5 ms·

The only issue with this is we can and have isolated clear mechanisms in which certain races are treated differently as compared to others (for example, names o

The only issue with this is we can and have isolated clear mechanisms in which certain races are treated differently as compared to others (for example, names on resumes and interview rates, property assessments given a white looking household vs black looking household, pain management in hospitals for women of various races during childbirth, etc), and do I think it is fair to say that the expectation would be if the system were truly unbiased that the proportion of people of different races in various roles would be about similar. Obviously there are a lot of mechanisms that might change that equal expectation, but it still seems reasonable to me that for most jobs the default expectations should be around equal.

sacrosancty 4y ago
- peter422 4y ago
  Why are you so concerned with the potential aggregate IQ difference of large groups of people? It’s irrelevant to the obvious and provable incidence of racism on the individual level.
  - sacrosancty 4y ago
    Because the different outcomes of those groups is popularly used as a reason that there must be racism causing it which leads to division, hate, and further racist government actions as people imagine that that racism must be very serious to cause such serious effects. But it might actually not be very significant if the cause is something else. And such efforts won't even help the people who are suffering from poverty either. It would be OK if this was a niche opinion but it's incredibly widespread and actually has real world consequences.
- anon_123g987 4y ago
  I "just Googled" it: > In recent decades, as understanding of human genetics has advanced, claims of inherent differences in intelligence between races have been broadly rejected by scientists on both theoretical and empirical grounds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence The article is full of references of primary sources that support this claim.
  - renlo 4y ago
    Wikipedia articles for contentious subjects tend to be ... opinionated. Is there anything more contentious than race?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - toomim 4y ago
    That is the #9 most controversial article in wikipedia, historically: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/the-ten-most-controversial-articles-on-wikipedia-might-surprise-you-16843979/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/the-ten-most-contr... It is heavily censored with wikipedia's left-leaning bias. Go read the talk page to see it in action.
    - deepl_derber 4y ago
      All the talk page indicates is that the article is correct, despite what a number of skull-measuring right-wingers would like you to believe. Wikipedia doesn't have a left-leaning bias, reality does.
      - illuminerdy 4y ago
        > "Wikipedia doesn't have a left-leaning bias, reality does." It's impossible to take you seriously when you say things like this.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        deepl_derber 4y ago
        I'm comfortable with right-wingers not taking me seriously, since I return the favor with pleasure.
- wizofaus 4y ago
  Except IQ differences between races are themselves heavily influenced by societal/ historical discrimination. And discrimination still occurs in employment practices for jobs where high IQ is not a significant predictor of capability. FWIW I don't doubt that racially-aligned genetic factors that influence appearance almost certainly affect other factors, including general cognitive ability, however we're so far off the point that it's likely to be the dominant explanation for why those from particular racial backgrounds rarely gravitate toward and ultimately succeed in particular careers that I see no benefit in focusing on it. I do however worry that many "affirmative action" policies may be well-intentioned but severely flawed and ultimately self-defeating - if I were a disabled older black female I wouldn't want to have to deal with the suspicion (in my own mind, as well in those of others) that I landed a particular role because of my race/sex/age/disabilities rather than in spite of them (or better still, because we finally lived in world where such attributes were simply considered irrelevant). There are surely better methods that can be used to help overcome undeniable levels of systemic favouritism towards those with particular attributes. I say that as a white, able-bodied male under 50 - personally I suspect most of the reason I've found it easy to succeed in the software industry is due to my upbringing and in particular my Dad, also a white able-bodied male who was even more successful in the IT industry even before he was 40. Virtually everyone technical or managerial in his in own companies fit the same profile - the sales department had some white female able-bodied employees under 50, and later on there were probably one or two Asian employees though I can't recall seeing any. The same industry today is undeniably more inclusive/representative of society as a whole, though we're still a long way from it. I don't think "affirmative action" has really been a big driving force, and I've certainly never worked anywhere that specifically had a policy of actively preferring candidates of a particular sex/race/age/etc. that traditionally has been underrepresented. But I would still like to see more of an effort made to encourage such candidates to apply and to ensure that there's nothing in the job-posting/interview/ selection process that might contribute towards that continued underrepresentation.
- deepl_derber 4y ago
  Personally I'd be more concerned that people don't know that IQ tests are not a measure of intelligence, and that anyone who's claiming that differences in IQ across racial lines are evidence of racial intelligence differences is attempting to launder some racist bullshit.

sacrosancty 4y ago

peter422 4y ago
Why are you so concerned with the potential aggregate IQ difference of large groups of people? It’s irrelevant to the obvious and provable incidence of racism on the individual level.
- sacrosancty 4y ago
  Because the different outcomes of those groups is popularly used as a reason that there must be racism causing it which leads to division, hate, and further racist government actions as people imagine that that racism must be very serious to cause such serious effects. But it might actually not be very significant if the cause is something else. And such efforts won't even help the people who are suffering from poverty either. It would be OK if this was a niche opinion but it's incredibly widespread and actually has real world consequences.
anon_123g987 4y ago
I "just Googled" it: > In recent decades, as understanding of human genetics has advanced, claims of inherent differences in intelligence between races have been broadly rejected by scientists on both theoretical and empirical grounds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence The article is full of references of primary sources that support this claim.
- renlo 4y ago
  Wikipedia articles for contentious subjects tend to be ... opinionated. Is there anything more contentious than race?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- toomim 4y ago
  That is the #9 most controversial article in wikipedia, historically: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/the-ten-most-controversial-articles-on-wikipedia-might-surprise-you-16843979/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/the-ten-most-contr... It is heavily censored with wikipedia's left-leaning bias. Go read the talk page to see it in action.
  - deepl_derber 4y ago
    All the talk page indicates is that the article is correct, despite what a number of skull-measuring right-wingers would like you to believe. Wikipedia doesn't have a left-leaning bias, reality does.
    - illuminerdy 4y ago
      > "Wikipedia doesn't have a left-leaning bias, reality does." It's impossible to take you seriously when you say things like this.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - deepl_derber 4y ago
        I'm comfortable with right-wingers not taking me seriously, since I return the favor with pleasure.
wizofaus 4y ago
Except IQ differences between races are themselves heavily influenced by societal/ historical discrimination. And discrimination still occurs in employment practices for jobs where high IQ is not a significant predictor of capability. FWIW I don't doubt that racially-aligned genetic factors that influence appearance almost certainly affect other factors, including general cognitive ability, however we're so far off the point that it's likely to be the dominant explanation for why those from particular racial backgrounds rarely gravitate toward and ultimately succeed in particular careers that I see no benefit in focusing on it. I do however worry that many "affirmative action" policies may be well-intentioned but severely flawed and ultimately self-defeating - if I were a disabled older black female I wouldn't want to have to deal with the suspicion (in my own mind, as well in those of others) that I landed a particular role because of my race/sex/age/disabilities rather than in spite of them (or better still, because we finally lived in world where such attributes were simply considered irrelevant). There are surely better methods that can be used to help overcome undeniable levels of systemic favouritism towards those with particular attributes. I say that as a white, able-bodied male under 50 - personally I suspect most of the reason I've found it easy to succeed in the software industry is due to my upbringing and in particular my Dad, also a white able-bodied male who was even more successful in the IT industry even before he was 40. Virtually everyone technical or managerial in his in own companies fit the same profile - the sales department had some white female able-bodied employees under 50, and later on there were probably one or two Asian employees though I can't recall seeing any. The same industry today is undeniably more inclusive/representative of society as a whole, though we're still a long way from it. I don't think "affirmative action" has really been a big driving force, and I've certainly never worked anywhere that specifically had a policy of actively preferring candidates of a particular sex/race/age/etc. that traditionally has been underrepresented. But I would still like to see more of an effort made to encourage such candidates to apply and to ensure that there's nothing in the job-posting/interview/ selection process that might contribute towards that continued underrepresentation.
deepl_derber 4y ago
Personally I'd be more concerned that people don't know that IQ tests are not a measure of intelligence, and that anyone who's claiming that differences in IQ across racial lines are evidence of racial intelligence differences is attempting to launder some racist bullshit.