4 ms·

Indeed, the myth of equality across racial and cultural lines must be protected at any cost.

barrkel 15y ago
The myth of equality of opportunity is indeed to be protected; but it is a myth, because uncountably more opportunities are afforded to the children of the privileged - things like affirmative action are tiny in the overall scale. I really don't like what you are insinuating. You appear to be implying that some people are inferior due to the ancestry of their parents, or the daily practices of their parents. You should learn something: that variance within groups is far larger than variance in the averages of groups; and thus race and culture are poor signals for use in judgement. To protect against this bias, we do hold to equality across racial and cultural lines; to do otherwise, is to be racist and simply morally wrong.
- yummyfajitas 15y ago
  You appear to be implying that some people are inferior due to the ancestry of their parents, or the daily practices of their parents. No, the implication is that P(inferior | race X) != P(inferior | race Y). ...we do hold to equality across racial and cultural lines; There are two types of equality under discussion: a) Statistical equality - P(Q > cutoff | race X) == cdf(Q > cutoff| race Y), where Q is some quality measure which is not a function of race. b) Equality of treatment - using the same cutoff value for race X and race Y. Which type of equality are you referring to?
  - barrkel 15y ago
    I'm referring to "equality" in this statement: Indeed, the myth of equality across racial and cultural lines must be protected at any cost. and trying to tease out its meaning in the context at hand. The context at hand appears to be in making decisions about people's lives. I don't see how to read it in any other way than "people should discriminate on the basis of race and culture"; and given reinhardt's previous comment against positive discrimination, he can only mean negative discrimination. Statistical equality does not seem relevant at all; I don't know why you brought it up. I'm suspicious that you are dissembling.
    - yummyfajitas 15y ago
      I interpreted "equality" in reinhardt's statement to mean statistical equality. Statistical equality is an empirical claim - if people wrongly believe it to be true, it would be a "myth".
- skeptical 15y ago
  I don't want to take either side, but it sounds like you have a huge taboo that you want to put to bed by saying 'I don't like what you are insinuating'. I'm not taking neither reinhardt's nor your side. But this 'don't touch this subject because it's sensitive' strategy is getting old and pretty ridiculous to resource to. A few lines after you wrote this __You should learn something: that variance within groups is far larger than variance in the averages of groups; and thus race and culture are poor signals for use in judgement.__ So, race and culture are poor signals for use in judgement, but you still admit that they are signals (poor or not) and that their averages does vary, even if less than within the group. All I can conclude is that you are afraid to touch the subject. You start by saying that it doesn't exist then you prove it is not relevant. That is not coherent, you can't believe them both because they are exclusive. Not saying that I agree or disagree with you, but if we're going to have discussions about this topic we're getting nowhere if we're stuck to the old taboos.
  - barrkel 15y ago
    I think taboos exist for very good reasons. The fact that something is a taboo does not, in and of itself, mean that it needs to be challenged. The problem is that very few people are rational. There are a lot of people who gain courage to do very unpleasant things once they've heard arguments that they can use as internal justifications, when they are not themselves sophisticated enough to understand how sound the arguments are. I live in a poor area of London. Racism isn't an abstract taboo; it's a daily sight, and it's disturbing to hear the rationales some people come out with. It's clear they didn't come up with it themselves.
    - skeptical 15y ago
      I completely disagree with you. You might want whatever taboos you like, I'm ok with that and won't challenge them. But heck, if you are going to discuss something then you must be free of taboos in that particular mater, or else your opinion is just bananas. I mean, of what value is your opinion on something you're afraid of talking about? EDIT: I don't want to be a downvote bitch. But it I am noticing my comments on this thread are all downvoted. I guess some people has the taboo so strongly imprinted on their minds that they don't even want me to mention it.
- sliverstorm 15y ago
  I really don't like what you are insinuating. You appear to be implying that some people are inferior due to the ancestry of their parents Is this just willful blindness? Do you really believe all ethnicity are perfectly matched in their potential? It's hard to study academia because we don't understand the brain well enough, but do a little reading about ethnicity and genetics as it relates to sports.
