4 ms·

You are trying to define it so it only applies to population size. That's not what it means. It's a shorthand for "social minority", as the top of the Wikipedi

by dalke 11y ago

You are trying to define it so it only applies to population size. That's not what it means. It's a shorthand for "social minority", as the top of the Wikipedia page I pointed out clearly says. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_group > Minority group is a term referring to a category of people differentiated from the social majority, i.e., those who hold the majority of positions of social power in a society, and may be defined by law. Rather than a relational "social group", as the term would indicate, "minority group" refers to the above-described. The differentiation can be based on one or more observable human characteristics, including: ethnicity, race, religion, caste, gender, wealth, health or sexual orientation. Usage of the term is applied to various situations and civilizations within history, despite its popular mis-association with a numerical, statistical minority.

danieltillett 11y ago
The problem with these sort of definitions of the terms minority and majority is they lose all meaning. It allows anyone to arbitrarily categorise any groups they want as a minority or majority depending how they split or lump everyone together. I guess I am a little old fashion in wanting to use words to communicate which gets impossible if anyone can use any word to mean anything they want.
- dalke 11y ago
  I stand by my statement that you are only "being argumentative by deciding to use your personal ideas of what majority/minority means, then complaining when others use a different definition." If your proposal is what I think it is then, if not technically wrong, it is useless to the point where it can be discarded as a way to understand social issues. But as you haven't really given an idea of what your definition is, it's hard for me to really evaluate it. (How is it meaningful to say that the Althing is run by a minority?) The decades of literature on the topic has a largely coherent use of what "social minority" means, with much discussion on what it means, including highlighting the distinction between numerical and social minority. For example, quoting from the UN at http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/MinorityRights_en.pdf http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/MinorityRights_e... : > In most instances a minority group will be a numerical minority, but in others a numerical majority may also find itself in a minority-like or non-dominant position, such as Blacks under the apartheid regime in South Africa. You are also correct that is it partially subjective. Again, quoting from that document: >It is often stressed that the existence of a minority is a question of fact and that any definition must include both objective factors (such as the existence of a shared ethnicity, language or religion) and subjective factors (including that individuals must identify themselves as members of a minority). and > The question often arises as to whether, for example, persons with disabilities, persons belonging to certain political groups or persons with a particular sexual orientation or identity (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersexual persons) constitute minorities. While the United Nations Minorities Declaration is devoted to national, ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, it is also important to combat multiple discrimination and to address situations where a person belonging to a national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minority is also discriminated against on other grounds such as gender, disability or sexual orientation. and > Similarly to minorities, there is no universally accepted international definition of indigenous peoples. But that is true of almost every social grouping. What is "Christian"? That said, for the purposes of this census report, "minority" means "minorities as defined by the US government", and the definition is clear. Instead, you're pointing to ambiguities on the edges and interpreting it as a problem with the core, when by all that I can tell, it's mostly a lack of willingness on your part to understand the topic.
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    I am not complaining that others use the terms minority and majority differently to me, I am complaining that the terms have lost all meaning because they have been used so inconsistently. I would like us to use new terms with consistent meanings so we can talk constructively about serious issues. Yes I understand what the concept minority means in regards the US census even if the groupings are now mostly historical rather than informative. This breakdown in meaning is reflected in the growing percentage of the population who do not feel they belong uniquely to one of the census categories.
    - dalke 11y ago
      There is no more ambiguity over the term "minority group" than there is over the term "Christian". Has the term "Christianity" lost all its meaning? Shall we stop talking about it until there's a well-defined term? The current interpretations of "minority" and "minority group" has been the primary definition for longer than you've likely been alive. You might as well complain about "calculus" because not only is it not dealing with pebbles, but it's really a short-hand for "calculus of infinitesimals", and not meant to include the calculus of variations or lambda calculus.

by dalke 11y ago

danieltillett 11y ago

The problem with these sort of definitions of the terms minority and majority is they lose all meaning. It allows anyone to arbitrarily categorise any groups they want as a minority or majority depending how they split or lump everyone together. I guess I am a little old fashion in wanting to use words to communicate which gets impossible if anyone can use any word to mean anything they want.

dalke 11y ago
I stand by my statement that you are only "being argumentative by deciding to use your personal ideas of what majority/minority means, then complaining when others use a different definition." If your proposal is what I think it is then, if not technically wrong, it is useless to the point where it can be discarded as a way to understand social issues. But as you haven't really given an idea of what your definition is, it's hard for me to really evaluate it. (How is it meaningful to say that the Althing is run by a minority?) The decades of literature on the topic has a largely coherent use of what "social minority" means, with much discussion on what it means, including highlighting the distinction between numerical and social minority. For example, quoting from the UN at http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/MinorityRights_en.pdf http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/MinorityRights_e... : > In most instances a minority group will be a numerical minority, but in others a numerical majority may also find itself in a minority-like or non-dominant position, such as Blacks under the apartheid regime in South Africa. You are also correct that is it partially subjective. Again, quoting from that document: >It is often stressed that the existence of a minority is a question of fact and that any definition must include both objective factors (such as the existence of a shared ethnicity, language or religion) and subjective factors (including that individuals must identify themselves as members of a minority). and > The question often arises as to whether, for example, persons with disabilities, persons belonging to certain political groups or persons with a particular sexual orientation or identity (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersexual persons) constitute minorities. While the United Nations Minorities Declaration is devoted to national, ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, it is also important to combat multiple discrimination and to address situations where a person belonging to a national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minority is also discriminated against on other grounds such as gender, disability or sexual orientation. and > Similarly to minorities, there is no universally accepted international definition of indigenous peoples. But that is true of almost every social grouping. What is "Christian"? That said, for the purposes of this census report, "minority" means "minorities as defined by the US government", and the definition is clear. Instead, you're pointing to ambiguities on the edges and interpreting it as a problem with the core, when by all that I can tell, it's mostly a lack of willingness on your part to understand the topic.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  I am not complaining that others use the terms minority and majority differently to me, I am complaining that the terms have lost all meaning because they have been used so inconsistently. I would like us to use new terms with consistent meanings so we can talk constructively about serious issues. Yes I understand what the concept minority means in regards the US census even if the groupings are now mostly historical rather than informative. This breakdown in meaning is reflected in the growing percentage of the population who do not feel they belong uniquely to one of the census categories.
  - dalke 11y ago
    There is no more ambiguity over the term "minority group" than there is over the term "Christian". Has the term "Christianity" lost all its meaning? Shall we stop talking about it until there's a well-defined term? The current interpretations of "minority" and "minority group" has been the primary definition for longer than you've likely been alive. You might as well complain about "calculus" because not only is it not dealing with pebbles, but it's really a short-hand for "calculus of infinitesimals", and not meant to include the calculus of variations or lambda calculus.