Monday, January 24, 2005

With apologies to Mr. Russon

Babble on.

On ABC's This Week yesterday morning, George Will said something worth repeating*:

Harvard, like most American universities, believes in diversity of everything but thought.

Here's what he was talking about.

* (With apologies to Nicholas Russon for wading briefly into his pond once again - no need for pistols, my good man!)

Babble off.

Update: It seems some knee-jerk columnists just can't keep the knee from jerking (hat-tip to LIB). After reading this piece (of what, I refuse to say, on the grounds that my mother reads this blog), I can only assume the standard for factual content at the Globe & Mail is dropping like a stone. Read a more well-researched account of what Lawrence Summers actually said that started this whole tempest.

I'll grant that the way he proposed these ideas lacked the sort of sensitivity to public perception one would expect of the president of a major university. But the substance of his remarks? Ruth Marcus, writing in the WaPo, says it best:

Many of the same people denouncing Summers, I'd venture, believe fervently that homosexuality, for example, is a matter of biology rather than of choice or childhood experience. Many would demand that medical studies be structured to consider differences between men and women in metabolizing drugs, say, or responding to a particular disease. And many who find Summers's remarks offensive seem perfectly happy to trumpet the supposed attributes that women bring to the workplace -- that they are more intuitive, or more empathetic or some such. If that is so -- and I've always rather cringed at such assertions -- why is it impermissible to suggest that there might be some downside differences as well?
The Summers storm might have been easy to forecast. But it says less, in the end, about the Harvard president than it does about the unwillingness of the modern academy to tolerate the kind of freewheeling inquiry that academics and intellectuals above all ought to prize rather than revile.

BTW, that Mallick would include herself in a hypothetical club with members like Marie Curie and Roberta Bondar shows just how much her ego exceeds her intellect. What. A. Twit.

Another update: Joel Fleming has also written a very readable fisking of The Twit. It's heartening to see a conservative raft bobbing bravely along in a sea of liberal academic political correctness.


At 10:21 p.m., Blogger Dr_Funk said...

I could get all Lloyd Bentsen on Heather Mallick: Ms. Mallick, I knew Roberta Bondar, Roberta Bondar is from my hometown..and you, Ms. Mallick are no Roberta Bondar!And don't even get me started on how she's no Marie Curie either...Discover something, Ms. Mallick and die as a result, then I'll be impressed.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home