{"id":9395,"date":"2017-08-12T00:33:29","date_gmt":"2017-08-12T05:33:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/?p=9395"},"modified":"2017-08-20T22:16:05","modified_gmt":"2017-08-21T03:16:05","slug":"the-damore-google-dust-up","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2017\/08\/12\/the-damore-google-dust-up\/","title":{"rendered":"The Damore-Google dust-up"},"content":{"rendered":"

Here I go wading into a\u00a0type of debate this blog does not often venture into: the debate surrounding Google employee James Damore’s firing for his ‘Ideological Echo Chamber’\u00a0manifesto<\/a>. I find this to be a complicated and interesting conversation, and I’m curious to know how my thoughts align with others.<\/p>\n

(I’m also trying here to model\u00a0the Whiteheadian process-relational ethics I’m currently writing about. That means: taking account of the multiple factors that are relevant, weighing them against each other in terms of the “intensities<\/a>” they\u00a0make available and the opportunities for producing beauty (as a harmony of factors) in the resulting syntheses, and looking beyond to where the different potential syntheses might lead. All of that figures as a very small part of my forthcoming\u00a0book; more on that soon.)<\/p>\n

These are thoughts in progress, subject to change as I hear others’ arguments and weigh the evidence (that I’ve far from mastered). Here are the thoughts, in no particular order:<\/p>\n

(1) We should be able to have conversations around gender\/race, biology vs. environment, employment and hiring policies, and the science (incl. social science) related to all of this without fear of being stifled, or fired, for airing our thoughts.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

(2) The science is far from settled (both ‘evolutionary psychology’ and social constructionism\/gender studies\/et al. notwithstanding). It is all worth engaging with and learning from, while remaining cautious of premature generalizations.<\/span><\/p>\n

(3) The tone of the 10-page memo<\/a>\u00a0is one that suggests the writer knows the truth and those who disagree with him don’t. This is part of what outrages\u00a0its critics. (I find that outrage understandable, even as I understand there’s a certain geekiness and perhaps an emotional “aspergerishness” that shouldn’t be too surprising to find in a software\u00a0engineer.)<\/p>\n

(4) But firing him appears to prove his point. It certainly gives more ammunition to the political (far) Right<\/a>. (That may outrage his critics further. And considering that\u00a0could be of tactical relevance for the pro-diversity side. But it is not a determining factor in whether the memo or the firing was\u00a0right or wrong.)<\/p>\n

(5) Google currently appears to line up on one side of the debate (the ‘progressive’ side) and in this respect they are unusual — not representative of any ‘dictatorship of the left’ as Damore seems to think, but more of an outlier or advance guard in the tech\/corporate world. (That’s an empirical statement that I’m open to revising if sufficient contrary evidence were provided.) If we are to value diversity (as Damore\u00a0claims to), we should be able to live with some prominent companies taking a stance like they have.<\/p>\n

(6) That stance should be seen not only as a shrewd political move on Google’s part, but as one that is respectful of their female and non-white employees. Since Google has been under scrutiny for precisely these issues, it’s understandable that there would be some consequence to the writer of\u00a0the memo\/manifesto. I’m not convinced that firing Damore was the best move, but I understand the\u00a0decision<\/a>\u00a0was a fraught one, and that it was intended to send a message that is consistent with the mentioned stance (and that is therefore defensible as such).<\/p>\n

(7) The debate has a lot of resonances for a lot of people, including women and minorities who have experienced workplace discrimination of the sort that I myself haven’t, so I’ll defer to them on the reality of what they are describing. That means I take it as real. And I’m aware there’s plenty of evidence to support that.<\/span><\/p>\n

(8) Some would reply that it resonates with white male employees who have themselves been ‘reverse discriminated’ like Damore ostensibly has. My own experience, and a little\u00a0familiarity with the literature, finds this argument suspect. (We’re talking not about a working-class, unemployed white guy, but\u00a0about a highly educated, well-paid specialist who is gaining himself<\/a> plenty of\u00a0media attention<\/a>\u00a0from this and who has already been offered employment —\u00a0from Wikileaks<\/a>\u00a0— for precisely these reasons. Not that any of that should reflect on the rightness or wrongness of his memo or his firing. But it adds interesting context — similar, for instance, to the contexts surrounding the firing of\u00a0Steven Salaita<\/a>, though these are politically polar opposite events.)<\/span><\/p>\n

