[Noisebridge-discuss] Some interesting thoughts on "benevolent sexism"

Gavin Knight gnnrok at gmail.com
Sun Apr 7 06:05:10 UTC 2013


naom-

Yea it's interesting how Dr. Amen has become the world's expert on this
issue, while writing books like Unleashing the Female Brain. I find the
articles associated to his "research" stripped of all science and hilarious
to say the least. I don't doubt some of the work done gives insight to the
differences though.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2280239/Neuroscientist-Daniel-G-Amens-book-Unleash-The-Power-Of-The-Female-Brain-explains-differences-men-women.html


The fact that people just digest this information without being presented
the research is just awesome.

Here's some random blog which critiques Amen, I found it an interesting
read but can't vouch for the source.
http://neurocritic.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/the-dark-side-of-diagnosis-by-brain-scan.html


On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 9:09 PM, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, even worse, the statistics don't actually map onto anything
> descriptive.
>
> It's completely useless to say, "the areas of the brain commonly
> associated with spacial reasoning are more active in men".  It's about as
> useful as saying, "the areas of the crotch commonly associated with
> reproduction are more external in men."
>
> Why? Because the idea of there being a "spacial reasoning" area of the
> brain is borderline nonsense.  What we have actually observed about the
> brain is that, yes, there are certain areas that do commonly become
> specialized, but -- in normal healthy brains -- there has never been
> conclusive evidence that just because male brains commonly "light up" in a
> certain area during spacial reasoning doesn't mean that THAT is the
> "spacial reasoning area of the brain".
>
> What it means is that females have been observed to use different areas of
> the brain during spacial reasoning, and females who are good at spacial
> reasoning do not have a "spacial reasoning area" similar to men's.  They
> have patterns of brain activity that are female, and they presumably use
> them "better" than other female brains.
>
> All of the above point back to the idea that describing patterns of brain
> activity do absolutely diddly-squat to help sort out who might be good at
> things.
>
> Science is only good science when it helps make predictions.  Digital
> Phrenology, like its namesake, has no predictive value.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology
>
> --Naomi
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 5:35 PM, LinkReincarnate <linkreincarnate at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Amen rev
>> On Apr 6, 2013 4:58 PM, "Mitchel McAllister" <xonimmortal at yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> That's a good name for it. And it's also an excellent example of what
>>> was said earlier about journalists not getting science right. However, Dr.
>>> Amen seems like she decided to "spice it up" as well, from the soundbytes
>>> she provided.
>>>
>>> There are more than a few issues with the article, from what I can see.
>>> Of course, the main problem is that once again we are handed a bunch of
>>> statistics, as predictors.
>>>
>>> Repeat after me, "Statistics are descriptive, not predictive."
>>>
>>> - Reverend Mik McAllister
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On *Sat, 4/6/13, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com>* wrote:
>>>
>>> This is what I call Digital Phrenology.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 1:18 AM, Gavin Knight <gnnrok at gmail.com<http://mc/compose?to=gnnrok@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> Did you see this article 2 days ago anyone?
>>>
>>> http://health.yahoo.net/experts/dayinhealth/surprising-differences-between-male-and-female-brain200
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Naomi Theora Most
> naomi at nthmost.com
> +1-415-728-7490
>
> skype: nthmost
>
> http://twitter.com/nthmost
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20130406/eef58e6d/attachment.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list