# Harvard's President says men have a natural advantage in math and science **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 18, 2005, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410 "2005-01-18T19:32:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2005, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/41 "2005-01-20T19:46:19Z")
> [@pokey](#): > > You’re missing my point. The point is, you can’t prove either way what happened… Well now you’re an agnostic on the matter but earlier you were attacking Steven Pinker, who is far from being uninformed on this subject. Why? ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2005, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/42 "2005-01-20T20:01:01Z")
> [@pokey](#): > > You’re missing my point. The point is, you can’t prove either way what happened. There is no sense getting upset or feeling that it is a battle between a poor beaten down man versus a bunch of harpies if you don’t know I know Harvard. I’m familiar with the psuedo-scandals people have whipped up against Summers in the past. > [@](#): > > Is Carol Gilligan even alive anymore? It’s 2005 now. She’s leaving Harvard for NYU, but very much alive. > [@](#): > > My opinion is that this the type of man bites dog story that makes people say gosh what’s this world coming to over nothing. Like I say, it’s not 1984. We live in a different world now, you have to be sensitive. Who decides what is “sensitive”? “Sensitive” is a weapon of power these days. ---
**Author:** ![pokey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ebca7d/32.png) [@pokey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pokey)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2005, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/43 "2005-01-20T20:06:52Z")
> [@Tigers2B1](#): > > Well now you’re an agnostic on the matter but earlier you were attacking Steven Pinker, who is far from being uninformed on this subject. Why? I have been an agnostic on the matter for each of my posts. My only position on the subject is that the reaction in this thread is emotional and not based on the facts reported. So was Pinker’s. He wasn’t there. His authority on neurobiology has no bearing on what happened or whether anyone is attacking “facts.” For all any of us know, the MIT biologist quoted has a great respect for the facts but was offended on another level. The analogy about his mom is is that he said “the truth can’t be offensive.” While that’s true, it’s irrelevant, because there is no reason to believe it’s the truth that the professors couldn’t handle. The article is ambiguous. Someone might be able to handle the scientific fact that their mom has an obesity issue, but be offended if a non-expert brings it up in an inappropriate context. I am not attacking him, I’m saying his logic is wrong. He’s doing what you are doing. He’s speculating that the people who were offended just can’t handle the topic of the gendered brain on an emotional level, but there’s no evidence of that. You are all just projecting. ---
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2005, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/44 "2005-01-20T20:21:17Z")
> [@pokey](#): > > …I am not attacking him, I’m saying his logic is wrong. He’s doing what you are doing. He’s speculating that the people who were offended just can’t handle the topic of the gendered brain on an emotional level, but there’s no evidence of that. You are all just projecting. We also have what Summer’s indicated he said. Do you have evidence that he said anything to the contrary? Did those who were “offended” offer anything Summer stated that is outb of bounds in an academic environment? Or were those academics “offended” by the propostion alone? In relation to Pinker — show me where Pinker’s statements went awry in your mind. Why Pinker is one in a pair of “dolts” - as you put this. **We do have his entire statement.** > [@](#): > > CRIMSON: From what psychologists know, is there ample evidence to support the hypothesis that a difference in “innate ability” accounts for the under-representation of women on science faculties? > > PINKER: First, let’s be clear what the hypothesis is—every one of Summers’ critics has misunderstood it. The hypothesis is, first, that the statistical distributions of men’s and women’s quantitative and spatial abilities are not identical—that the average for men may be a bit higher than the average for women, and that the variance for men might be a bit higher than the variance for women (both implying that there would be a slightly higher proportion of men at the high end of the scale). It does not mean that all men are better at quantitative abilities than all women! That’s why it would be immoral and illogical to discriminate against individual women even if it were shown that some of the statistidcal differences were innate. > > Second, the hypothesis is that differences in abilities might be one out of several factors that explain differences in the statistical representation of men and women in various professions. It does not mean that it is the only factor. Still, if it is one factor, we cannot reflexively assume that different statistical representation of men and women in science and engineering is itself proof of discrimination. Incidentally, another sign that we are dealing with a taboo is that when it comes to this issue, ordinarily intelligent scientists suddenly lose their ability to think quantitatively and warp statistical hypotheses into crude dichotomies. > > As far as the evidence is concerned, I’m not sure what “ample” means, but there is certainly enough evidence for the hypothesis to be taken seriously. > > For example, quantitative and spatial skills vary within a gender according to levels of sex hormones. And in samples of gifted students who are given every conceivable encouragement to excel in science and math, far more men than women expressed an interest in pursuing science and math. > > CRIMSON: Were President Summers’ remarks within the pale of legitimate academic discourse? > > PINKER: Good grief, shouldn’t everything be within the pale of legitimate academic discourse, as long as it is presented with some degree of rigor? That’s the difference between a university and a madrassa. > > CRIMSON: Would it be normal to hear a similar set of hypotheses presented and considered at a conference of psychologists? > > PINKER: Some psychologists are still offended by such hypotheses, but yes, they could certainly be considered at most major conferences in scientific psychology. > > CRIMSON: Finally, did you personally find President Summers’ remarks (or what you’ve heard/read of them) to be offensive? > > PINKER: Look, the truth cannot be offensive. Perhaps the hypothesis is wrong, but how would we ever find out whether it is wrong if it is “offensive” even to consider it? People who storm out of a meeting at the mention of a hypothesis, or declare it taboo or offensive without providing arguments or evidence, don’t get the concept of a university or free inquiry. ---
