site banner

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
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Revealed preferences in the real world: black doctors.

I wonder if anyone has studied this? What is going to happen to all the black doctors who are being admitted to med school with inferior credentials and who will likely be socially promoted through residency/licensing as well.

I'm sure a large degree of affirmative action has already affected the supply of doctors, but the post-Great Awokening world seems to have taken that to a new level. Apparently rates of test-failing have increased by nearly 10x in some subjects at UCLA's medical school post 2020.

https://x.com/aaronsibarium/status/1793657774767022569

This is obviously forbidden information. I wonder how many schools will simply cover it up and graduate people as normal despite failures.

I hate to say it, but if I or a loved one was seriously ill, I would try my best to get a non-black doctor. If I wanted the best, I'd probably follow Peter Griffin's advice. I imagine others have similar revealed preferences that we would never admit in public. In the future, will black doctors magically have tons of open appointments while the cue to see Dr. Rosenblatt grows ever longer? I think probably.

I'm looking at the data in the linked article and having some difficulty squaring the two images with each other, and with the thesis more broadly. The second chart, which has data from 20-21, 21-22, and 22-23 does show a substantial rise in fail rates on various exams. However the first chart, which has 22-23 and 23-24 data seems to show an increase in pass rates, in some cases quite a large one (Pediatrics 1A block goes from a > 50% fail rate to around 20%). The data also seems inconsistent between the two charts for the one year (22-23) on which they overlap. For example, the Pediatrics Block 1A failure rate in the first chart seems to be in excess of 50%, but the Pediatrics 1A block in the second chart seems to be < 20%. Similarly the failure rate for Family Medicine block 1B is in excess of 50% for the 22-23 year in the first chart, but is less than 30% for the same year and block in the second chart. Which number is correct?

I look at the charts and see a gigantic increase in fail rates from 2020 to 2023, followed by what appears to be a decrease in fail rate in 2024 (but still massively above the previous baseline).

In honesty, we can never know what these tests look like year to year. Perhaps they gave everyone an A during the Covid years. Perhaps they dumbed down the test in 2024 so more people would pass.

We'll never have the objective data we need, and the powers that be want it that way. I agree that surreptiously-taken screenshots is no proof, but it's not like UCLA is going to publish data that shows they are graduating incompetents.

Who knows, maybe despite lower MCAT scores black doctors are just as good because they compensate in other ways. Are you willing to bet your life on it?

Haven’t we already done this experiment and it failed miserably. Killer King hospital did exists and people tried not to go there.

Wow, I did not know about that. Yikes. Poor Martin Luther King getting all the worst stuff named after him.

So basically, those who supported the practice of associating his name with the bad part of town might as well have been the, er, MLKKK.

Activist goals (the stated ones, anyway) would have been better served by just trying to get more high-human-capital into medicine. But that’s a bridge too far.