site banner
PaperclipPerfector  6mo ago (text post)   25602 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 20, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Sure, it definitely seems like there's been an increase in failure rates, but why are the charts inconsistent about failure rates in the same year? It also seems weird to blame black doctors specifically. According to the chart on racial admission data in the article black enrollment over the 2019-2022 time period (the article doesn't have 2023 or 2024) was essentially flat (2212% to 2413%). Unless there is some huge un-shown spike in black enrollment in the last two years it seems hard to see how having a more-black student body is responsible for the increase in failure rates.

ETA:

After reading the article a bit more closely I realized I was interpreting the demographic change chart incorrectly in the context of the tests. Medical school takes four years and the shelf exam test scores in the charts are coming in the third of that four years. So the 22-23 class that has the horrible scores is actually the 2021 demographics and the 23-24 class with the improved scores is the 2022 demographics. We don't have test scores for the last two bars on the demographic chart because they haven't taken the tests in question yet. So the improved 23-24 test scores were achieved with a demographic makeup that is less Asian and more black than the worse 22-23 test scores.

ETA 2:

As Joyful points out below they removed a year of coursework, so this is happening in their second year, so the 2022 demographics are the 2023-2024 test year.

ETA 3:

Confusing numbers for percentages. Updated.

Most likely UCLA is experiencing much more trouble attracting the limited pool of black students with good test scores now that every other school in the country is aggressively poaching them.

Morehouse college has the same problem despite going from 100% black to 100% Black

The immediately visible effects of AA first show up at the lowest ranked schools and work their way up. When Harvard takes the 1050 SAT guy who would have gone to Evergreen State, Evergreen has to settle for the guy who learned to write his name in his juvie GED program.

Combined with the rise of Grade-Inflation Studies degrees and endless free money, it's the perfect cover for everyone who matters choosing to ignore the consequences.

As a matter of simple mathematics, assuming the first chart with the > 50% fail rates is correct, this cannot be the whole story. In the Family Medicine category failure rates go from around 10% in 21-22 to around 50% in 22-23%. Even if no black students had been failing in 21-22 and every black student failed in 22-23 that would not be enough of a change to explain this difference, unless the fraction of students who are black also doubled.

nd 2+ years studying to get the highest possible score on an exam they get to take one time so you had to be sure. Now they just try to pass. Now a lot of that exam was stuff that "doesn't really matter" (ex: biochem pathways) but the incentive shift was absolutely massive.

The article mentions that they also changed the curriculum from two years of coursework to one.

Not sure what they are talking about specifically (the linked data was for clinical "shelf" exams and the course length change is preclinical) but a number of higher tier schools started to condense the traditionally two year preclinical curriculum into a year and a half or so (the spared time was used elsewhere).

This transition predates making Step-1 P/F, COVID, and recent social justice advances, but not every school is picking it up at the same time. They may also start to roll it back because it can be very rough on students.

A number of massive changes have hit medical education all at once, some of which are quality suppressing some are not.

Wait, 24% of UCLA med school admittees are black !?

Blacks are 14% of the national population, and like 6% of California's population. What is going here? Those numbers can't be right, can they?

Those aren't percentages; they're numbers.

Appreciate the correction, updated my post with the correct numbers.

Welcome to why Affirmative Action makes Asians and Whites furious

If you read the article linked in the Twitter post, you'd see that Asian enrollment dropped by about 1/3 and Hispanic enrollment went up about 50%. Black enrollment seems to have mostly held steady.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats