Can someone in the Irving TX area "draft" this young man?

[teku14]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

So what?


Why should we even be trying to?


So what?


Yes, we should applaud this type of behavior.


Yes.


Obviously not. But Ahmed is not just every 10-14 year old who's done a remarkable thing.
When an incident becomes a matter of public interest, then examples need to be set. Important examples about racial tolerance and encouraging STEM.



Nothing he did constitutes plagiarism.


No, it doesn't. There are no "recent developments" that change anything here. Whether or not he "invented" the clock or not is irrelevant. It's a pedantic argument that has nothing to do with the larger themes of the cultural prejudices in play here (both racially and intellectually motivated).

Being the larger theme or not the answer to that is obvious amongst us all which clearly that it was wrong to do this based racial grounds is unacceptable. There there's your "relavent" part of this discussion out of the way. Now if we get to the actual part of this discussion which IS the lip service he his getting (like the title of this thread). What if everyone walked into school with electronic guys spilled out onto case and presenting it as their own invention? I wouldn't give anymore lip service to this than "I'm glad you have an interest in STEM but you're not allowed to take credit for someone else's work". If we go by definition of plagiarism, he has presented someone else's work as his own and while that shouldn't change the overall cultural response, it certainly should be a call to tone down on the lip service. Shall we applaud everyone that begins to take credit for others work? And it's not pedantic. I don't like to take public events like these at face value. I'm going to be skeptical of his intentions when a development like this emerges on a kid that's been hailed by everyone as such a innocent child.

[teku14]

Originally Posted by Monochron

No on is suggesting that he has "earned" all the attention and gifts. Sometimes big gestures which garner large media coverage are useful for making large social change. I'm not qualified to determine what he has "earned", but I'm very glad that this story is big enough that so many people are talking about it. And all the gifts he has received act as a tangible gesture that important people/companies value this kind of spirit in young people.

It publicly changes the story from "Administrators victimize young STEM enthusiast" to "The President, Microsoft, etc. value victimized young STEM enthusiasts".

I understand your point. This makes a lot more sense to me.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by teku14

Being the larger theme or not the answer to that is obvious amongst us all which clearly that it was wrong to do this based racial grounds is unacceptable. There there's your "relavent" part of this discussion out of the way.

That's only the tip of the iceberg. There's a lot more of that discussion to be had. You're attempting to steer this discussion away from real issues, towards your own manufactured ones.

Originally Posted by teku14

Now if we get to the actual part of this discussion which IS the lip service he his getting (like the title of this thread). What if everyone walked into school with electronic guys spilled out onto case and presenting it as their own invention? I wouldn't give anymore lip service to this than "I'm glad you have an interest in STEM but you're not allowed to take credit for someone else's work". If we go by definition of plagiarism, he has presented someone else's work as his own and while that shouldn't change the overall cultural response, it certainly should be a call to tone down on the lip service. Shall we applaud everyone that begins to take credit for others work? And it's not pedantic. I don't like to take public events like these at face value. I'm going to be skeptical of his intentions when a development like this emerges on a kid that's been hailed by everyone as such a innocent child.

This is pretty, and, yes, pedantic. There are no "revelations" here. He's not attempting to profit from anyone else's work. Nothing here calls his innocence into question, especially not for the supposed crimes he was detained for.

You're missing the forest for the trees. You're trying to hang him based on the word "invention," and implying accusations at him that don't even make sense. Nothing you're talking about is relevant. The "lip service" he's receiving is because he's become both a public figure and a symbol. He's receiving this "lip service" because of the unfortunate circumstances he was placed in, and how demonstrating the positive qualities he was embodying can be a vehicle for change.

Whether or not the clock was his "invention" is irrelevant. Trying to fact check it does not make you some form of enlightened mind, who can see beyond the cloud of media hype. It makes you someone hooked upon a trivial detail, trying to derail an important conversation upon that detail.

[wireties]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

To whitewash away injustices because of a lack of definitive proof only enables them to perpetuate.

And to condemn based on conjecture dilutes the seriousness of charges of racial injustice next time around. Why not wait till the facts are in?

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

You would have a point in a legal setting, but this is a larger cultural setting.

I'm thinking the difference might be lost on the persons and institutions being accused of racial injustices.

[teku14]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

That's only the tip of the iceberg. There's a lot more of that discussion to be had. You're attempting to steer this discussion away from real issues, towards your own manufactured ones.



This is pretty, and, yes, pedantic. There are no "revelations" here. He's not attempting to profit from anyone else's work. Nothing here calls his innocence into question, especially not for the supposed crimes he was detained for.

You're missing the forest for the trees. You're trying to hang him based on the word "invention," and implying accusations at him that don't even make sense. Nothing you're talking about is relevant. The "lip service" he's receiving is because he's become both a public figure and a symbol. He's receiving this "lip service" because of the unfortunate circumstances he was placed in, and how demonstrating the positive qualities he was embodying can be a vehicle for change.