  - barrkel 15y ago
    I don't think "all ethnicity are perfectly matched in their potential" is an interesting statement one way or the other. I believe individuals are more interesting than arbitrarily chosen groups. I believe we should judge people on their own merits, rather than choosing groups, taking averages of those groups, and then using those groups to make judgements.
    - sliverstorm 15y ago
      While I am all for treating individuals as individuals, this discussion thread is not about individuals, it is about groups.
      - barrkel 15y ago
        I thought the thread was about college admissions, which at their best, really ought to be about individuals, not groups.
        sliverstorm 15y ago
        Perhaps in an ideal world, but for better or worse we're currently stuck with everyone looking at ethnic distributions and being really upset about them. Affirmative action, for example, is probably the counterpoint to admissions being about individuals...
  - chegra84 15y ago
    "In the mosaic of America, three groups that have been unusually successful are Asian-Americans, Jews and West Indian blacks — and in that there may be some lessons for the rest of us." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/opinion/07kristof.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=kristof&st=cse http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/opinion/07kristof.html?_r=... "Do African immigrants make the smartest Americans? The question may sound outlandish, but if you were judging by statistics alone, you could find plenty of evidence to back it up. In a side-by-side comparison of 2000 census data by sociologist John R. Logan at the Mumford Center, State University of New York at Albany, black immigrants from Africa average the highest educational attainment of any population group in the country, including whites and Asians." http://thesouthern.com/news/opinion/editorial/page/article_2b589221-b917-54e5-a6b6-b57e3c25bf63.html http://thesouthern.com/news/opinion/editorial/page/article_2... I think it is more cultural than genetics.
- abracat1 15y ago
  > You should learn something: that variance within groups is far larger than variance in the averages of groups; and thus race and culture are poor signals for use in judgement. To protect against this bias, we do hold to equality across racial and cultural lines; to do otherwise, is to be racist and simply morally wrong. I don't want to take sides in this debate, but I often see your above post appearing on debates about this issue. Can you explain what your first three sentences even mean? It is basically vague, ambigiuous and devoid of any meaning (while sounding academic - perfect for online debates). That spiel is known as Lewtonin's Fallacy (please look it up). PS: typed from cellphone so please forgive typos.

The myth of equality of opportunity is indeed to be protected; but it is a myth, because uncountably more opportunities are afforded to the children of the privileged - things like affirmative action are tiny in the overall scale. I really don't like what you are insinuating. You appear to be implying that some people are inferior due to the ancestry of their parents, or the daily practices of their parents. You should learn something: that variance within groups is far larger than variance in the averages of groups; and thus race and culture are poor signals for use in judgement. To protect against this bias, we do hold to equality across racial and cultural lines; to do otherwise, is to be racist and simply morally wrong.

yummyfajitas 15y ago
You appear to be implying that some people are inferior due to the ancestry of their parents, or the daily practices of their parents. No, the implication is that P(inferior | race X) != P(inferior | race Y). ...we do hold to equality across racial and cultural lines; There are two types of equality under discussion: a) Statistical equality - P(Q > cutoff | race X) == cdf(Q > cutoff| race Y), where Q is some quality measure which is not a function of race. b) Equality of treatment - using the same cutoff value for race X and race Y. Which type of equality are you referring to?
- barrkel 15y ago
  I'm referring to "equality" in this statement: Indeed, the myth of equality across racial and cultural lines must be protected at any cost. and trying to tease out its meaning in the context at hand. The context at hand appears to be in making decisions about people's lives. I don't see how to read it in any other way than "people should discriminate on the basis of race and culture"; and given reinhardt's previous comment against positive discrimination, he can only mean negative discrimination. Statistical equality does not seem relevant at all; I don't know why you brought it up. I'm suspicious that you are dissembling.
