4 ms·

> effect of the negative discrimination on the affected individuals It's worse than that. What doctor would you go to, a white man, a black man, or a woman, i

by tomp 8y ago

> effect of the negative discrimination on the affected individuals It's worse than that. What doctor would you go to, a white man, a black man, or a woman, if you knew that there's affirmative action for blacks/women, and you wanted (and could afford) the best doctor? Mind you, picking white man isn't even racist, it's rational in the Bayesian framework (the white/male had to have better exam scores to be admitted to the school than blacks/women).

lucideer 8y ago
> picking white man isn't even racist, it's rational in the Bayesian framework Only if you assume no inherent counter-bias, which is of course ridiculous. Without affirmative action, blacks/women would have to have equal exam scores coupled with adverse conditions (statistically, on average) to the white/male candidate. By that logic, they would need to perform much better on aggregate.
- dandare 8y ago
  Do you assume the adverse conditions that affect black women (BW) will disappear once they are admitted to the school? If not, then it is still more rational to choose a white man (WM), who performed better in the exams and is not affected by adverse conditions during his study. Anyway, my original question was about fairness :).
  - lucideer 8y ago
    > Do you assume the adverse conditions that affect black women (BW) will disappear once they are admitted to the school? I guess the hope is that increased participation will slowly reduce the severity of adversity, but whether that is effective I'm less sure of (I don't really believe it will ever disappear completely tbh). As for it being more rational to choose the person who contends with adversity on the assumption that the adversity never disappears (and therefore continues to impair), this only works on the assumption that affirmative action is a complete, perfect remedy to adversity: otherwise those contending with adversity must still overachieve to a certain degree to get the same positions (and therefore represent a potentially better rational choice).
isostatic 8y ago
I'd go for the black woman, as she had far more adversity to overcome to get into that position and is therefore better (harder working, less likely to have got in via the old boys network) Of course I wouldn't really, I'm just using your logic.
- islon 8y ago
  A research done in Brazil (where racial quotas for universities were implemented) showed that students that got in through quotas performed better, on average, than "normal" students. So I guess you are right.
  - volkisch 8y ago
    Can you cite your sources? Br has been in the whole trend of positive discrimination for a long time and I doubt this study isn't biased as most of their society when it comes to everyone that isn't "white".
  - gsaga 8y ago
    In india the opposite is true. A significant fraction of student admitted through race quota fail and drop out. Now they want to reduce the exam difficulty for them!
  - d0100 8y ago
    Source?
- tomp 8y ago
  Yeah that's a good point. Nassim Taleb elaborates on a similar one here: https://medium.com/incerto/surgeons-should-notlook-like-surgeons-23b0e2cf6d52 https://medium.com/incerto/surgeons-should-notlook-like-surg... Although technically that's a different effect. Affirmative action is, AFAIK, meant to counter negative bias before (i.e. positive discrimination at university entry is meant to counter worse education and poverty at a primary- and high-school level), whereas you're talking about overcoming biases after graduation ("old boys network" etc).
- dandare 8y ago
Fnoord 8y ago
> What doctor would you go to, a white man, a black man, or a woman, if you knew that there's affirmative action for blacks/women, and you wanted (and could afford) the best doctor? What is it with this obsession that every requires the best doctor? I don't want the best doctor, I want a good enough doctor who is close to my house location or I will stick to my current doctor because I had good experience with them. Once I stumble upon problems with that doctor I might reevaluate. Sometimes good is good enough, you don't always need the best of the best. My dentist is a woman, and not white. She's great. My doctor is a white male, he is also great. Skin or gender mean nothing to me in this context.
- gluelogic 8y ago
  > What is it with this obsession that every requires the best doctor? Being only willing to settle for the absolute best doctor in the world is ridiculous, but it is perfectly rational to want to choose the best one out of a small group of candidates. I can't imagine approaching it any other way when my personal health is on the line.
- cloverich 8y ago
  (Not agreeing with OP's strategy whatsoever) -- because the wrong doctor can cost you time, health and your _life_. Particularly with surgeon's, the best surgeon's (and practice's) may have substantially lower complication rates. Its not a small difference.
- PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
  And most people will optimize for all those factors as well. We aren't saying that you have to pick the doctor with the absolute highest scores, only that there is another factor to rationally consider which shouldn't be there.
- genericid 8y ago
  But how will you find a good enough doctor to begin with?
  - Fnoord 8y ago
KSteffensen 8y ago
I want to feel safe with my doctor and feeling safe is largely unrelated to grades as long as they are good enough. Feeling safe is related to rapport with the person which is again related to ethnicity, gender, age, behavior, etc.

