Althouse’ rule on sex-differences in action

A few years ago Ann Althouse told Bob Wright that there was an easy way to do sex-differences research without being pilloried: make sure that the generalizations work out so that they are flatter women. Over at Feministing, Are Women More Risk-Averse in Investing?:

A 2005 study from the Center for Financial Research at the University of Cologne documented differences between male and female fund managers: Women managers tended to take less extreme risk and to adopt more measured investment styles (which perform well over time). And according to research published in 2002 in the International Journal of Bank Marketing, women tend to make investment-related decisions with a detailed, comprehensive approach, while men are more likely to simplify data and make decisions based on an overall schema.

I always get nervous when scientists or sociologists start making wide-sweeping gender claims, but I’m also not scientifically sophisticated enough to evaluate whether these studies are valid.

Anyone have any thoughts?

Matt Yglesias says don’t worry. Well Matt, you should worry. Reality is often best understood on a case-by-case basis, but no matter how its joints are carved up there are numerous interlocking connections. To be a risk taking egomaniac is in bad odor today for obvious reasons. But do we want everyone in all domains to minimize risk? I doubt it. And I’m sure people can think of domains which are value-added to society where male risking taking is a benefit, and Right Thinking People know that when it comes to Good Things women are always at least as well endowed, if not more, than men, on average.

Posted in culture, science | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

Politics & the transparent society

The Mark Sanford affair is all over the news right now. Additionally, a newspaper in South Carolina has released the first batch of emails of private correspondence between Sanford and his mistress. How would you like your personal romantic correspondence indexed on Google News? A few years ago I talked to a CEO of a firm which was developing software for corporations that allows for total transparency in the work place. One of the issues that came up was that most people who clock in for 8 hours of work in the office goof-off a fair amount, from the bottom to the top. If a better accounting of real worked hours could be had the argument is that the work day could be shortened so that time wasted at work could be allocated to a wide range of leisure activities. The short of it is that I’m sure that transparency of personal information is going to go much further than we have today. Consider this story of a robbery solved via Google street view.

What does this have to do with politics? From what I am to understand in the past people in power were allowed to project a public persona which was at some variance with their private life. This disjunction has been melting away over the past generation.  If you are going to extol bourgeois probity, it seems likely that you’re going to have to walk the talk. Various sexual scandals involving politicians have indicated to some that their power allows them to satisfy their sexual appetites in a manner which would otherwise not be possible, but in an age of radical transparency this temptation and fringe benefit might be sharply diminished. Or perhaps public norms will shift in terms of what is demanded of their political leaders? The transparent society will effect public figures first, but we’ll all have to deal with it sooner or later.

Posted in politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , | 8 Comments

Why Abortion?

Mr. Hume:   The salience of abortion as a social-conservative issue has at least three components:

(1) As an aspect of the culture of permissiveness that persons of a conservative temperament deplore.  Abortion “travels” by association with promiscuity, homosexuality, pot smoking, and the rest.

(2) Roe v. Wade as a judicial-usurpation issue.

(3) RC metaphysics (with Evangelicals tagging along for the ride) based on the concept of ensoulment.  RC intellectuals throw up big clouds of squid ink here, but the underlying belief is plainly metaphysical.  “God ensouled this creature. Abortion thwarts God’s will.”

Number 2 obviously wasn’t in play until 1973.  Number 3 only really pushed to the front when RC intellectuals got to critical mass among conservative propagandists, which I think was ca. late 1980s. (I don’t have Damon Linker’s book to hand.) Prior to that, number 1 was pretty much it.

I don’t know how things were in the USA, but the abortion debate in Britain in the 1960s, which I followed closely, was all about class.  Middle- and upper-class women could get comfortable abortions with little trouble, everyone knew that.  Poor women couldn’t.  This was unfair.  The counter-view was Nixonian, based on antipathy to “permisiveness.”

The distaste for “permissiveness” in general was not dogmatic or ideological, and conservatives of Nixon’s generation were free to take any legislative position.  Margaret Thatcher, for example, voted pro-choice.

And setting aside racial issues, abortion probably does have a eugenic aspect.  If intelligence is considerably heritable — and the evidence seems to be that it is — and if it’s disproportionately the left-hand side of the bell curve that’s getting abortions — which seems likely — then abortion is eugenic.  That logic seems to account for at least some of the enthusiasm for abortion among the authorities in Communist China, where wellnigh everybody takes eugenic ideas for granted.

Posted in Uncategorized | 71 Comments

Abortion, the forgotten years….

