Once again, the primary characteristic of scientific inquiry is skepticism. If the question is more important than the answer, it becomes that much more important to question EVERYTHING lest some fundamental question does not get asked. When any question is not allowed to be asked for whatever reason, the search for truth suffers.
I've always been curious about the argument that diversity is important for diversity's sake. My daughter is currently in veterinary school. 75% of her class are women. Men have an equal opportunity to apply and be accepted - and in fact may be more likely to be accepted because there are so few of them. But why is that important? Can it not be just OK that women are more interested in the profession?
Indeed, we could have predicted that women might be more interested than men in veterinary medicine, once the barriers to entry were minimized. Might women have a different approach than men? Sure. To me, that means that, if I have an animal with a complicated situation that warrants a second or third opinion, I might want that additional take to be from someone who is somewhat different from the first: possibly the other sex, possibly older (or younger), very likely someone trained in a different tradition or at a different institution. The more similar the second vet is to the first, the more likely that their opinions, if they are the same, are not wholly independent.
All of that said, I am also reminded of Louis Leakey, mid-20th century, spearheading the scientific effort to understand the behavior of the great apes. We thought there were three non-human great ape species at the time (bonobos were thought to be subsumed within chimps), and he thought it important that long-term field observations be made of each of the species, in the wild. Sounds dangerous and uncomfortable to most people (and it was, in a variety of ways). But he intentionally chose three women to do the work, because he believed—and I think that he was right—that they were more likely to have the kind of patience and insight best suited to the work. Was that sexist? Maybe. It also seems to have worked to reveal much about our closest extant relatives.
(The three women being Jane Goodall with chimps; Dian Fossey with gorillas; and Birute Galdikas with orangutans.)
So it becomes ever more obvious that men and women are not the same. Not interchangeable although there will always be women with masculine outlooks and vice versa. Perhaps we are seeing a redefinition of what is "women's work"
In the past 30 or so years, I have seen the field of Veterinary medice become dominated by women. I am completely neutral about this. For many years the profession of Veterinary Technician has been filled almost entirely by young women. I don't see either having a negative effect on the field.
I think you have to go a level deeper. Might this be another example of women making a exercising a choice that fewer men make? My daughter is a vet with loans that are almost at the value of my house. She makes good money, but there were a number of choices she could have made to improve the ROI on a degree. I'm not the only male in this country who's list of potential vocations were ranked by money in and money out. Even in medicine and engineering the pay gap isn't what it would appear to be.
If any of these people are interested in being a vet in a lovely area of the country a friend who owns a veterinary hospital in Summerfield NC is looking for someone to take hire so she can retire. There is a great shortage of vets in our area right now and they have trouble seeing patients. We'd be thrilled to have good people apply.
I have loved working with a woman vet. She gets me. She also understands that I'm practical, calm, that we make reasonable decisions based on thought and not emotion, but cries with us when we lose our animals (ok, her husband vet did too). It doesn't matter, they've both been wonderful vets, but the animals responded much better to her quiet personality.
I wish your daughter well with her studies and future as a vet.
Wow! Out of the park this morning Heather! Somewhere along my timeline I was fascinated by bushido fight tactics. Now it is possible that I misinterpreted. But the basic principle was that in a battle situation the experienced warrior does not focus an any particular thing on the battlefield. The ‘field’ being the context. . Open gaze. Open heart, open mind, open awareness. Something moves you will notice it. Bruce Lee said similar things. “Don’t stare at the moon you will miss the stars”. I paraphrase, so long ago.
Not unlike a proper scientific observation or experiment. Heisenberg? I can’t tell anymore.
In our *urge* to agency(which is being hyper stimulated all the time these days!) we give away too many valuable “F’s” ….if you know what I mean.
Way too late in life I heard, and adopted, the adage, a question well asked is half solved. (I think I have that right). When Twain said "there are lies, damn lies, and statistics" I think he was pointing out that giving hog wash a "scientific" wrapper, can get far too many of the unquestioning to drink it.
An intellectual who follows the authorities in all things…(t)hey just know, in their heart of hearts, that science is real… yes Galileo was imprisoned by these same “thinkers”. It was science corrupted by religion a very powerful and corrupt institution at that time. What corrupts science today is the same thing a corrupt and powerful institution abetted by compromised leaders. I call them the predators. Some call them the elite. No they are the predators. They are coming for all who are not them or do not subscribe to the predator ways. Evil people.
To Technical Support. There is some key that if hit by mistake completely erases your comment if hit by mistake. Some of us are old and hit the wrong keys a lot. PLEASE make it so that is impossible?
Once again, the primary characteristic of scientific inquiry is skepticism. If the question is more important than the answer, it becomes that much more important to question EVERYTHING lest some fundamental question does not get asked. When any question is not allowed to be asked for whatever reason, the search for truth suffers.
