Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
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.
|
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.
