DHTML Menu / JavaScript Menu Powered by Milonic
Already a member? Sign In

Village Journals help
Resonate your identity with Naseeb journals. Express your opinions, share your thoughts, post your writings and connect with like minded people through the power of expression.

Women are inferior....


... "no they are not". A discussion on gender inequalities in the hard-sciences by two prominent harvard psychologists.
www.edge.org

It's really long, and they cite a lotta psych work, but I found it pretty interesting. If you don't want to read, but have 2 hours to kill, they have a 300 meg video of the debate also.

(cross posted to the brain village, but I figure there are a lotta oppinionated women in here).
 

Add Comments

 
Add
 

  Comments on this journal

Login to find out (May 24, 2005 at 1:52am)
that's one heckova long article yaar!!!! but is interesting all the same :)
 
Login to find out (May 17, 2005 at 3:22am)
What's this about lotas????
 
Login to find out (May 16, 2005 at 5:08am)
but its interesting stuff no doubt--and even more interesting b/c it seems to dispel alot more of the broader stereotypes--since the two are arguing over a small sliver of difference b/n male and females, and not absolute differences in the ability to reason etc.
 
Login to find out (May 16, 2005 at 5:07am)
still--at its most extreme..the two seem to be arguing over pretty minute differences..but i think i can see spelke's point about the SAT's--it depends on what skills you decide to focus on, that make the test either pro-boy, or pro-girl..and if you took pinker's assertion a bit further..it would also imply that there are innate differences in the different race's ability to succeed (of course, maybe without the other additional types of supporting evidence pinker gives)...my problem is that, i find spelke's type of evidence easier to asses, b/c it is 'everyday sorta stuff', pinker's evidence is alot more technical, and i just don't know how much weight to give it vs the fact that there have been other tests that have come out otherwise (as spelke points out)
 
Login to find out (May 16, 2005 at 4:57am)
i guess they're not so good at it--if you buy pinker's interpretation. :-P
 
Login to find out (May 14, 2005 at 1:43pm)
If you read the article (or watched the movie), you'd realize I wasn't calling your gender lotas. Lotas require complex visio-spatial and geometric reasoning which women aren't so good at.
 
Login to find out (May 14, 2005 at 12:55pm)
i guess we're opinionated lotas
 
Login to find out (May 14, 2005 at 4:51am)
did you just refer to us as lotas?
 
Login to find out (May 14, 2005 at 2:51am)
interesting stuff..will read and respond.
 
Login to find out (May 14, 2005 at 1:02am)
i had that coming, huh :-P
 
Login to find out (May 14, 2005 at 12:54am)
i think u mean "opinionated." :oP