Phil Nice
Phil Nice
Aug 9, 2017 · 1 min read

“…..the author does not appear to understand gender.”

And your argument for this seems to be that owing to a lack of any credentials (or knowledge?) on the subject, you will “leave that to someone else.” I think I would characterise this hypothesis and subsequent *argument* as a rhetorical bubble. Put something in it, or leave it out.

This is not a good start. It doesn’t bode well for the general standard of what you put forward. Your argument no. 2 is anecdotal and interesting enough, but your point in regards to Damore’s memo is unclear. № 3. starts out by misrepresenting Damore’s points and you even go as far as to put quotation marks around a straw man.

Damore’s memo comes across as a quite thorough and meticulous review of current scientific knowledge in behavioural science, raising questions about an ideological bias. Your blog comes across as a rather incoherent rant.

    Phil Nice

    Written by

    Phil Nice