Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankJ
First let say I think the school way overreacted. Nothing i have seen in the media says Ahmed tried to pass off his clock as anything more than a clock. I will even concede that cultural bias or prejudices probably played a part, maybe a large part in the school's actions. But to make a blanket assumption that was their primary reason for their actions without knowing the whole story (and the school cannot explain their side because of privacy issues) is to be guilty of the same prejudices as the school is being accused of.
|
To whitewash away injustices because of a lack of definitive proof only enables them to perpetuate. You would have a point in a legal setting, but this is a larger cultural setting. This isn't about condemning the school so much as holding up Ahmed as a counterpoint against the cultural prejudices. Whether or not they were the exclusive reasons that led to his detainment by the authorities is a secondary matter. The circumstances has presented an opportunity for Ahmed to be an example to encourage STEM and dismantle racial prejudices.
More to my original point of the post you quoted, fact checking whether or not his clock was an "invention" or not is entirely off point. That doesn't matter here. Encouraging curiosity, intellectualism, and STEM experimentation as cultural values is what's important. Dismantling racial prejudices is what's important. Whether or not he printed his own PCB is not important. Trying to catch him in his word choice of "invention" and fact check the clock he brought is a petty argument that has little to do with the actual issues. This
tweet in response to Richard Dawkin's line of inquiry about the origin of the clock captures it well.