3 ms·

The claim you're debating - "does caste-based discrimination exist" is more likely to be true with an anecdote "I've seen it" than with an anecdote "I haven't e

The claim you're debating - "does caste-based discrimination exist" is more likely to be true with an anecdote "I've seen it" than with an anecdote "I haven't encountered it." Those two anecdotes can both truthfully coexist, but the first one proves the statement while the second doesn't disprove it. The evidence needed to disprove such a statement is pretty large; an individual's work history is not enough to say confidently that discrimination isn't happening. How many companies have you worked at, 6? How many companies are there with significant indian representation? At Google alone there are far more than six TEAMS with majority indian representation. How could you claim that your experience invalidates someone else's? Meanwhile, if there are a handful of anecdotes that folks have experienced or witnessed caste-based discrimination, we should be pretty confident that it's a problem.

rramadass 4y ago
This is a classic example of wrong Critical Thinking. Let me write out the "proof" for you; 1) You have one anecdata from a person who IS NOT hiding behind anonymity. You have another anecdata from a person who IS hiding behind anonymity. Therefore Person 2's claims cannot be taken on faith. 2) The topic under discussion is part of Person 1's culture and hence he is familiar with all its nuances. Person 2 has no knowledge of the subject or at best a cursory knowledge from tabloids and not from any authentic sources. Therefore Person 2 cannot claim equal relevance with Person 1's knowledge. 3) Person 1 has lived and worked across both his and Person 2's cultures for a significant period of time. Thus he is familiar with thought processes of both sides w.r.t. the topic under discussion. Person 2 does not have any such experience. Thus Person 2's "claims" do not have the same weight as Person 1's. QED.
- kajecounterhack 4y ago
  I was just saying their perspective would "prove it" assuming you and the other person's personal experiences are both valid. But you are making the assumption that it's invalid and your own experience is the only one you can trust as valid. I'm not saying this particularly commenter's experience is hard proof of anything, but it's not hard to find enough perspectives from other people to convince yourself that caste discrimination is likely to be a real problem. The rest of the comment probably bears re-reading on your part. P(N people with perspectives different from your experience are all liars) < P(perspectives different from your experience can be true) Also writing qed at the end of your comment doesn't make it a rigorous proof, lol. Like, you've already failed to understand the basic concept of sampling bias.
  - rramadass 4y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31607927 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31607927

rramadass 4y ago

This is a classic example of wrong Critical Thinking. Let me write out the "proof" for you; 1) You have one anecdata from a person who IS NOT hiding behind anonymity. You have another anecdata from a person who IS hiding behind anonymity. Therefore Person 2's claims cannot be taken on faith. 2) The topic under discussion is part of Person 1's culture and hence he is familiar with all its nuances. Person 2 has no knowledge of the subject or at best a cursory knowledge from tabloids and not from any authentic sources. Therefore Person 2 cannot claim equal relevance with Person 1's knowledge. 3) Person 1 has lived and worked across both his and Person 2's cultures for a significant period of time. Thus he is familiar with thought processes of both sides w.r.t. the topic under discussion. Person 2 does not have any such experience. Thus Person 2's "claims" do not have the same weight as Person 1's. QED.

kajecounterhack 4y ago
I was just saying their perspective would "prove it" assuming you and the other person's personal experiences are both valid. But you are making the assumption that it's invalid and your own experience is the only one you can trust as valid. I'm not saying this particularly commenter's experience is hard proof of anything, but it's not hard to find enough perspectives from other people to convince yourself that caste discrimination is likely to be a real problem. The rest of the comment probably bears re-reading on your part. P(N people with perspectives different from your experience are all liars) < P(perspectives different from your experience can be true) Also writing qed at the end of your comment doesn't make it a rigorous proof, lol. Like, you've already failed to understand the basic concept of sampling bias.
- rramadass 4y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31607927 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31607927