I’ve mentioned before that in the early-to-mid-1970s abortion did not have the valence on the Right that it does today. It was primarily the Roman Catholic Church which opposed Roe vs. Wade with concerted and strenuous vigor. Though to a large extent conservative Protestant America may have been a bit disquieted, it was not quite outraged. The newest release of the Nixon tapes confirm this. Richard Nixon’s position as a conservative or man of the Right is ambiguous, as quite often his pragmatic or Machiavellian political inclinations swamped out any principles. But I think it is fair to say that Nixon was typical as a moderately conservative white Protestant of his age in his mores and attitudes. I’m a little confused as to the outrage that Nixon thought that interracial conception was grounds for abortion, this was 1973, and according to the General Social Survey in that year ~50% of whites age 50 and over favored laws against interracial marriage. ~30 years later in the same age cohort (now in their late 70s to 80s) the proportion of whites who favor laws against interracial marriage remains ~30%. In any case, the outrage that some liberals feel when one moots the idea of aborting a fetus if they are of a particular racial combination or sex shows that the “rights” and “liberty” based reasoning of the pro-choice movement is often relatively shallow. Abortion is meant to empower women in a positive sense of freedom, a consequentialist rationale, not to reinforce prejudice, discrimination and oppression. Making abortion a right is in fact a form of legislating morality and inculcating values about how women relate to their bodies and society.  Interestingly Nixon’s qualms about abortion were consequentialist. Rather than the sanctity of life he seemed to be elucidating a view that abortion was another instance where the sexual revolution rolled back individual responsibility in favor of license. Instead of murder, it seemed a problem of moral hazard.

Posted in culture | Tagged , | 8 Comments

Sounds like some Iranians we know

Rabbi Leib Glanz, a leader in New York City’s Hasidic Satmar sect, told a meeting of New York Democrats last year that he saw God’s hand in the elevation of David Paterson to the New York governorship following the fall of Eliot Spitzer.  “God works in mysterious ways,”  he said to the black pols, according to the New York Times.  Either this humble man of God is mistaken (but how could that be?) or God is (but how could THAT be?), because Paterson is suffering from some of the lowest approval ratings in New York history. 

 
Last year Glanz muscled through a lavish Bar Mitzvah in a New York City jail for the son of an inmate, an ex-fugitive financial fraudster.  Glanz, who was a part-time jail rabbi, regularly arranged for such preferential treatment for Jewish inmates, in contravention of the essential anti-corruption principle that no inmate or group of inmates receive special benefits.  Following the expose of the Bar Mitzvah by the New York Post, Glanz has resigned his jail chaplaincy.  But the preposterously disproportionate influence that the Hasidic Jewish community wields in New York politics continues unabated.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 3 Comments

Iran, is it that polarized by class?

Like many people I don’t know that much about what’s going on in Iran besides what I read. An Iranian American friend asked me what I thought would happen…which I think goes to show that we’re all in uncharted waters here. But one of the talking points which regularly emerges are the cleavages in Iranian society along the lines of class. An extreme caricature of a common perception might be that the religious population of South Tehran are typical Middle Easterners in their mores and attitudes, while the fashionable folk of North Tehran, with their nose jobs, would easily fit in to Tehrangeles.

Though I do not doubt that class is a major predictor of political affinity in Iran today, I do think that one should not overstate the differences across Iranian society in terms of social attitudes as a function of class. I say this because my own knowledge of “Iranians” comes through Iranian Americans, so when I first looked at Iran in the World Values Survey I was expecting a large minority of social liberals in a Western sense with anti-religious sentiments. As it happens I didn’t find it, rather, Iran is a moderately conservative Middle Eastern country, with significant, but not stark, differences by class when it comes to views on “hot button” issues.

Instead of making arguments, I’ll offer some numbers. Below are a list of issues from WVS wave 5 (taken in 2005) for Iran. You can see there are differences by class. You can also see that there is a great deal of overlap.
Continue reading

Posted in culture, politics | Tagged , , | 7 Comments

Knowledge and happiness

Writer Christopher Benson reviews The Wreck of Western Culture: Humanism Revisited, by John Carroll, in the Weekly Standard.  The book, which I haven’t read, appears to lodge the familiar conservative attack on the alleged pretensions of secular humanism to improve the world without reference to God:

[The] rallying illusion [of humanism], [Carroll writes,] is bred deeply into us by now–that knowledge will make us better and happier, and that we are free, free to improve ourselves.

At the risk of being accused of shallowness, may I suggest that knowledge in fact can make us happier and that more knowledge is always better than less.    The Brooklyn Museum contains a painting called Her First Born (1888) by the American Robert Reid.  A young woman from the working or agricultural class lays her head and arms over a small draped casket in a simple, white-washed room.  Two candles burn next to the casket; a crucifix hangs on the wall between the candles.