by tomp 8y ago

lucideer 8y ago

> picking white man isn't even racist, it's rational in the Bayesian framework Only if you assume no inherent counter-bias, which is of course ridiculous. Without affirmative action, blacks/women would have to have equal exam scores coupled with adverse conditions (statistically, on average) to the white/male candidate. By that logic, they would need to perform much better on aggregate.

dandare 8y ago
Do you assume the adverse conditions that affect black women (BW) will disappear once they are admitted to the school? If not, then it is still more rational to choose a white man (WM), who performed better in the exams and is not affected by adverse conditions during his study. Anyway, my original question was about fairness :).
- lucideer 8y ago
  > Do you assume the adverse conditions that affect black women (BW) will disappear once they are admitted to the school? I guess the hope is that increased participation will slowly reduce the severity of adversity, but whether that is effective I'm less sure of (I don't really believe it will ever disappear completely tbh). As for it being more rational to choose the person who contends with adversity on the assumption that the adversity never disappears (and therefore continues to impair), this only works on the assumption that affirmative action is a complete, perfect remedy to adversity: otherwise those contending with adversity must still overachieve to a certain degree to get the same positions (and therefore represent a potentially better rational choice).

isostatic 8y ago

I'd go for the black woman, as she had far more adversity to overcome to get into that position and is therefore better (harder working, less likely to have got in via the old boys network) Of course I wouldn't really, I'm just using your logic.

islon 8y ago
A research done in Brazil (where racial quotas for universities were implemented) showed that students that got in through quotas performed better, on average, than "normal" students. So I guess you are right.
- volkisch 8y ago
  Can you cite your sources? Br has been in the whole trend of positive discrimination for a long time and I doubt this study isn't biased as most of their society when it comes to everyone that isn't "white".
- gsaga 8y ago
  In india the opposite is true. A significant fraction of student admitted through race quota fail and drop out. Now they want to reduce the exam difficulty for them!
- d0100 8y ago
  Source?
tomp 8y ago
Yeah that's a good point. Nassim Taleb elaborates on a similar one here: https://medium.com/incerto/surgeons-should-notlook-like-surgeons-23b0e2cf6d52 https://medium.com/incerto/surgeons-should-notlook-like-surg... Although technically that's a different effect. Affirmative action is, AFAIK, meant to counter negative bias before (i.e. positive discrimination at university entry is meant to counter worse education and poverty at a primary- and high-school level), whereas you're talking about overcoming biases after graduation ("old boys network" etc).
dandare 8y ago

Fnoord 8y ago

> What doctor would you go to, a white man, a black man, or a woman, if you knew that there's affirmative action for blacks/women, and you wanted (and could afford) the best doctor? What is it with this obsession that every requires the best doctor? I don't want the best doctor, I want a good enough doctor who is close to my house location or I will stick to my current doctor because I had good experience with them. Once I stumble upon problems with that doctor I might reevaluate. Sometimes good is good enough, you don't always need the best of the best. My dentist is a woman, and not white. She's great. My doctor is a white male, he is also great. Skin or gender mean nothing to me in this context.

gluelogic 8y ago
> What is it with this obsession that every requires the best doctor? Being only willing to settle for the absolute best doctor in the world is ridiculous, but it is perfectly rational to want to choose the best one out of a small group of candidates. I can't imagine approaching it any other way when my personal health is on the line.
cloverich 8y ago
(Not agreeing with OP's strategy whatsoever) -- because the wrong doctor can cost you time, health and your _life_. Particularly with surgeon's, the best surgeon's (and practice's) may have substantially lower complication rates. Its not a small difference.
PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
And most people will optimize for all those factors as well. We aren't saying that you have to pick the doctor with the absolute highest scores, only that there is another factor to rationally consider which shouldn't be there.
genericid 8y ago
But how will you find a good enough doctor to begin with?
- Fnoord 8y ago

KSteffensen 8y ago

I want to feel safe with my doctor and feeling safe is largely unrelated to grades as long as they are good enough. Feeling safe is related to rapport with the person which is again related to ethnicity, gender, age, behavior, etc.