Spring Break
The Daily OrangeIdeas addressed by Summers were insensitive
By
Posted: 2/23/05, 11:37 PM EST Section: Opinion
Harvard President Larry Summers has come under fire for comments he made last month during a conference on diversifying the science and engineering work force.
During the discussion, Summers entertained the idea that women might not have the same level of "intrinsic aptitude" in those fields as men, and that issues of socialization and discrimination were secondary to biology in explaining the lack of women in those professions. The topics that he chose to discuss during his talk were more than appropriate for the conference, but the manner in which he addressed them was not.
Summers intended to provoke discussion with his statements and did not intend to offend his audience. As the president of a major university, however, he should have been more mindful of the effect his words have. It would have be more productive for Summers to focus his talk on how to get more women involved in those programs, instead of poorly explaining why they aren't.
Many of his positions were poorly defended in his speech. He often cited anecdotal evidence to explain the phenomenon where he could have chosen scientific evidence instead. If he had presented them in a different setting, his ideas might have been better received, and he might have been able to spark an educational discussion instead of coming across as confrontational.
While Summers' speech was abrasive, it has been met with an inappropriate level of backlash. Many of his critics are insisting that he resign, or that he be removed from his position; that is not the type of response that his speech should have elicited. Summers was speaking at a private function and, while his remarks may have been inappropriate, it should be met with open discussion and debate. Calling for his resignation just sends the message that it is not all right for unpopular views to be expressed at a center for learning.
Despite the controversy, Summers has succeeded where many of his peers have failed. He brought more attention to a problem that he feels needs to be addressed. While the intentions were good, the execution was not.
During the discussion, Summers entertained the idea that women might not have the same level of "intrinsic aptitude" in those fields as men, and that issues of socialization and discrimination were secondary to biology in explaining the lack of women in those professions. The topics that he chose to discuss during his talk were more than appropriate for the conference, but the manner in which he addressed them was not.
Summers intended to provoke discussion with his statements and did not intend to offend his audience. As the president of a major university, however, he should have been more mindful of the effect his words have. It would have be more productive for Summers to focus his talk on how to get more women involved in those programs, instead of poorly explaining why they aren't.
Many of his positions were poorly defended in his speech. He often cited anecdotal evidence to explain the phenomenon where he could have chosen scientific evidence instead. If he had presented them in a different setting, his ideas might have been better received, and he might have been able to spark an educational discussion instead of coming across as confrontational.
While Summers' speech was abrasive, it has been met with an inappropriate level of backlash. Many of his critics are insisting that he resign, or that he be removed from his position; that is not the type of response that his speech should have elicited. Summers was speaking at a private function and, while his remarks may have been inappropriate, it should be met with open discussion and debate. Calling for his resignation just sends the message that it is not all right for unpopular views to be expressed at a center for learning.
Despite the controversy, Summers has succeeded where many of his peers have failed. He brought more attention to a problem that he feels needs to be addressed. While the intentions were good, the execution was not.