  - yummyfajitas 15y ago
    I interpreted "equality" in reinhardt's statement to mean statistical equality. Statistical equality is an empirical claim - if people wrongly believe it to be true, it would be a "myth".
skeptical 15y ago
I don't want to take either side, but it sounds like you have a huge taboo that you want to put to bed by saying 'I don't like what you are insinuating'. I'm not taking neither reinhardt's nor your side. But this 'don't touch this subject because it's sensitive' strategy is getting old and pretty ridiculous to resource to. A few lines after you wrote this __You should learn something: that variance within groups is far larger than variance in the averages of groups; and thus race and culture are poor signals for use in judgement.__ So, race and culture are poor signals for use in judgement, but you still admit that they are signals (poor or not) and that their averages does vary, even if less than within the group. All I can conclude is that you are afraid to touch the subject. You start by saying that it doesn't exist then you prove it is not relevant. That is not coherent, you can't believe them both because they are exclusive. Not saying that I agree or disagree with you, but if we're going to have discussions about this topic we're getting nowhere if we're stuck to the old taboos.
- barrkel 15y ago
  I think taboos exist for very good reasons. The fact that something is a taboo does not, in and of itself, mean that it needs to be challenged. The problem is that very few people are rational. There are a lot of people who gain courage to do very unpleasant things once they've heard arguments that they can use as internal justifications, when they are not themselves sophisticated enough to understand how sound the arguments are. I live in a poor area of London. Racism isn't an abstract taboo; it's a daily sight, and it's disturbing to hear the rationales some people come out with. It's clear they didn't come up with it themselves.
  - skeptical 15y ago
    I completely disagree with you. You might want whatever taboos you like, I'm ok with that and won't challenge them. But heck, if you are going to discuss something then you must be free of taboos in that particular mater, or else your opinion is just bananas. I mean, of what value is your opinion on something you're afraid of talking about? EDIT: I don't want to be a downvote bitch. But it I am noticing my comments on this thread are all downvoted. I guess some people has the taboo so strongly imprinted on their minds that they don't even want me to mention it.
sliverstorm 15y ago
I really don't like what you are insinuating. You appear to be implying that some people are inferior due to the ancestry of their parents Is this just willful blindness? Do you really believe all ethnicity are perfectly matched in their potential? It's hard to study academia because we don't understand the brain well enough, but do a little reading about ethnicity and genetics as it relates to sports.
- barrkel 15y ago
  I don't think "all ethnicity are perfectly matched in their potential" is an interesting statement one way or the other. I believe individuals are more interesting than arbitrarily chosen groups. I believe we should judge people on their own merits, rather than choosing groups, taking averages of those groups, and then using those groups to make judgements.
  - sliverstorm 15y ago
    While I am all for treating individuals as individuals, this discussion thread is not about individuals, it is about groups.
    - barrkel 15y ago
      I thought the thread was about college admissions, which at their best, really ought to be about individuals, not groups.
      - sliverstorm 15y ago
        Perhaps in an ideal world, but for better or worse we're currently stuck with everyone looking at ethnic distributions and being really upset about them. Affirmative action, for example, is probably the counterpoint to admissions being about individuals...
- chegra84 15y ago
  "In the mosaic of America, three groups that have been unusually successful are Asian-Americans, Jews and West Indian blacks — and in that there may be some lessons for the rest of us." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/opinion/07kristof.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=kristof&st=cse http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/opinion/07kristof.html?_r=... "Do African immigrants make the smartest Americans? The question may sound outlandish, but if you were judging by statistics alone, you could find plenty of evidence to back it up. In a side-by-side comparison of 2000 census data by sociologist John R. Logan at the Mumford Center, State University of New York at Albany, black immigrants from Africa average the highest educational attainment of any population group in the country, including whites and Asians." http://thesouthern.com/news/opinion/editorial/page/article_2b589221-b917-54e5-a6b6-b57e3c25bf63.html http://thesouthern.com/news/opinion/editorial/page/article_2... I think it is more cultural than genetics.
abracat1 15y ago
> You should learn something: that variance within groups is far larger than variance in the averages of groups; and thus race and culture are poor signals for use in judgement. To protect against this bias, we do hold to equality across racial and cultural lines; to do otherwise, is to be racist and simply morally wrong. I don't want to take sides in this debate, but I often see your above post appearing on debates about this issue. Can you explain what your first three sentences even mean? It is basically vague, ambigiuous and devoid of any meaning (while sounding academic - perfect for online debates). That spiel is known as Lewtonin's Fallacy (please look it up). PS: typed from cellphone so please forgive typos.