• Investing
  • Stock
Round Table Thoughts
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Home Economy Stanford Fails to Master Clear Thinking
Economy

Stanford Fails to Master Clear Thinking

by December 26, 2022
by December 26, 2022 0 comment
Share
0
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsapp

Stanford University’s information technology community produced, and then hid, a document entitled “Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative.” Stanford didn’t adopt the EOHLI document. The fact that Stanford has not directly rejected this document and the ideas expressed within it, however, strongly suggests that this widely ridiculed document aligns with some deep-seated views pervading the campus. As two people with ties to Stanford, we will explain, using techniques and principles that Stanford used to champion, why this document is so wrong.

Some people criticize the document because they see it as a means of exerting control over others. That may well be true. But dismissing any proposal by speculating about people’s motives is not a legitimate way to argue. People can support bad ideas based on bad or good motives, and good ideas based on bad or good motives. If you object to the ideas, you need to say why, not attack assumed motives. By providing reasons for their conclusions, the document’s authors implicitly claim that they are logical. So it makes sense to analyze their arguments. And when we do so, we find that their reasoning is faulty.  The EOHLI document fails in the following ways: distinctions, costs/benefits, alternatives, and the big picture.

Consider the word “master.” The Stanford document explains that “Historically, masters enslaved people, didn’t consider them human and didn’t allow them to express free will, so this term should generally be avoided.” So, for example, you shouldn’t encourage your child to master algebra or English.

While it’s true that the master of a human slave and the master of a subject such as English share the same noun, most of us would consider the enslavement of a person to be something terribly wrong, while attaining expertise in a subject is good. The fact that the two expressions use the same word fails to make the distinction between the two definitions of the word. Many words have multiple definitions. Eliminating the word won’t do much to eliminate the connotation.

Asking everyone to stop using a clear and useful word fails to consider the costs and benefits of such a requirement. There may be a tiny benefit to reducing the use of the word “master,” but the cost of the disruption to our language and communication is huge. In short, the cost exceeds the benefit.

If the word “master” has negative connotations (the enslavement of others) then those behaviors are what should be addressed, not the word itself. The people who don’t like slavery should see that they have alternatives. They can attack a word or they can attack a behavior. Those who attack the word haven’t considered that there are always alternatives and, once we consider the alternatives, we can choose the best one: preventing the behavior.

If we look at the big picture, we might notice something else that’s even more important. If we want to fight and prevent slavery in general, for example, prohibiting the use of a word isn’t going to do much. It would be better to understand why slavery is bad and explain those reasons to others. Getting rid of a word is not going to help a child born 50 years from now to understand why chattel slavery is corrosive to a society. And by openly examining slavery, we can explore the important differences between real slavery and perceived slavery, such as one might find in an oppressive work environment. Are the two the same? Why or why not?

Have you ever felt that you must do something? You might tell yourself, “I must.” If you want to be a good person, perhaps you think that you should avoid the word “master” because slavery is wrong. But you are already a good person for not advocating and supporting slavery. You don’t need to do everything conceivable, no matter how silly, to express to the world your distaste for slavery. We hear you: you don’t want to reinstitute slavery.

People have rightly derided Stanford for the EOHLI document. In doing so, we should criticize the document for the right reasons: those who constructed the EOHLI have ignored or violated the principles for clear thinking that Stanford has developed and championed over the years. Ironically, it should be Stanford itself that helps less-enlightened organizations master the techniques of clear thinking that were at least partly developed at that great university.

You Might Also Like
  • Iowa Senate passes controversial child labor bill
  • Democrat Sen. Bob Menendez defends himself against bribery charges: ‘Active smear campaign’
  • Biden ends bid for second term in White House as he drops out of his 2024 rematch with Trump
  • On the Need to Theorize Carefully
Share
0
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsapp

previous post
Does the Fed Control Interest Rates?
next post
74 percent of all electricity meters in North America are now smart

You may also like

Cindy McCain to head UN’s World Food Program

March 3, 2023

Israel eliminates Hezbollah senior commander as terror group warns it...