(9) Reading the full 10-page memo and<\/strong><\/em> some of the detailed criticisms it’s received has been useful and enlightening. (Criticisms like this one<\/a>\u00a0and this one<\/a>.)<\/span><\/p>\n

(10) Reading the way it’s presented by the punditocracy is a little less useful and less enlightening. (For instance, the way in which David Brooks\u00a0can\u00a0call for the head<\/a>\u00a0of a certain scapegoat while glibly relating that\u00a0“We are at a moment when mobs on the left and the right ignore evidence and destroy scapegoats” — as if his own comments were exempt. But also the way the memo has been\u00a0so easily mischaracterized<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

(11) Finally,\u00a0the point above that I find most relevant and important in this moment of history — the “intensity” most worth emphasizing — is #7: this event’s reflection on the progress of women and minorities in a world still largely dominated by men of European colonial-elite descent. The memo highlights some of the problems our society\u00a0has with that progress. Damore’s firing might not have the best immediate impact on women’s and minorities’ rights, but Google’s effort to\u00a0send a positive message to those who are in the midst of that struggle is very meaningful. Equally meaningful is the attempt to raise the level of conversation all around, especially around gender discrimination and the multiple sciences and research fields associated with it. \u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Note to #11: Placing an issue within a larger historical context, like this, doesn’t mean subordinating individuals to historical forces, but it does mean teasing out the wider and deeper implications of things. We can’t avoid making choices for one kind of future over another, and part of making a\u00a0choice is opting for one emphasis over another.\u00a0<\/span>I would understand if someone else saw this issue differently — for instance, as mostly as a matter of free speech, reason, and the dangers of the “mob mentality” that David Brooks\u00a0finds on the left and the right. But I would hope they would be open to engaging with the other factors at play here. If they are, there is hope for us. If not, there is propaganda, desperation, Breitbart, and all the rest that comes with them.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Here I go wading into a\u00a0type of debate this blog does not often venture into: the debate surrounding Google employee James Damore’s firing for his ‘Ideological Echo Chamber’\u00a0manifesto. I find this to be a complicated and interesting conversation, and I’m curious to know how my thoughts align with others.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":99,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":true,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[203,690660,691215],"tags":[455060,455067,455069,455062,109070,452,455064,41465,455066,576,455063,455068,455070,455065],"class_list":["post-9395","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-academe","category-cultural_politics","category-politics_postpolitics","tag-anti-diversity","tag-anti-racism","tag-breitbart","tag-corporate-world","tag-cultural-left","tag-diversity","tag-evolutionary-psychology","tag-gender","tag-gender-studies","tag-google","tag-james-damore","tag-process-relational-ethics","tag-punditocracy","tag-social-constructionism"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p4IC4a-2rx","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":1187,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2010\/01\/29\/the-politics-of-objects-relations\/","url_meta":{"origin":9395,"position":0},"title":"the politics of objects & relations","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"January 29, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"The objects versus relations debate has revved up again over at Larval Subjects, in the commentary responding to Levi Bryant\u2019s Questions about the possibility of non-correlationist ethics. The debate, as I would describe it, circles around the following question: If we agree that traditional philosophy has been too centrally premised\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Eco-theory"","block_context":{"text":"Eco-theory","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/ecophilosophy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":10784,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2020\/06\/04\/eco-ethico-aesthetics-and-george-floyd\/","url_meta":{"origin":9395,"position":1},"title":"Eco-ethico-aesthetics and George Floyd","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"June 4, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"As I explain in Shadowing the Anthropocene, process-relational philosophy in a Peircian-Whiteheadian vein takes aesthetics to be first, ethics to be second, and logic (which, in our time, we need to think of also as eco-logic) to be third. This is not a temporal sequence, but a logical one: aesthetics\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Cultural politics"","block_context":{"text":"Cultural politics","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/cultural_politics\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2020\/06\/43924569-tv-damage-bad-sync-tv-channel-rgb-lcd-television-screen-with-static-noise-from-poor-broadcast-signal.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2020\/06\/43924569-tv-damage-bad-sync-tv-channel-rgb-lcd-television-screen-with-static-noise-from-poor-broadcast-signal.