Fired Google engineer got his ideas from… evolutionary psychology
|August 8, 2017||Posted by News under Culture, Evolutionary psychology, Intelligent Design, Naturalism|
In a coherent system, that would be a dilemma.
As progressives turn and rend each other with increasing ferocity—as a break from attacking others— we learn that the engineer who was fired from Google for authoring the anti-diversity memo was relying on the principles of evolutionary psychology. From Nitasha Tiku at Wired:
The 10-page missive was posted on an internal discussion board and went viral inside, and outside, the company Friday and Saturday. The document cited purported principles of evolutionary psychology to argue that women make up only 20 percent of Google’s technical staff because they are more interested in people rather than ideas, which the author considers an obstacle to being a good engineer. The author, James Damore, said Google’s liberal leanings and emphasis on training around “unconscious bias” have created an ideological echo chamber that make it difficult to discuss these issues openly inside the company.
Late Monday, Damore told Breitbart that he had been fired. (He confirmed this to WIRED, saying he was “fired for ‘perpetuating gender stereotypes.'”) Also Monday, Google CEO Sundar Pichai told employees that the missive’s author had violated the company’s Code of Conduct, a Google spokesman confirms. More.
A friend asks us to note that the conclusions of evo psych are called “purported” in this account. possibly because We Mustn’t Accept Them. Any conclusions that are actually in line with progressive thought, no matter how counterfactual, are of course treated as Science.
Yes, it is classic Orwell indeed: The Google execs probably all believe in evolutionary psychology, as they believe in Darwin. But they must ruthlessly sacrifice a colleague who acts on the belief system.
Most traditions honour their martyrs. But come to think of it, a Darwinian tradition would act in precisely in this way, wouldn’t it? Perhaps an evo psych prof can get a paper out of it all, drowning the incoherence in jargon.
This story underlines a general direction in science: Ideology matters and evidence that might conflict with ideology is the enemy.
See also: “The evolutionary psychologist knows why you vote — and shop, and tip at restaurants”
How naturalism rots science from the head down