Whether or not the clock was his "invention" is irrelevant. Trying to fact check it does not make you some form of enlightened mind, who can see beyond the cloud of media hype. It makes you someone hooked upon a trivial detail, trying to derail an important conversation upon that detail.

How about you learn to respect an opinion? Since you are again generalizing my entire stance I will address your comments. You're making false assumptions on what I'm supposedly implying. I'm not trying to "hang" him on the word invention. I am trying to cast doubt on his persona. And how is this relevant? I don't know about your morals but I value integrity very highly and will scrutinize even the most one-sided arguments if there is any question of integrity here. Call it pedantic, pretty, or frankly whatever you may but honesty and integrity are important even for a 14-year old. If the unfortunate case of Ahmed was presented in exactly the same way minus this "minor" detail at the end, than there would be absolutely no question of the qualities he embodies. You are so hung up on the most obvious and self-explanatory part of this debate that you simply fail to see how anything else is relevant. Yes. He was unjustly cuffed and interrogated and dehumanized due to what seems like a largely racially motivated reason. But how, pray tell, are you going to keep this discussion "relevant" for long when the only thing you have to contribute is your stale old argument that "Everything you guys say is irrelevant unless you say that he was falsely dehumanized and that this was racially motivated and we should encourage all the others victimized ". We get that Please grow out of that and understand where my point of view is situated. I and others that value scientific integrity have reason to be skeptical (note I'm leaving this at skepticism and nothing more, you can imagine whatever you think I'm implying) of his character and the "positive qualities he embodies". Don't get me wrong here. This does not change anything about the movement he stands for. That still stands strong. I will encouraging curiosity, intellectualism, and STEM experimentation but I will definitely not encourage dishonesty.

I will summarize. I've agreed with you this entire time with your case of encouragement for all people for are victimized like this. You've somehow misconstrued my other point that I'm skeptical of Ahmed's character as evidence that I'm missing the underlying point. While I do make the case for this as well, you must learn to respect this opinion since integrity relates greatly to what Ahmed the student who was victimized is portrayed.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by teku14

I'm not trying to "hang" him on the word invention. I am trying to cast doubt on his persona. And how is this relevant? I don't know about your morals but I value integrity very highly and will scrutinize even the most one-sided arguments if there is any question of integrity here. Call it pedantic, pretty, or frankly whatever you may but honesty and integrity are important even for a 14-year old.

Seeing as there is a question of honesty and integrity, I have one simple question. Think very carefully before you answer.


How is casting doubt on someone's persona NOT "hanging" him or her (for lack of a better term close at hand)?


Let me explain, so that you may know why I ask. If integrity is important, and honesty is important, then I believe that it it quite important to maintain the integrity and honesty--and, additionally, the reputation for such. Am I not correct? And, the tarnishing of said reputation is rather a serious matter, is it not? And, furthermore, said tarnishing could potentially lead someone towards death. (That one wasn't a question. There are known or suspected cases of that happening.) At any rate, a smeared reputation may as well be a "dead" or "hung" reputation, am I not correct?

If you said yes to at least one of those questions, then I have another question for you.

Is one word being "wrong" (whether it is or not is debatable in this case--for one thing, it could have been a misquote) worth attempting to drag someone else's reputation through the mud over?

Think very carefully about your answer. I'm not entirely sure you're going to like it. For that matter, I can't say for sure I'd like my answer either if someone asked me that question.




Folks, this discussion of 1) whether or not there was racism, 2) whether or not the teacher/school administration/police went too far, and 3) whether or not the student in question actually built the clock himself...

...Is it really worth going into what many an outsider would see as personal attacks over? I've been following this thread, making almost no comments, and honestly, that's what it seems to be going towards. Could we try to keep it away from those? Thanks a lot.

[Lil' Lavery]

@teku14
No, I will not "respect an opinion" that is openly trying to defame ("cast doubt on the persona") a 14 year old. Especially when that defamation only hurts the larger issue here. You claim you agree with me, yet your argument only serves to attempt to undermine the footing on which Ahmed stands.

@wireties
Fighting cultural/institutional prejudices is exactly where the real issues are. This doesn't "dilute" anything. And I certainly think the ones being "condemned" know that they aren't in a legal setting right now.

[teku14]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

@teku14
No, I will not "respect an opinion" that is openly trying to defame ("cast doubt on the persona") a 14 year old. Especially when that defamation only hurts the larger issue here. You claim you agree with me, yet your argument only serves to attempt to undermine the footing on which Ahmed stands.

@wireties
Fighting cultural/institutional prejudices is exactly where the real issues are. This doesn't "dilute" anything. And I certainly think the ones being "condemned" know that they aren't in a legal setting right now.