February 16, 2024

Typo forces Pennsylvania county to replace over 18K ballots

April 18, 2023

Bipartisan bill would prevent millionaires from taking unemployment checks

December 15, 2023

Judge rules RFK Jr. can sue Biden administration over alleged...

August 25, 2024

Bitcoin and Ethereum: Bitcoin increasingly safe above

September 27, 2024

FEC complaint alleges coordinated disinformation campaign from Biden’s 2020 run

November 10, 2023

How and where to watch Donald Trump’s town hall with...

December 6, 2023

The prosecution’s star witness against Trump, Michael Cohen, is a...

May 11, 2024

McCarthy open to working with Senate Democrats on stopgap funding...

September 29, 2023

    Stay updated with the latest news, exclusive offers, and special promotions. Sign up now and be the first to know! As a member, you'll receive curated content, insider tips, and invitations to exclusive events. Don't miss out on being part of something special.


    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • S&P 500 Earnings for 2025 Q1 — Still Overvalued

      July 1, 2025
    • Lululemon sues Costco over selling alleged dupes

      July 1, 2025
    • Clean energy stocks fall as Trump bill would tax components from China, phase out credits

      July 1, 2025
    • Tech Stocks Lead the Charge: What’s Driving the Momentum?

      July 1, 2025
    • Google makes first foray into fusion in venture with MIT spinoff Commonwealth Fusion Systems

      July 1, 2025

    Popular Posts

    • 1

      Biden appointee played key role in recruiting Chinese...

      June 25, 2024 3,621 views
    • 2

      Trump-era China sanctions ended by Biden may be...

      June 27, 2024 2,904 views
    • 3

      Walz’s honeymoon with China gets fresh scrutiny as...

      August 9, 2024 2,596 views
    • 4

      Shein’s global ambitions leaves some cybersecurity experts fearful...

      July 10, 2024 2,559 views
    • 5

      Harris VP pick spent years promoting research facility...

      August 29, 2024 2,437 views

    Categories

    • Economy (7,009)
    • Editor's Pick (2,158)
    • Investing (538)
    • Stock (2,645)

    Popular Posts

    • 1

      Biden appointee played key role in recruiting Chinese businesses to Delaware: ‘Longtime friends’

      June 25, 2024
    • 2

      Trump-era China sanctions ended by Biden may be revived under new House GOP bill

      June 27, 2024
    • 3

      Walz’s honeymoon with China gets fresh scrutiny as Harris camp blasts ‘lying’ critics

      August 9, 2024
    • 4

      Shein’s global ambitions leaves some cybersecurity experts fearful of Chinese spy threats

      July 10, 2024
    • 5

      Harris VP pick spent years promoting research facility that collaborated with ‘Chinese military company’

      August 29, 2024

    Latest News

    • S&P 500 Earnings for 2025 Q1 — Still Overvalued

      July 1, 2025
    • Lululemon sues Costco over selling alleged dupes

      July 1, 2025
    • Clean energy stocks fall as Trump bill would tax components...

      July 1, 2025

    Categories

    • Economy (7,009)
    • Editor's Pick (2,158)
    • Investing (538)
    • Stock (2,645)

    Disclaimer: RoundTableThoughts.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2024 RoundTableThoughts.com. All Rights Reserved.

    Round Table Thoughts
    • Investing
    • Stock
    Round Table Thoughts
    • Economy
    • Editor’s Pick

    Read alsox

    Stampede, gunfire at Gaza humanitarian aid...

    March 1, 2024

    Down and out: What went wrong...

    January 22, 2024

    Lawmakers ask Biden to add Office...

    February 3, 2023
    Sign In

    Keep me signed in until I sign out

    Forgot your password?

    Password Recovery

    A new password will be emailed to you.

    Have received a new password? Login here