Merged Arday life and death

[Rolfe]

The professor (David Harris) who first raised the issue with Arday has put up a video today explaining how it all came about and how it unfolded.



What startled me, because I hadn't heard it before, is that when Arday replied with a rude and aggressive email threatening to report Harris to the police if he contacted him again, Arday added a reference at the end to disciplinary proceedings that had been taken out against Harris in 1996. Harris said it was about a miscommunication with a subject, and he was exonerated, nothing to do with harassment. Arday referred to this, saying, you've been in trouble for harassment before and you will be again if you contact me again. This was on top of telling Harris that old people like him had had a good run and he should budge over and make way for the next generation.

Charming.

 

[Emily's Cat]

A couple of long articles that have really dug up the receipts.

Jason Arday Lied About Being Autistic

And much else.

cartrarian.substack.com

That conclusion is biting.

The people who spent years talking about misinformation, institutional accountability, lived experience and speaking truth to power were presented with an almost perfect test of those principles. They failed. They chose the person over the evidence, identity over truth and political convenience over scrutiny. Then, when reality became impossible to ignore, they attacked the people who had bothered to look. That is the real scandal surrounding Jason Arday.

 

[Emily's Cat]

See fig 1A

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abf1234

See, that's actually the opposite of what is claimed. Which has low-key been my point.

If one were to say that conservative biases diverge from reality more than liberal biases do, I could buy that. But saying that reality has a liberal bias is not supported by your research.

I stand by my prior statement: Reality has no bias.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Reading through the timeline on this, and how Arday's story evolved... I end up wondering if the poor guy had some undiagnosed schizophrenia or some other break with reality.

Or perhaps it's just that I genuinely can't wrap my head around creating such a web of falsehoods and exaggerations and never giving thought to whether someone would eventually bother to check them. I dunno. I'm predisposed to being very honest, I suck at lying, even the everyday white lies that we're all supposed to tell. If someone asks me whether those pants make their butt look big, I'm socially conscious enough to avoid saying "no, your butt makes your butt look big". But I'm also honest enough to say "that cut isn't the most flattering on you, I think you might look better in something like that over there".

 

[Emily's Cat]

Anyway... Someone gifted me this article at some point in the last week or two. I myself don't have an Atlantic subscription so I can't gift it to you. It's relevant to this discussion, in that it recounts the experience of a black academic at a well-regarded school, and their view of DEI (in so many terms) within that role. It was a really good read, and it seems balanced and reasonable. So if you happen to have a subscription, I recommend it. If you don't... well... maybe someone else will gift it to you.

Why I Quit the Tenure Track

The insufferable hypocrisy of elite academia

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Rolfe]

Some people have said narcissism, always wanting to be the centre of attention. Given that several of his dramatic scena were pretty much lifted from various soaps or other popular culture presentations, maybe main character syndrome?

 

[d4m10n]

If one were to say that conservative biases diverge from reality more than liberal biases do, I could buy that. But saying that reality has a liberal bias is not supported by your research.

The former is what people mean by the latter.

 

[Trausti]

If one were to say that conservative biases diverge from reality more than liberal biases do, I could buy that. But saying that reality has a liberal bias is not supported by your research.

 

[smartcooky]

I expect he ticked the following boxes:

met the minimum qualifications (NOPE)

met the person specifications(so he was black and young - we agree)

had a strong fabricated CV (FTFY)

claimed to be high achiever; for example, his PRO-NE concept and initiative at (current) Durham Uni which was tissue of lies

secured social funding of £2.5m (More lies)

indefatigable charity running and fundraising (more lies)

motivating, articulate and engaging (and good liar)

he was agreed by a panel to have been the best candidate for the job. (oh, of course he was, for certain definitions of "best")

Fixed a few of your mistakes there...

 

[smartcooky]

That conclusion is biting.

The people who spent years talking about misinformation, institutional accountability, lived experience and speaking truth to power were presented with an almost perfect test of those principles. They failed. They chose the person over the evidence, identity over truth and political convenience over scrutiny. Then, when reality became impossible to ignore, they attacked the people who had bothered to look. That is the real scandal surrounding Jason Arday.

OUCH!

 

[lionking]

Regarding checks for plagiarised theses as part of a recruitment process, AI systems do this now in staggeringly quick times, and Turnitin has been operating since 2000. There really is no excuse for not checking PHD theses for prospective employees of universities.

 

[lionking]

Who from “the left” denies evolution?

