3 ms·
I did read the actual letter. Idk if you read my actual comment. Him stating "Blacks are more stupid than whites", and following it up with "I like that senten
by boomskats 3y ago
I did read the actual letter. Idk if you read my actual comment.
Him stating "Blacks are more stupid than whites", and following it up with "I like that sentence and I think it is true", feels unnecessarily offensive, and he doesn't really address that in his apology at all.
Saying hurtful things and then trying to intellectualise why they were hurtful, with an apology letter clearly aimed at your academic peers rather than those who your words would have hurt, is not about censorship. It's about not being a dick.
- K0balt 3y agoHmm, I wonder if we read the same letter, since you are leaving the salient parts out. He said some stupid things, as an example of saying stupid things. It was reprehensible, IMO, and exhibited very poor judgment, but his full statement makes it clear his intention was not to imply that one race is genetically superior to another, but rather to say that poor nutrition and socioeconomic conditions lead to suboptimal outcomes and measurable differences in cognitive health. I think that’s a plausible hypothesis, and I think that poor nutrition and socioeconomic conditions are something that a wealthy society should probably be trying to address. I also think that he used some very portly chosen words to make an unimportant, belligerent point… and then that point was roundly made for him by everyone deciding that he must be a racist. And maybe he is, I don’t know, but the contents of that particular letter don’t say that to me, even as objectionable as the parts that you brought out of the full context certainly are. As for not being a dick, he absolutely should be called out for saying dickish, petulant things. But that’s not what happened.