I'd been sitting debating what to write as a post tonight, when someone sent me a link to a blog post entitled "What Mark Suster Missed In His Blog Post Defending uBeam". After reading through it, I was amazed at not only how insightful it was, but how well written, and how quickly it appeared. I have no idea who this person is, but they did a better job than anything I could have written today, so I'll just quote this section below, and strongly encourage you to read the full piece.
"So the message to women in STEM from those like Perry seemed to be to not worry about getting Bachelor’s degrees let alone advanced degrees in a particular field of expertise relevant to a future career (or indeed in the case of Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos, another women-in-STEM inspiration, a college degree at all), but have a vision, be dogged and hire sheep like Scientists, Technologists, Engineers with PhDs and experience – all ironically male it appears for uBeam and Theranos – to constantly prod them out of their unimaginative stupor to produce the idea in the visionary founder’s head.
Indeed what Perry (and Holmes) represent is symptomatic of an anti-intellectualism where advanced degrees and fundamental research instead of being seen as a progressive way to deeply understand and investigate issues in a systematic manner under the guidance of experienced mentors and peer reviews and communication, leading to the creation of new ideas, are seen as impediments to true progress."
Note for future readers. Blog post in question is here: https://ludwitt.wordpress.com/2016/05/13/what-mark-suster-missed-in-his-blog-post-defending-ubeam/
ReplyDeleteThanks for pointing that out. I've updated the link to correctly reflect the actual blog post in question within the blog.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteInteresting information, which is good.
ReplyDelete