3 ms·
The text is not asking anyone to care about all humans equally. It is pointing out to a bias in reporting: one can never read "fact X". One can only read "fact
by dangom 5y ago
The text is not asking anyone to care about all humans equally.
It is pointing out to a bias in reporting: one can never read "fact X". One can only read "fact X from source Y". Depending on one's alignment with source Y, one is more or less inclined to believe or care about fact X.
The text points out examples of multiple Ys and how they choose how to report on X.
Much of what you call "woke" is realizing that human rationality has many biases, and in order to reify what we in the West agreed upon in text back in 1789, we will have to learn what these biases are and learn to actively compensate for them.
Much progress has been done, but much is still left to do.
Of course you care more about your family than anyone else's, and about Ukrainians and Russians more than Iraqis or Yemenis. It's a great starting point to think about that, and what unintended consequences everyone's individual biases can have for the future of our society.
This is not an exercise that people go through often enough.
- lostmsu 5y agoI came to the conclusion about biases back in high school, and IMHO, what people call woke is just the stupidest idea to fight them I've ever heard: forcing counter-biases on everyone, including people who are not initially biased (relatively speaking). We should have stronger requirements for education in mathematical logic, and perhaps probability theory in schools instead of teaching countless anecdata.
- dangom 5y agoSame principle, different example. We never read "fact X", we read "fact X from source Y". What if source Y is biased in that its using all facts X to push an anti-bias agenda?
- lostmsu 5y agoOnce you find out they lied, and never retracted false statement, you just stop reading the source, period.