Troeltsch
Troeltsch
Aug 9, 2017 · 1 min read

I am a bit surprised that many feel this is a well-written and well-researched memo. The author is making specific causal claims that women, mainly due to biological reasons, are less suited for some types of engineering work.

If he really wanted to prove this point his logic would have to be something similar to:

a) these are the proven qualities that are associated with success in job x; these have been verified through studies and survey data;

b) men’s biological structure has been shown to be highly correlated to all of these qualities; here is my proof of evolutionary biology over the years that has led men’s brains to have qualities x,y,z that are highly correlated with proven qualities a, b, c.

c) women’s biological structure, on the other hand, does not have correlates to these qualities. here is my proof of evolutionary biology over the years that has led to differences with men leading to qualities x1, x2, x3. they have little or no correlation with proven qualities a,b,c.

d) here’s a counterfactual analysis for the doubters.

Granted, this is certainly not a a rant, but any one who cites “neuroticism” with a link to the Wikipedia page is simply making things up based on ad-hoc generalizations.

cheers,

charles murray

    Troeltsch

    Written by

    Troeltsch