4 ms·

I have some misgivings about their reasoning after reading the first section ("Significance") of the article. (Apologies if I just didn't read far enough.) > R

I have some misgivings about their reasoning after reading the first section ("Significance") of the article. (Apologies if I just didn't read far enough.) > Race-based economic inequality is both a defining and persistent feature of the United States that is at odds with national narratives regarding progress toward racial equality. Perhaps I'm reading too much into their phrasing, but saying that inequality is "race-based" sounds like a claim regarding causality. If so, I wonder if they're overreaching and should have limited their claims to correlation. > ... Notably, White Americans generated more accurate estimates of Black–White equality when asked to consider the persistence of race-based discrimination in American society. I could imagine many primer statements that potentially improve the accuracy of the estimates people come up with. But that alone would not show those primer statements to be true. I hope the paper's authors and readers avoid that logical trap.

mikeash 8y ago
When two things are correlated, there are four possibilities: A causes B, B causes A, A and B are both caused by some third factor C, or they are correlated by random chance. It is unlikely that economic inequality causes race, or that some third factor causes both economic inequality and race. The odds of race and economic situations being correlated by random chance are vanishingly small. The numbers involved are so big that there’s just no way, it would be like flipping a fair coin a million times and getting 700,000 heads. That leaves race causing economic inequality, probably by way of intermediate factors like oppression caused by race.
- DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
  > When two things are correlated, there are four possibilities: A causes B, B causes A, A and B are both caused by some third factor C, or they are correlated by random chance. Kudos for breaking the problem down into a handful of mutually exclusive categories that we can discuss. That's really helpful. > That leaves race causing economic inequality, probably by way of intermediate factors like oppression caused by Notice your use of the word "probably". I might be mistaken, but I think that's smuggling in the very set of assumptions I was questioning in the first place.
  - mikeash 8y ago
    You suggested that race might not be the cause of economic equality correlated with race. I’m saying that race causing economic inequality is the only reasonable explanation for the facts. Whether it’s because race directly causes inequality or because race causes other stuff which then causes inequality doesn’t matter. It’s a causal relationship either way.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > It is unlikely that economic inequality cause race I wouldn't rule it out entirely for individuals where social pressure wouldn't react strongly against it (those of ambiguous appearance without a clear single identity imposed on uprearing); racial identity in those cases is probably shaped in part by experience of which economic status is a component. But that's, if it exists, a marginal effect around the edges.
  - mikeash 8y ago
    Great point. If you’re relying on self-reporting or subjective evaluation rather than objective measures (and good luck finding an objective measure of race that matches what people think it is) then there will surely be some influence in that direction.
- AlexTWithBeard 8y ago
  There's always a chance of both being caused by the same thing. Genetic profile could be one example of such thing, but there may be other. If you (or me) cannot readily give a full list of possible causes, it doesn't mean these causes do not exist
  - toufiqbarhamov 8y ago
    There's always a chance of both being caused by the same thing. Genetic profile could be one example of such thing, but there may be other. If you (or me) cannot readily give a full list of possible causes, it doesn't mean these causes do not exist. ...And there’s a chance that Oumuoamuoa is a spaceship, that I’m an AI, and that you don’t even exist. It’s vanishingly unlikely though, which was the point being made by the person you responded to.
    - AlexTWithBeard 8y ago
      I'm not sure I understand your point. There is indeed a non-negligible chance that you are an AI, but how is it relevant to the subject we're discussing? mikeash made a statement that: It is unlikely... that some third factor causes both economic inequality and race. I politely disagree with this point and, moreover, gave an example of such third factor.
- spraak 8y ago
  Very succinct and eloquent, thank you
rayiner 8y ago
African Americans were enslaved, based in their race, and then segregated and discriminated against, based in their race, by the law up until recently. If Bill Gates and Steve Jobs has been born black in the south, they would’ve gone to a segregated school. (Kennedy had to send troops to forcibly desegregate the University of Alabama when they were 8.) I think we are comfortably to the point where we can start talking about causation, not merely correlation.
- laingc 8y ago
  This does not explain the substantial disparity in outcomes for black Americans of West Indian origin, who were also enslaved, discriminated against, and continue to be on the receiving end of whatever racist attitudes persist in American society.

mikeash 8y ago

When two things are correlated, there are four possibilities: A causes B, B causes A, A and B are both caused by some third factor C, or they are correlated by random chance. It is unlikely that economic inequality causes race, or that some third factor causes both economic inequality and race. The odds of race and economic situations being correlated by random chance are vanishingly small. The numbers involved are so big that there’s just no way, it would be like flipping a fair coin a million times and getting 700,000 heads. That leaves race causing economic inequality, probably by way of intermediate factors like oppression caused by race.

DoofusOfDeath 8y ago
> When two things are correlated, there are four possibilities: A causes B, B causes A, A and B are both caused by some third factor C, or they are correlated by random chance. Kudos for breaking the problem down into a handful of mutually exclusive categories that we can discuss. That's really helpful. > That leaves race causing economic inequality, probably by way of intermediate factors like oppression caused by Notice your use of the word "probably". I might be mistaken, but I think that's smuggling in the very set of assumptions I was questioning in the first place.
- mikeash 8y ago
  You suggested that race might not be the cause of economic equality correlated with race. I’m saying that race causing economic inequality is the only reasonable explanation for the facts. Whether it’s because race directly causes inequality or because race causes other stuff which then causes inequality doesn’t matter. It’s a causal relationship either way.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> It is unlikely that economic inequality cause race I wouldn't rule it out entirely for individuals where social pressure wouldn't react strongly against it (those of ambiguous appearance without a clear single identity imposed on uprearing); racial identity in those cases is probably shaped in part by experience of which economic status is a component. But that's, if it exists, a marginal effect around the edges.
- mikeash 8y ago
  Great point. If you’re relying on self-reporting or subjective evaluation rather than objective measures (and good luck finding an objective measure of race that matches what people think it is) then there will surely be some influence in that direction.
AlexTWithBeard 8y ago
There's always a chance of both being caused by the same thing. Genetic profile could be one example of such thing, but there may be other. If you (or me) cannot readily give a full list of possible causes, it doesn't mean these causes do not exist
- toufiqbarhamov 8y ago
  There's always a chance of both being caused by the same thing. Genetic profile could be one example of such thing, but there may be other. If you (or me) cannot readily give a full list of possible causes, it doesn't mean these causes do not exist. ...And there’s a chance that Oumuoamuoa is a spaceship, that I’m an AI, and that you don’t even exist. It’s vanishingly unlikely though, which was the point being made by the person you responded to.
  - AlexTWithBeard 8y ago
    I'm not sure I understand your point. There is indeed a non-negligible chance that you are an AI, but how is it relevant to the subject we're discussing? mikeash made a statement that: It is unlikely... that some third factor causes both economic inequality and race. I politely disagree with this point and, moreover, gave an example of such third factor.
spraak 8y ago
Very succinct and eloquent, thank you

rayiner 8y ago

African Americans were enslaved, based in their race, and then segregated and discriminated against, based in their race, by the law up until recently. If Bill Gates and Steve Jobs has been born black in the south, they would’ve gone to a segregated school. (Kennedy had to send troops to forcibly desegregate the University of Alabama when they were 8.) I think we are comfortably to the point where we can start talking about causation, not merely correlation.

laingc 8y ago
This does not explain the substantial disparity in outcomes for black Americans of West Indian origin, who were also enslaved, discriminated against, and continue to be on the receiving end of whatever racist attitudes persist in American society.