I've always been curious about the argument that diversity is important for diversity's sake. My daughter is currently in veterinary school. 75% of her class are women. Men have an equal opportunity to apply and be accepted - and in fact may be more likely to be accepted because there are so few of them. But why is that important? Can it not be just OK that women are more interested in the profession?
Indeed, we could have predicted that women might be more interested than men in veterinary medicine, once the barriers to entry were minimized. Might women have a different approach than men? Sure. To me, that means that, if I have an animal with a complicated situation that warrants a second or third opinion, I might want that additional take to be from someone who is somewhat different from the first: possibly the other sex, possibly older (or younger), very likely someone trained in a different tradition or at a different institution. The more similar the second vet is to the first, the more likely that their opinions, if they are the same, are not wholly independent.
All of that said, I am also reminded of Louis Leakey, mid-20th century, spearheading the scientific effort to understand the behavior of the great apes. We thought there were three non-human great ape species at the time (bonobos were thought to be subsumed within chimps), and he thought it important that long-term field observations be made of each of the species, in the wild. Sounds dangerous and uncomfortable to most people (and it was, in a variety of ways). But he intentionally chose three women to do the work, because he believed—and I think that he was right—that they were more likely to have the kind of patience and insight best suited to the work. Was that sexist? Maybe. It also seems to have worked to reveal much about our closest extant relatives.
(The three women being Jane Goodall with chimps; Dian Fossey with gorillas; and Birute Galdikas with orangutans.)
So it becomes ever more obvious that men and women are not the same. Not interchangeable although there will always be women with masculine outlooks and vice versa. Perhaps we are seeing a redefinition of what is "women's work"
In the past 30 or so years, I have seen the field of Veterinary medice become dominated by women. I am completely neutral about this. For many years the profession of Veterinary Technician has been filled almost entirely by young women. I don't see either having a negative effect on the field.
I think you have to go a level deeper. Might this be another example of women making a exercising a choice that fewer men make? My daughter is a vet with loans that are almost at the value of my house. She makes good money, but there were a number of choices she could have made to improve the ROI on a degree. I'm not the only male in this country who's list of potential vocations were ranked by money in and money out. Even in medicine and engineering the pay gap isn't what it would appear to be.
If any of these people are interested in being a vet in a lovely area of the country a friend who owns a veterinary hospital in Summerfield NC is looking for someone to take hire so she can retire. There is a great shortage of vets in our area right now and they have trouble seeing patients. We'd be thrilled to have good people apply.
I have loved working with a woman vet. She gets me. She also understands that I'm practical, calm, that we make reasonable decisions based on thought and not emotion, but cries with us when we lose our animals (ok, her husband vet did too). It doesn't matter, they've both been wonderful vets, but the animals responded much better to her quiet personality.
I wish your daughter well with her studies and future as a vet.
Wow! Out of the park this morning Heather! Somewhere along my timeline I was fascinated by bushido fight tactics. Now it is possible that I misinterpreted. But the basic principle was that in a battle situation the experienced warrior does not focus an any particular thing on the battlefield. The ‘field’ being the context. . Open gaze. Open heart, open mind, open awareness. Something moves you will notice it. Bruce Lee said similar things. “Don’t stare at the moon you will miss the stars”. I paraphrase, so long ago.
Not unlike a proper scientific observation or experiment. Heisenberg? I can’t tell anymore.
In our *urge* to agency(which is being hyper stimulated all the time these days!) we give away too many valuable “F’s” ….if you know what I mean.
Great post. Thank you!
Way too late in life I heard, and adopted, the adage, a question well asked is half solved. (I think I have that right). When Twain said "there are lies, damn lies, and statistics" I think he was pointing out that giving hog wash a "scientific" wrapper, can get far too many of the unquestioning to drink it.
An intellectual who follows the authorities in all things…(t)hey just know, in their heart of hearts, that science is real… yes Galileo was imprisoned by these same “thinkers”. It was science corrupted by religion a very powerful and corrupt institution at that time. What corrupts science today is the same thing a corrupt and powerful institution abetted by compromised leaders. I call them the predators. Some call them the elite. No they are the predators. They are coming for all who are not them or do not subscribe to the predator ways. Evil people.
Hi, Dr. Heying, I threw this in the chat during today's Dark Horse, but not sure if you or Bret are able to read the chat during broadcast.
RE Chile, I wrote a long piece on it a few weeks ago from the perspective of copper mining:
https://greenleapforward.substack.com/p/el-sueldo-de-chile-y-el-futuro-pa
A translated copy of the constitution itself is available here:
https://www.scribd.com/document/589962415/Chile-Constitution-Proposal-EnGLISH
To Technical Support. There is some key that if hit by mistake completely erases your comment if hit by mistake. Some of us are old and hit the wrong keys a lot. PLEASE make it so that is impossible?