This image is no longer a familiar one, but the death of children was once a constant agony of life, as artists from Ben Jonson to Gustav Mahler have memorialized.  So, too, was the death of mothers during childbirth.  The accomplishments of medical knowledge have all but eliminated these sources of sorrow and suffering from the Western experience, and we are better off—and yes, on average, happier–for it.  Of course, children generate many other ways of being miserable for their parents, and perhaps we always define unhappiness up, but I’d rather have the option of being unhappy about more trivial matters than about premature death.

The time of the Black Death  was one of impeccable religiosity, untouched by humanist hubris.  I doubt whether many critics of the humanist and Enlightenment projects would trade places with 14th century Italians during the plague.

The internet is a happiness-generating device.  Faust sold his soul for the knowledge that the internet puts at our fingertips for free; anyone who is not happy with such power—at least every now and then–is insensate.

Carroll writes:

Without God, without a transcendental law, there is only death.

Gee!  That seems to be selling human creativity and companionship pretty short.

And I would say that we have “improved ourselves,” as Carroll puts it.  We have reined in the human propensity for violence over the centuries, Steven Pinker has shown.  Western society is less corrupt and more rule-bound and humane than it ever was.

Yes, yes, I know.  There’s the nuclear bomb.  But the benefits to human society generated by nuclear physics are enormous, and it’s not clear to me that earlier, religion-saturated societies would have had any more scruples about using it than we do, given the willingness of war-making or heresy-eliminating believers to use all the technology of destruction available to them at the time.

Conservatives who argue that the secular striving for human progress and knowledge is a poor substitute for “the ‘I am’ of Jesus,” as Benson terms it, are making a worthy argument that deserves respect and close attention.  Perhaps they are ultimately right.  Yet I confess that sometimes they strike me—perhaps unfairly and ignorantly–just a little bit like liberals who rail against corporations, bankers, and entrepreneurs, while benefiting from the risk-taking and drive of such suspect capitalists at every minute of their lives.

Posted in Uncategorized | 30 Comments

Social science & engineering

A recent Bloggingheads.tv featured two philosophers, and was titled “Explaining and Appraising Moral Intuition”. A considerable proportion of the discussion involved the utility of cognitive and evolutionary psychology in probing the reflexive roots of our moral intuitions, and how that might modify our moral reasoning. One of the interlocutors, Joshua Greene, suggests that exposing the proximate cognitive processes and the ultimate evolutionary rationales which set the framework for our reflexive moral judgments may allow us to reconsider their validity. What should be the criteria which we use? Greene alludes to utilitarianism. But that begs the question: what is this utility you speak of Dr. Greene?
Continue reading

Posted in culture, economics, philosophy, science, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

God on Campus

Religious readers of this site periodically rebuke me for misunderstanding the nature of prayer.  Prayer is a way of communing with God, they say; no informed believer would ask or expect God to intervene on their or others’ behalf.  Thus, I am wrong to be puzzled by the self-centeredness of believers who credit God with curing them of cancer, say, seemingly oblivious, if not indifferent, to the fact that hundreds just like them die every day from the disease; contrary to all appearances, no believer really thinks of God as a Friend (as Michael Novak puts it) in High Places who can, if he chooses, protect the believer from the vicissitudes of fate.  I am also wrong to wonder at believers’ lack of interest in trying to understand systematically which prayers God responds to and which not, why he rescues some children from natural disasters and not others, because no one would ever say that he does so respond to human need. 

I have no doubt that prayer is often a communion and not a petition, an expression of gratitude and not a request for help.  But I have never been persuaded that believers do not in fact also look to God for assistance and, when the thing hoped for arrives, attribute that development to God’s empathy.  The attribution of positive events to God’s intervention is simply too standard a trope in religious rhetoric.  

And now here is Joseph Bottum describing the semester’s end at Notre Dame University:

All across campus, the flowers have begun to bloom, their dull Indiana roots stirred by the spring rain, and the grass is almost green again at Notre Dame. Beneath a 16-foot statue of the Blessed Virgin, the main administration building sits, as always, its gold dome sparkling in the warm spring sun.
. . .  The Grotto of Our Lady of Lourdes flickers with candles, lit by anxious students as they prepare for final exams.

If anyone would be doctrinally correct, you’d think it would be Notre Dame students, but they mustn’t have gotten the message about prayer and God’s power on earth, either.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 11 Comments

Theater of death and life

I highly recommend Ionesco’s Exit the King to anyone who is in New York.   It is an almost unbearably wrenching exploration of mortality delivered by the most astounding theatrical performance–by Geoffrey Rush (for which he won a Tony)–I have seen in recent memory.  I often find myself wondering during works that address liminal themes:  “so, is the author going to bring God into the picture?”   Not here.  Not that there is anything overtly or militantly secular about the play.    It simply addresses the fear of death and love for life in a purely human context.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments