4 ms·

Disparity of outcome does not prove disparity of opportunity.

by jwond 6y ago

epistasis 6y ago
Could you explain the logic that get you to that conclusion? Everytime somebody has tried to argue that to me, it turns out that they believe that there are racial differences that are not based on evidence. For example, I once had somebody say that the racial outcome differences were not like socioeconomic upbringing differences in outcome, and that though socioeconomic outcome differences were evidence of difference in opportunity, that racial differences were genetic, which is clearly abiological. So if you are not positing racial differences in opportunity, what are you positing as the explanatory variable?
- luminaobscura 6y ago
  If it was all socioeconomics, you could see that in the data. You would control for parent's income and/or education, and you would see disparity disappear. I don't know what is the primary cause of disparities but i wouldn't assume it's all socioeconomics without evidence. Maybe different groups are valuing things differently? For example, an Indian may try to migrate to US using PHD as a gateway. So they may be more willing to sacrifice and work hard. Or maybe for some groups PHD (or education in general) brings more prestige compared to others.
  - epistasis 6y ago
    My point is that socioeconomic differences resulting in different outcomes would be accepted as evidence of differences of opportunity. Because there's ample evidence of opportunities being different when growing up with fewer resources and more stresses. There's also ample evidence of racial discrimination resulting in differences of opportunity, in all fields of science. But people are quick to assume that it doesn't exist, or are quick to point out any chance that it may even exist.
    - luminaobscura 6y ago
      If a group has "fewer resources and more stresses" "when growing up", we should try to address that directly. This doesn't mean universities doesn't present equal opportunity. The reason someone is not as capable may be just bad luck (bad parents etc.). But still, society should give positions to most capable ones.
      - epistasis 6y ago
        I would point out that the original claim was "equal opportunity," not merely "universities presenting equal opportunity." And I agree that we should fix the systemic racism that causes unequal opportunity starting from early in in life. And if we are to believe the stories that come from Black people that attempt degrees in CS, or STEM in general, they also face significant differences in opportunity at the university level as well. I'm inclined to believe these stories, as everytime I have spent some time investigating they have been true.
- rowawey 6y ago
  Whaaa? There is no equation for it. Unquantifiable cultural trauma that has been passed-down from one generation to the next combined with treatment under slavery, lynchings, KKK marches in DC, Jim Crow segregation, crack epidemic/War on Drugs, genocide by police, and so forth. How would you feel if you were constantly treated as a criminal, as a threat to others, and the police could murder you whenever they wanted for no reason? Also, Jane Elliott's blue/brown eyes exercise should be a requirement for all elementary school children. It can't be left to chance whether or not to teach kids a lesson or two about empathy, or we risk raising a nation of selfish psychopaths who completely ignore homeless people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elliott https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elliott
ygaitonde 6y ago
A PhD in CS is the final result of a long series of opportunities which certain groups may/may not have equitable access to. e.g. an affordable undergraduate education, resources to support students throughout undergrad, a good high school/elementary/pre-k education, and so on.

Disparity of outcome does not prove disparity of opportunity.

by jwond 6y ago

Disparity of outcome does not prove disparity of opportunity.

Could you explain the logic that get you to that conclusion? Everytime somebody has tried to argue that to me, it turns out that they believe that there are racial differences that are not based on evidence. For example, I once had somebody say that the racial outcome differences were not like socioeconomic upbringing differences in outcome, and that though socioeconomic outcome differences were evidence of difference in opportunity, that racial differences were genetic, which is clearly abiological. So if you are not positing racial differences in opportunity, what are you positing as the explanatory variable?

luminaobscura 6y ago
If it was all socioeconomics, you could see that in the data. You would control for parent's income and/or education, and you would see disparity disappear. I don't know what is the primary cause of disparities but i wouldn't assume it's all socioeconomics without evidence. Maybe different groups are valuing things differently? For example, an Indian may try to migrate to US using PHD as a gateway. So they may be more willing to sacrifice and work hard. Or maybe for some groups PHD (or education in general) brings more prestige compared to others.
- epistasis 6y ago
  My point is that socioeconomic differences resulting in different outcomes would be accepted as evidence of differences of opportunity. Because there's ample evidence of opportunities being different when growing up with fewer resources and more stresses. There's also ample evidence of racial discrimination resulting in differences of opportunity, in all fields of science. But people are quick to assume that it doesn't exist, or are quick to point out any chance that it may even exist.
  - luminaobscura 6y ago
    If a group has "fewer resources and more stresses" "when growing up", we should try to address that directly. This doesn't mean universities doesn't present equal opportunity. The reason someone is not as capable may be just bad luck (bad parents etc.). But still, society should give positions to most capable ones.
    - epistasis 6y ago
      I would point out that the original claim was "equal opportunity," not merely "universities presenting equal opportunity." And I agree that we should fix the systemic racism that causes unequal opportunity starting from early in in life. And if we are to believe the stories that come from Black people that attempt degrees in CS, or STEM in general, they also face significant differences in opportunity at the university level as well. I'm inclined to believe these stories, as everytime I have spent some time investigating they have been true.
rowawey 6y ago
Whaaa? There is no equation for it. Unquantifiable cultural trauma that has been passed-down from one generation to the next combined with treatment under slavery, lynchings, KKK marches in DC, Jim Crow segregation, crack epidemic/War on Drugs, genocide by police, and so forth. How would you feel if you were constantly treated as a criminal, as a threat to others, and the police could murder you whenever they wanted for no reason? Also, Jane Elliott's blue/brown eyes exercise should be a requirement for all elementary school children. It can't be left to chance whether or not to teach kids a lesson or two about empathy, or we risk raising a nation of selfish psychopaths who completely ignore homeless people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elliott https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elliott

ygaitonde 6y ago

A PhD in CS is the final result of a long series of opportunities which certain groups may/may not have equitable access to. e.g. an affordable undergraduate education, resources to support students throughout undergrad, a good high school/elementary/pre-k education, and so on.