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

I think some people still miss the part of DEI that some of us have a problem with. It's the E. It doesn't stand for Equality, but Equity, aka bending over backwards to give some supposedly disadvantaged group extra opportunities and resources, at the expense of the group who is supposedly already having an advantage. Here's an image from a PRO-equity site illustrating the fundamental difference between Equality and Equity.
View media item 8788
The whole POINT is to take the tall guys' boxes and give them to the short guys.

Incidentally it's also basically discrimination by the back door. It's essentially the same logic applied in the 30's in Germany: in their case, the supposedly over-privileged group were the Jews.

 

[angrysoba]

I think some people still miss the part of DEI that some of us have a problem with. It's the E. It doesn't stand for Equality, but Equity, aka bending over backwards to give some supposedly disadvantaged group extra opportunities and resources, at the expense of the group who is supposedly already having an advantage. Here's an image from a PRO-equity site illustrating the fundamental difference between Equality and Equity.
View media item 8788
The whole POINT is to take the tall guys' boxes and give them to the short guys.

Incidentally it's also basically discrimination by the back door. It's essentially the same logic applied in the 30's in Germany: in their case, the supposedly over-privileged group were the Jews.

Hans, if you are robbing a bank with two buddies, and one of them has two guns, the other has one gun and you have no guns, wouldn't it be fair for the guy with two guns to give you one of them?

Society should encourage sharing and sharing alike among thieves. It is only fair!

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

Hans, if you are robbing a bank with two buddies, and one of them has two guns, the other has one gun and you have no guns, wouldn't it be fair for the guy with two guns to give you one of them?

Society should encourage sharing and sharing alike among thieves. It is only fair!

Now I'm reminded of the pimento sandwich scene from Better Call Saul

 

[theprestige]

motivating, articulate and engaging

That's not what his students said.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

If one were to say that conservative biases diverge from reality more than liberal biases do, I could buy that. But saying that reality has a liberal bias is not supported by your research.

I think that's mostly in the USA, and a result of the ultra-polarised two party system. If one of them is pro-X, the other HAS to be anti-X. I swear that my impression from over here is that if one party wanted to outlaw kicks to the crotch, the other would feel a need to make them mandatory.

In Europe one can jolly well be for example a conservative Christian and not be a young Earth creationist, nor take any extreme position, and in fact the two major Christian parties in Germany are just centre-right, like the Democrats used to be in the USA. Conversely the main "socialist" party (which is actually just centre-left) is different from The Greens, when it comes to environment. (The latter is obviously more environment oriented.) We even have joke parties like the Anarchist Pogo Party who tried to run in 2021 under the slogan "work is ****" and asked their supporters NOT to vote, or Die PARTEI (The PARTY) whose program includes such jokes as rebuilding the Berlin wall, or opening the borders for all migrants, but only if they're insects or birds.

 

[theprestige]

I think some people still miss the part of DEI that some of us have a problem with. It's the E. It doesn't stand for Equality, but Equity, aka bending over backwards to give some supposedly disadvantaged group extra opportunities and resources, at the expense of the group who is supposedly already having an advantage. Here's an image from a PRO-equity site illustrating the fundamental difference between Equality and Equity.
View media item 8788
The whole POINT is to take the tall guys' boxes and give them to the short guys.

Incidentally it's also basically discrimination by the back door. It's essentially the same logic applied in the 30's in Germany: in their case, the supposedly over-privileged group were the Jews.

I'm more than happy to give the least qualified a box or two to stand on, so they can better watch the most qualified at work and play, but that's not what they're demanding, is it?

 

[steenkh]

Who from “the left” denies evolution?

And "IQ deniers", "heritability deniers", "sex difference deniers". None of these seem to be high on the leftist political agenda. The poster who added this text to the image must have really been wrangling his or her brain to come up with something for the left side.

 

[Planigale]

I think some people still miss the part of DEI that some of us have a problem with. It's the E. It doesn't stand for Equality, but Equity, aka bending over backwards to give some supposedly disadvantaged group extra opportunities and resources, at the expense of the group who is supposedly already having an advantage. Here's an image from a PRO-equity site illustrating the fundamental difference between Equality and Equity.
View media item 8788
The whole POINT is to take the tall guys' boxes and give them to the short guys.

Incidentally it's also basically discrimination by the back door. It's essentially the same logic applied in the 30's in Germany: in their case, the supposedly over-privileged group were the Jews.

Yes equality is the same as saying a billionaire should pay the same tax as a pauper.
Shifting taxation from being income based to expenditure based is moving from equity to equality, Millionaires tend to spend a lower proportion of their income on goods and save and invest a greater proportion than poor people, So whilst taxation may become more equal with the rich man paying less tax but still more than the poorman, it becomes less equitable with the poor man paying a greater proportion of his income than the rich man.

Not everyone thinks equality trumps equity.