4 ms·

> Instead he advocates the use of such scores when choosing between candidates for a job. I'm struggling to understand how this doesn't wind up being a proxy f

> Instead he advocates the use of such scores when choosing between candidates for a job. I'm struggling to understand how this doesn't wind up being a proxy for racism/sexism and the other things we abhor when considering equal opportunity.

golemotron 8y ago
Should equal opportunity mean that you have an equal chance of getting a job regardless of your aptitude? That's all the testing measures.. aptitude. The alternative is giving out jobs by guesswork. It could be argued that by not checking for aptitude, we are doing quite a bit of that now.
- cultus 8y ago
  You might be confusing "aptitude" with "spurious correlations."
  - golemotron 8y ago
    You might be doing the same.
nabla9 8y ago
> being a proxy for racism/sexism Genetic variation inside races is much larger than between them. I don't think that that genetic screening is a good idea, but if it would be rigorously and blindly applied, it would probably break up many race and gender barriers. We already do ad hoc screening based on phenotypes determined by genes. * taller men have higher wages than shorter men. * beautiful women get jobs more easily than ugly women. * facial asymmetries and other small deviations from the norm affect the prospects of many people.
- 0815test 8y ago
  As someone who's 178cm (5ft9) tall and has mild facial asymmetry, thank you for reminding me my prospects will suck...
  - SpanishConf 8y ago
    As someone who's the same height (yay?) it's okay, it's really average around the world, you're not short, you're average for 95% of the world ;) (Also it's 5'10") Having said so, may I remind you that the biggest predictor for your own personal wealth is the wealth of your parents, so you know.
- fromthestart 8y ago
  >Genetic variation inside races is much larger than between them Do you have a source for this? It sounds suspiciously like feel good propaganda.
  - chillwaves 8y ago
    Do you have a source that states "races" are determined by genetics? https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-... https://www.americanscientist.org/article/is-race-real https://www.americanscientist.org/article/is-race-real https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/genetics-history-race-neanderthal-rutherford/ https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/genetics-history... Those are literally the first three results from the google search "is race real from science point of view".
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - nabla9 8y ago
    How Science and Genetics are Reshaping the Race Debate of the 21st Century: http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-reshaping-race-debate-21st-century/ http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-resh... Here is good article that explains it more clearly: Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/ >The proportion of human genetic variation due to differences between populations is modest, and individuals from different populations can be genetically more similar than individuals from the same population. Yet sufficient genetic data can permit accurate classification of individuals into populations. Both findings can be obtained from the same data set, using the same number of polymorphic loci. This article explains why. .... >The fact that, given enough genetic data, individuals can be correctly assigned to their populations of origin is compatible with the observation that most human genetic variation is found within populations, not between them. It is also compatible with our finding that, even when the most distinct populations are considered and hundreds of loci are used, individuals are frequently more similar to members of other populations than to members of their own population. Thus, caution should be used when using geographic or genetic ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes.
YouAreGreat 8y ago
> struggling to understand how this doesn't wind up being a proxy for racism Here's the gist: Human bad. Capital good.
- SpanishConf 8y ago
  Spot on. This will be and is being used to justify a world of luxury for the 1% and a world of pain for everyone else who isn't "perfect". I personally believe we should strive to create a better world for 100% of the population, not justify the shortfallings of the current mixed-capi-soci system.

golemotron 8y ago

Should equal opportunity mean that you have an equal chance of getting a job regardless of your aptitude? That's all the testing measures.. aptitude. The alternative is giving out jobs by guesswork. It could be argued that by not checking for aptitude, we are doing quite a bit of that now.

cultus 8y ago
You might be confusing "aptitude" with "spurious correlations."
- golemotron 8y ago
  You might be doing the same.

nabla9 8y ago

> being a proxy for racism/sexism Genetic variation inside races is much larger than between them. I don't think that that genetic screening is a good idea, but if it would be rigorously and blindly applied, it would probably break up many race and gender barriers. We already do ad hoc screening based on phenotypes determined by genes. * taller men have higher wages than shorter men. * beautiful women get jobs more easily than ugly women. * facial asymmetries and other small deviations from the norm affect the prospects of many people.

0815test 8y ago
As someone who's 178cm (5ft9) tall and has mild facial asymmetry, thank you for reminding me my prospects will suck...
- SpanishConf 8y ago
  As someone who's the same height (yay?) it's okay, it's really average around the world, you're not short, you're average for 95% of the world ;) (Also it's 5'10") Having said so, may I remind you that the biggest predictor for your own personal wealth is the wealth of your parents, so you know.
fromthestart 8y ago
>Genetic variation inside races is much larger than between them Do you have a source for this? It sounds suspiciously like feel good propaganda.
- chillwaves 8y ago
  Do you have a source that states "races" are determined by genetics? https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-... https://www.americanscientist.org/article/is-race-real https://www.americanscientist.org/article/is-race-real https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/genetics-history-race-neanderthal-rutherford/ https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/genetics-history... Those are literally the first three results from the google search "is race real from science point of view".
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- nabla9 8y ago
  How Science and Genetics are Reshaping the Race Debate of the 21st Century: http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-reshaping-race-debate-21st-century/ http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-resh... Here is good article that explains it more clearly: Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/ >The proportion of human genetic variation due to differences between populations is modest, and individuals from different populations can be genetically more similar than individuals from the same population. Yet sufficient genetic data can permit accurate classification of individuals into populations. Both findings can be obtained from the same data set, using the same number of polymorphic loci. This article explains why. .... >The fact that, given enough genetic data, individuals can be correctly assigned to their populations of origin is compatible with the observation that most human genetic variation is found within populations, not between them. It is also compatible with our finding that, even when the most distinct populations are considered and hundreds of loci are used, individuals are frequently more similar to members of other populations than to members of their own population. Thus, caution should be used when using geographic or genetic ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes.

YouAreGreat 8y ago

> struggling to understand how this doesn't wind up being a proxy for racism Here's the gist: Human bad. Capital good.

SpanishConf 8y ago
Spot on. This will be and is being used to justify a world of luxury for the 1% and a world of pain for everyone else who isn't "perfect". I personally believe we should strive to create a better world for 100% of the population, not justify the shortfallings of the current mixed-capi-soci system.