-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
/
yx1CEsUBYVM.txt
5 lines (3 loc) · 2.67 KB
/
yx1CEsUBYVM.txt
1
2
3
4
5
Speaker 1: 00:00 Dr brown, uh, you've talked about a nonmonetary orders, uh, that could include sanctions like orders to undertake sensitivity and anti bias training. I would like either one or both of you to comment on whether you could explain why an individual may have a strong objection to undertaking such a training. And Mr Brown, could you let the committee know how serious the sanction could be? And of course you already dead on that. Uh, if you refuse to undertake such an order, uh, and specifically at the federal level, but what would, what would, why would people have an objection to taking such training? I think I'm going to let Dr Peterson answer why he or someone like him might have an objection to undertaking that type of training and lot obviously, once again with the severity of that decision. If it gets before the tribunal,
Speaker 2: 00:48 well, I have a profound objection to, to undergoing such training. In fact, I would flatly refuse under all conditions to undergo it. And the reason, there's multiple reasons for that. The first reason is that the science surrounding the, uh, the so called charge of implicit bias that's associated with perception is by no means settled in, in to such a degree that one of the three people who designed the most commonly used measure, which is the implicit association test, has detached himself from the other two researchers on the grounds that the use of the test has become, has far transcended its scientific validity and reliability. It's nowhere near valid or reliable enough to be used in the manner that has been using. And even the more a pro iat researchers who developed the test have admitted to that publicly, even though they haven't stressed it nearly to the degree they should have.
Speaker 2: 01:39 So first of all, the sciences is not settled and is being used absolutely inappropriately. And I can say that as a clinician because I know that and as a psychometrician I know the criteria for using a test for a sec. Essentially diagnostic purposes and the, it doesn't even come close to what's necessary. And then the next issue is, well, where's the evidence that an anti unconscious bias training works? There's no evidence and what little evidence there is suggests that it actually has the opposite effect because people don't like being brought in front of a reeducation committee and having their fundamental perceptions. You see their perceptions, not even their thoughts, but their perceptions themselves altered by collective Fiat. It's an unbelievable honor, sir. We have a very engaged committee, concise questions and concise responses with the helpful, uh, senator pro.