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2020\/06\/43924569-tv-damage-bad-sync-tv-channel-rgb-lcd-television-screen-with-static-noise-from-poor-broadcast-signal.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2020\/06\/43924569-tv-damage-bad-sync-tv-channel-rgb-lcd-television-screen-with-static-noise-from-poor-broadcast-signal.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2020\/06\/43924569-tv-damage-bad-sync-tv-channel-rgb-lcd-television-screen-with-static-noise-from-poor-broadcast-signal.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":13190,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2023\/05\/05\/race-shifting-gender-transitioning-other-identity-moves\/","url_meta":{"origin":9395,"position":2},"title":"Race-shifting, gender transitioning, & other identity moves","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"May 5, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"These thoughts, written in the aftermath of a half-day\u00a0conference\u00a0on race-shifting (first part viewable\u00a0here) and influenced by Kim TallBear\u2019s\u00a0critique\u00a0of\u00a0identity, have me going out on a limb, for reasons that are likely pretty obvious. But I will persevere with them, and ask that you read them through to the end before reacting\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Cultural politics"","block_context":{"text":"Cultural politics","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/cultural_politics\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2023\/04\/1200px-Semiotic_square.svg_.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2023\/04\/1200px-Semiotic_square.svg_.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2023\/04\/1200px-Semiotic_square.svg_.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2023\/04\/1200px-Semiotic_square.svg_.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2023\/04\/1200px-Semiotic_square.svg_.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":9856,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2018\/10\/09\/shadowing-the-anthropocene\/","url_meta":{"origin":9395,"position":3},"title":"Shadowing the Anthropocene","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"October 9, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Shadowing the Anthropocene: Eco-Realism for Turbulent Times arrived in the mail today. It's published by punctum books, an open-access academic and para-academic publisher I've found to be a real delight to work with. Eileen Joy deserves a medal for her leadership of punctum, and\u00a0Vincent W.J. van Gerven Oei's cover and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Anthropocene"","block_context":{"text":"Anthropocene","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/anthropo_scene\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2018\/10\/180502shadowingtheanthropocene-cover-front-draft-647x1024-174x275.png?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":10352,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2020\/03\/21\/process-relational-readings\/","url_meta":{"origin":9395,"position":4},"title":"Process-relational readings","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"March 21, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"A very helpful analytical review of the \"relational paradigm in sustainability research, practice, and education\" has just been published online by Ambio. While it's limited to a certain selection of key publications, the article, by European sustainabililty researchers Zack Walsh, Jessica Bohme, and Christine Wamsler, covers the terrain of \"relational\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Philosophy"","block_context":{"text":"Philosophy","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/geo_philosophy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2020\/03\/Screen-Shot-2020-03-21-at-10.32.57-AM.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2020\/03\/Screen-Shot-2020-03-21-at-10.32.57-AM.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2020\/03\/Screen-Shot-2020-03-21-at-10.32.57-AM.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/files\/2020\/03\/Screen-Shot-2020-03-21-at-10.32.57-AM.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1366,"url":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/2010\/11\/05\/process-relational-theory-primer\/","url_meta":{"origin":9395,"position":5},"title":"Process-relational theory primer","author":"Adrian J Ivakhiv","date":"November 5, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"One of the tasks of this blog, since its inception in late 2008, has been to articulate a theoretical-philosophical perspective that I have come to call \u201cprocess-relational.\u201d This is a theoretical paradigm and an ontology that takes the basic nature of the world to be that of relational process: that\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Eco-theory"","block_context":{"text":"Eco-theory","link":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/category\/ecophilosophy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9395","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/99"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9395"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9395\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9421,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9395\/revisions\/9421"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9395"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9395"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uvm.edu\/aivakhiv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9395"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}