> If anything, I would say that my views are the opposite -- homogenization creates a lack of differentiation around skill and aptitude based on questionable science
If that were true, you'd expect countries like South Korea, Japan, and German to perform poorly in science and engineering, among other things.
Diversity may be a worthy goal for societal reasons, but it certainly is not a perquisite for excellence, seeing as there are many highly successful countries that are very homogeneous.
> If that were true, you'd expect countries like South Korea, Japan, and German to perform poorly in science and engineering, among other things.
It's wild to me that someone can have the view that the existence of other countries settles the debate over whether or not our school systems encourage well-rounded/successful students given that comparisons to more homogenized schooling environments like China is still one of the more contentious high-level debates about educational quality we have today. Again, I'm not here to convince you one way or another, but that is not a debate that I think most of society considers settled.
> Diversity may be a worthy goal for societal reasons, but it certainly is not a perquisite for excellence
If that's the argument you want to make, then fine, go for it. But then don't say that you're opposing a group that "hates the idea of excellence and differentiation." You are arguing for removing differentiation between different kinds of intelligence and skillsets and compressing that spectrum into an objectively less descriptive metric.
Make up your mind whether I'm arguing for more diversity and more differentiation between people or for less of it.
If that were true, you'd expect countries like South Korea, Japan, and German to perform poorly in science and engineering, among other things.
Diversity may be a worthy goal for societal reasons, but it certainly is not a perquisite for excellence, seeing as there are many highly successful countries that are very homogeneous.