4 ms·
> an inequality of outcome, on the basis of race or sex is the best indicator one would have of an inequality of opportunity. It's good if you use it as an ind
by young_unixer 6y ago
> an inequality of outcome, on the basis of race or sex is the best indicator one would have of an inequality of opportunity.
It's good if you use it as an indicator, but it's currently used as "evidence" and as a justification to give certain advantages to certain groups under the (almost always unproven) assumption that there's inequality of opportunity. For example: quota laws, and affirmative action in general. Quota laws and affirmative action that are notably pushed by progressive mob that I talk about, so I don't see the mischaracterization.
- badRNG 6y agoInequality "of outcome" is the best evidence one can have of inequality "of opportunity", and again, it was the primary evidence in the Brown v. Board of Education overturn of Plessy v. Ferguson. The distinction didn't hold water in 1954, and I don't think it holds water in 2020. Consistent inequality on the basis of sex or race is the principle evidence that there is inequality "of opportunity."
- young_unixer 6y ago> Consistent inequality on the basis of sex or race is the principle evidence that there is inequality "of opportunity." How so?
- RashadSaleh 6y agodefinitions: equality of opportunity = x equality of outcome = y equation: y = f(x, [z1, z2, ...]) where z1, z2, ... are possibly other factors determining y you seem to say that y = f(x) You need to prove that z1, z2, ... don't exist and that y = f(x) has a causal relationship Both can be proved or disproved through numbers. In case the numbers don't exist, one suspends judgement.