**Author:** ![pokey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ebca7d/32.png) [@pokey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pokey)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2005, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/45 "2005-01-20T20:21:33Z")
> [@Apos](#): > > See my below post. Of course he symapathizes with these barriers. But he’s being browbeaten into weepy comiseration on this issue because people are throwing stories of horrible discrimination and probably even sexual abuse at his feet and demanding that he account for it. How would you respond if that happened to you? He knows he’s beaten. He made teh mistake of stepping on the orthodoxy’s feet, and now he must bow down and pay the price or else be labeled a sexist bigot who cares nothing for the abuse of women. That’s how it works. It’s a matter of perspective. To me, it seems that he is doing what’s right, and that it is a positive thing. He is not in a degraded position by apologizing. In my mind’s eye, it’s entirely possible that he is genuine in his comments and apologizes without resentment because he truly wants to express himself clearly and without anyone misunderstanding. In your mind’s eye, he shouldn’t have to, it is unlikely that he misspoke, and he is only bullshitting to save his job. We are both guessing, and I hope we both know it, so we should agree to disagree and call it a matter of perspective. ---
**Author:** ![pokey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ebca7d/32.png) [@pokey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pokey)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2005, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/46 "2005-01-20T20:32:20Z")
> [@Tigers2B1](#): > > We also have what Summer’s indicated he said. Do you have evidence that he said anything to the contrary? Did those who were “offended” offer anything Summer stated that is outb of bounds in an academic environment? Or were those academics “offended” by the propostion alone? > > In relation to Pinker — show me where Pinker’s statements went awry in your mind. Why Pinker is one in a pair of “dolts” - as you put this. **We do have his entire statement.** Not Pinker’s statement. I was referring to Summers’ statement. PINKER does not have SUMMER’S statement, only his paraphrase after. Sometimes when someone makes an offensive comment that they didnt’ know was offensive, they later phrase it completely differently, the way they would have liked to say it in the first place. Pinker goes awry when he says that people were offended by the facts. Unless he’s reading a better article than the one on CNN, he has no way of knowing anyone is offended by facts, he is tearing down the same strawman you are. I’m going to have to say, you are having a logic problem. You don’t know what happened, Pinker does not know what happened, and if you all want to imagine a big drama that may not have happened, enjoy yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2005, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/47 "2005-01-20T20:49:13Z")
No, I understand you perfectly. Problem is — there’s nothing there to indicate this was an “offensive” comment in and of itself. And I have to say **pokey** – that in your world, it seems that unless you’re there, and you’re certain all mental and necessary physical facilities are in proper working order – you can’t comment on a matter. Why? Well spoken communication only tells us a part of the story. So, even a transcript is no good - true? In fact, we do have what Summer indicated he said — and we have NOTHING that substantially contradicts that — even from those who were “offended.” Summer merely suggested a proposition for consideration. Is there statements out there to the contrary? Summers also indicates that stated that there may be innate differences between men and women. Now THAT proposition HAS been mentioned. And, I suspect, is the source of the complaints of “offense” - ---
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2005, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/48 "2005-01-20T20:57:52Z")
> [@pokey](#): > > Not Pinker’s statement. I was referring to Summers’ statement. PINKER does not have SUMMER’S statement, only his paraphrase after… Then what specifically qualifies Pinker as a “dolt?” As you stated he was – ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2005, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/49 "2005-01-20T23:16:29Z")
> [@pokey](#): > > It’s a matter of perspective. To me, it seems that he is doing what’s right, and that it is a positive thing. He is not in a degraded position by apologizing. In my mind’s eye, it’s entirely possible that he is genuine in his comments and apologizes without resentment because he truly wants to express himself clearly and without anyone misunderstanding. In your mind’s eye, he shouldn’t have to, it is unlikely that he misspoke, and he is only bullshitting to save his job. We are both guessing, and I hope we both know it, so we should agree to disagree and call it a matter of perspective. Unless, of course, your perspective is that I have offended you, in which case I’d better get down on my knees and beg forgiveness. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2005, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/50 "2005-01-21T01:51:09Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > You aren’t thinking of that French broad whop discovered radium and polonium, are you? The only person (male or female) who has won a Nobel prize in both physics and chemistry? Yes, just your typical woman scientist, wasn’t she? Yep. And I bet she never saw a great movie called [_Cannibal Women in the Avocado Jungle of Death_](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094834/), a hysterical satire of ultra-feminist politics, in which a pre-_Politically Incorrect_ Bill Mahr makes the trenchant observation about French broads and Kryptonite. Marie Curie wasn’t actually French, by the way. She was from Poland and named Polonium in tribute. [sub]i.e. I call “whoosh” on you[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Tigers2B1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc29f/32.png) [@Tigers2B1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tigers2B1)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2005, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410/51 "2005-01-27T15:32:20Z")
George Will finally weighs in on the Summers gender incident ---- And Nancy Hopkin’s “hysterical” reaction - Here’s the link. > **[George Will: Biography and Latest Articles - George Will](https://townhall.com/columnists/georgewill/)** > > George F. Will, whose newspaper column has been syndicated by The Washington Post Writers Group since 1974, today appears in more than 460 papers. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/harvards-president-says-men-have-a-natural-advantage-in-math-and-science/285410.md?page=2)