Once again you are you make the false connection that I Am undermining the movement as a whole ("the footing Ahmed stands on"). We shouldn't continue this discussion anymore if you can't comprehend how Ahmed and the larger issue can be addressed separately.

[teku14]

Originally Posted by EricH

Seeing as there is a question of honesty and integrity, I have one simple question. Think very carefully before you answer.


How is casting doubt on someone's persona NOT "hanging" him or her (for lack of a better term close at hand)?


Let me explain, so that you may know why I ask. If integrity is important, and honesty is important, then I believe that it it quite important to maintain the integrity and honesty--and, additionally, the reputation for such. Am I not correct? And, the tarnishing of said reputation is rather a serious matter, is it not? And, furthermore, said tarnishing could potentially lead someone towards death. (That one wasn't a question. There are known or suspected cases of that happening.) At any rate, a smeared reputation may as well be a "dead" or "hung" reputation, am I not correct?

If you said yes to at least one of those questions, then I have another question for you.

Is one word being "wrong" (whether it is or not is debatable in this case--for one thing, it could have been a misquote) worth attempting to drag someone else's reputation through the mud over?

Think very carefully about your answer. I'm not entirely sure you're going to like it. For that matter, I can't say for sure I'd like my answer either if someone asked me that question.




Folks, this discussion of 1) whether or not there was racism, 2) whether or not the teacher/school administration/police went too far, and 3) whether or not the student in question actually built the clock himself...

...Is it really worth going into what many an outsider would see as personal attacks over? I've been following this thread, making almost no comments, and honestly, that's what it seems to be going towards. Could we try to keep it away from those? Thanks a lot.

I see your point however who's fault is it if someone plagiarizes and gets caught, defamed, and dies because of it? But you may be right in the sense that this is a kid and that I shouldn't be as harsh for this kind of thing especially given the circumstances he's In. I'm certainly not trying to "drag his reputation through the mud" which is an extremely harsh metaphor. And the one word is not wrong. He's said it multiple times in interviews but yet again you are correct about giving him this given the circumstances. However, I do reserve the right to remain skeptical of him as a person. That's my opinion.

[wireties]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Fighting cultural/institutional prejudices is exactly where the real issues are. This doesn't "dilute" anything. And I certainly think the ones being "condemned" know that they aren't in a legal setting right now.

You leave yourself open to charges of impugning the character of individuals, organizations, indeed entire political entities, with zero evidence. This is nearly as egregious as the assumed racial prejudice itself.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by teku14

Once again you are you make the false connection that I Am undermining the movement as a whole ("the footing Ahmed stands on"). We shouldn't continue this discussion anymore if you can't comprehend how Ahmed and the larger issue can be addressed separately.

I'll put this bluntly.
There are real issues in play, and in a thread discussing those, you chose to attack the character a 14 year old you have never met. Not only are you distracting from the issue, you're contributing to the problem at hand. You're cyber bullying a 14 year old.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by wireties

You leave yourself open to charges of impugning the character of individuals, organizations, indeed entire political entities, with zero evidence. This is nearly as egregious as the assumed racial prejudice itself.

How is holding Ahmed up as an example impugning the character of anyone? What happened to Ahmed was wrong, and stating as much needs to happen.

[teku14]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I'll put this bluntly.
There are real issues in play, and in a thread discussing those, you chose to attack the character a 14 year old you have never met. Not only are you distracting from the issue, you're contributing to the problem at hand. You're cyber bullying a 14 year old.

And here you are guilty of the same, blindly supporting a 14 year old that you have never met and taking all that the media has to offer at face value while still making the same stale old arguments. You're last two sentences are purely unfounded rhetoric so I will disregard them for your sake.

[Madison]

Originally Posted by teku14

And here you are guilty of the same, blindly supporting a 14 year old that you have never met and taking all that the media has to offer at face value while still making the same stale old arguments. You're last two sentences are purely unfounded rhetoric so I will disregard them for your sake.

Sean's points are valid and he's trying to foster a meaningful discussion about something that's FAR more important than whether this particular person meets your bizarre standards for integrity, etc.

Sean wants to talk about institutional racism and anti-intellectualism. You want to whine about a single individual. While they are subjects that certainly can be addressed separately as you've suggested, your piece of this discussion -- going after a kid -- is a worthless waste of your time and ours.

[Jacob Bendicksen]

Originally Posted by teku14

And here you are guilty of the same, blindly supporting a 14 year old that you have never met and taking all that the media has to offer at face value while still making the same stale old arguments. You're last two sentences are purely unfounded rhetoric so I will disregard them for your sake.

I can't speak for Sean, but I'd rather support someone I'd never met than put them down. I'd like to think that people are good unless proven otherwise.