4 ms·
> which will ultimately generate more balanced outcomes naturally. On what do you base this MASSIVE assumption? On the one hand, people who advocate for diver
by dolni 5y ago
> which will ultimately generate more balanced outcomes naturally.
On what do you base this MASSIVE assumption?
On the one hand, people who advocate for diversity say that our differences are our strengths. These differences are apparently important enough that workplaces do better with more diversity.
But on the other hand, these groups of people who are quite different are expected to just have equal outcomes, for whatever reason.
How does that make any damn sense?
- vannevar 5y agoI think maybe you're confused by the definition of equality here. We're not talking about absolute equality of outcomes for everyone. We're talking about equality of outcomes between people of equal ability. For example, if two people of equal ability, one black, one white, have equal opportunity throughout their lives, we would expect that on average they'd end up with roughly equivalent outcomes. (Note that the fact that one can imagine some benign circumstance where that doesn't happen doesn't change the expectation---it's a statistical expectation over the entire population.)