination" policies.

Summers
 

In reading the transcript, he seemed to go beyond posing the question, and posited the answer, without any real support (the excerpt I read, IIRC, basically was "there are three possible reasons--it can't be discrim., because we've taken steps to root that out; it might be a bit hours, but we see women achieve succes in other fields, so that's probably not it; third is inate differences, and because the other explanations are out, this must be the dominant reason." Uh, yeah, that's logical reasoning.

We interrupt this economics discussion for a cheap political shot.
 

that makes Clinton Gollum or bilbo?

Summers
 

But how do you design around cultural/societal forces?

Summers
 

cross-cultural studies are a useful approach. For example, one might look at success rates of women becoming scientists in other cultures. If they differ, then perhaps culture is to explain. If they're the same, then perhaps it's inate differences. Or a universal culture. But one could at least take a first whack at the question.

Summers
 

You have to incorporate them into the design methodology and do cross-cutrual studies over a long time and many societies. I can guarantee that you're going to end up seeing a lot more women scientists in some cultures than others (not necessarily this one).

ETA:

You're also going to have to look at the way boys and girls are encouraged early on, and you're going to have to look at education methods.

Summers
 

Read the transcipt. Summers sat there arrogantly spewing unsupported prejudices in front of a group of intelligent and analytical scientists. This is what Harvard faculty do in front of students, but not what the President does in front of faculty.

ETA: I'm serious in this point. Institutionally, Summers has a very different role to play, and part of what he undermines is the idea that a standard of academic rigour ought to apply in an institution like Harvard. Granted, that standard has been worn down over the years (cf. the neo-cons for an example today), but he really just trashed it entirely.

Crazy Prediction
 

I have a crazy prediction to make based on flimsy evidence.

As women come into science more full force, they will begin making a disproportionate share of the significant new breakthroughs. This is based on my observations of my daughter and son, who think in very different ways about science and about how things work. The daughter is more often surprising to me in her perspective, thinking about something very differently than I (or my male, software engineer friends).

Men are very yesterday. Yes, for one reason or another, women think differently. But the way men think is played out and over-mined.

Summers
 

And at the end of the day, the results are going to be inconclusive. There are just far too many variables.

Personally, I think it is more of a matter of interest than anything else, but that may be affected by societal pressure as well.

Summers
 

The only way to say for sure is to raise kids in a society vacuum and see what happens, and I'm not sure you'd get IRB approval for that.

I do think that men and women think differently, and it'd probably be really interesting to see how that's impacted in their work. I deal with men and women scientists on a regular basis, and they're all a pain in the ass when you're trying to get them to be compliant.

Summers
 

“In the special case of science and engineering, there are issues of intrinsic aptitude, and particularly of the variability of aptitude, and that those considerations are reinforced by what are in fact lesser factors involving socialization and continuing discrimination. I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong...”

The effing arrogant cad! Doesn't he know that we've already figured out the math gap in junior high?

Oh, wait, we haven't? . . . .

Crazy Prediction
 

You effing, arrogant cad!

(Um, this is basically what Summers said.)