well, if you do some research in the field of cognitive psychology you´ll find this:
In 1997 Baron-Cohen developed the "empathizing-systemizing (E-S) theory" which states that humans may be classified on the basis of their scores along two dimensions (empathizing and systemizing). The E-S theory argues that typical females tend to score higher on empathizing relative to systemizing (they are more likely to have a brain of Type E), and typical males tend to score higher on systemizing relative to empathizing (they are more likely to have a brain of Type S). He suspects that if individuals with a "systemizing" focus are selecting each other as mates, they are more likely to have children with autism.
This is related to the effects of testosterone on the brain, meaning, that this sexual hormone makes the right-part of the brain less dominant, while estrogens don´t suppress the right part of the brain. In this way, man are more left-hemisphere prone and thus more likely to be focus in 1 thing at a time. This is research related to sexual differences in cognitive abilities, which point to the fact that sexual hormones have influence over brain-cognitive functions
I know these things because prior to work as web developer I´ve went through almost 3 years of intense psychology college researching about these topics...
According to the article I pasted in point 4, Google fired an employee who cited the exact Simon Baron-Cohen's research.
I also have studied psychology, and that's why I favor both nature and nurture arguments. Undoubtedly, there are some areas we could improve, such as being more friendly and inclusive. But things like 50/50 outcome is unnecessary because we need to respect the biological differences (due to DNA, hormones, predisposition...whatever) and the career choices those factors lead to.
On the matter of nurture you can teach the person being respectfull and aware of other peoples needs and limitations. For sure, we should do all of this, understanding that our efforts on this side can go only to a certain 'pre-determined' point of biological limits. Right? Meaning, biology will constrains us after some level, even though we are psychological fully commited to some (any) purpose!!
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
well, if you do some research in the field of cognitive psychology you´ll find this:
In 1997 Baron-Cohen developed the "empathizing-systemizing (E-S) theory" which states that humans may be classified on the basis of their scores along two dimensions (empathizing and systemizing). The E-S theory argues that typical females tend to score higher on empathizing relative to systemizing (they are more likely to have a brain of Type E), and typical males tend to score higher on systemizing relative to empathizing (they are more likely to have a brain of Type S). He suspects that if individuals with a "systemizing" focus are selecting each other as mates, they are more likely to have children with autism.
Ok?
So, this is the wikipedia page link (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Baron-...)
This is related to the effects of testosterone on the brain, meaning, that this sexual hormone makes the right-part of the brain less dominant, while estrogens don´t suppress the right part of the brain. In this way, man are more left-hemisphere prone and thus more likely to be focus in 1 thing at a time. This is research related to sexual differences in cognitive abilities, which point to the fact that sexual hormones have influence over brain-cognitive functions
I know these things because prior to work as web developer I´ve went through almost 3 years of intense psychology college researching about these topics...
According to the article I pasted in point 4, Google fired an employee who cited the exact Simon Baron-Cohen's research.
I also have studied psychology, and that's why I favor both nature and nurture arguments. Undoubtedly, there are some areas we could improve, such as being more friendly and inclusive. But things like 50/50 outcome is unnecessary because we need to respect the biological differences (due to DNA, hormones, predisposition...whatever) and the career choices those factors lead to.
On the matter of nurture you can teach the person being respectfull and aware of other peoples needs and limitations. For sure, we should do all of this, understanding that our efforts on this side can go only to a certain 'pre-determined' point of biological limits. Right? Meaning, biology will constrains us after some level, even though we are psychological fully commited to some (any) purpose!!