3 ms·

If it were about J.R.R. Tolkien's orcs, then I might agree. When basic observation disproves ¾ of your "literal description" about a racially-defined population

If it were about J.R.R. Tolkien's orcs, then I might agree. When basic observation disproves ¾ of your "literal description" about a racially-defined population… those "facts" probably didn't originate from honest mistakes. It's possible to be racist while using objective language: there's an entire Wikipedia article on scientific racism.

s1artibartfast 2y ago
What was the basic observation that disproves it? It was a statement about a specific group of people in a specific situation. I assume most of it was based in contemporary reality. You could probably say the same thing about other places today and be correct. I think the part that you're missing is that it wasn't a statement about blacks in general, but a particular community of incredibly poor people with zero education. syphilis was in fact rampant in that community, and I imagine that with zero access to healthcare or even detection, they were fairly fatalistic about it. People were more likely to have it than not have it by a huge margin.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  You're asking me to provide a recorded observation, as evidence that the people recording "facts" didn't make observations. My theory (as stated) doesn't expect that evidence to exist! If this were debate club, that would be a foul. Fortunately for my ELO rating, they did make observations that contradicted their bigotry. Per the great-grandparent: >> In reality, the promise of medical treatment, usually reserved only for emergencies among the rural black population of Macon County, Alabama, was what secured subjects' cooperation in the study. (Racists always do this. Such comorbidities are part of why we have a special name for this special category of "being wrong".)
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    >You're asking me to provide a recorded observation, as evidence that the people recording "facts" didn't make observations. My theory doesn't expect that evidence to exist! I Don't understand either if your statements. You said the characterization of Marcon County was obviously wrong, but say there's no possible evidence way they could have known this. >reality, the promise of medical treatment, usually reserved only for emergencies among the rural black population of Macon County, Alabama, was what secured subjects' cooperation in the study What are you trying to say here? Is this bad? They gave medical care to people who wouldn't have it otherwise. Getting Medical Care is a reason people of all Races enroll in clinical trials and it's still true today
    - bobthepanda 2y ago
      Normally you need to confirm a stereotype with data, not verify it after the fact. The treatment funding ran out during the study period, so this stopped being a benefit but the study continued anyways.
    - wizzwizz4 2y ago
      They had a positive belief. Conventionally, people come to positive beliefs after observing evidence*. I'm accusing them of not doing this. They absolutely could have known better; they simply chose not to look. *: Exception: beliefs about Other Groups of People, which are conventionally formed by looking at Our Group of People, then inventing ways that Other Groups of People are different and/or worse.
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        OK, I see what is going on. I believe they were likely correct and basing their opinion directly from observational data. Syphilis was rampant and education was extremely low. You think they were wrong, and assume observational data would refute it.
        wizzwizz4 2y ago
        In this case, observational data did refute it. >> [list of stereotypes] contribute to […] the prevailing indifference with regards to treatment. >> the promise of medical treatment […] secured subjects' cooperation in the study However, you're right: I was actually using the heuristic "racists are full of shit". This heuristic is pretty useful, because it means you can do useful things with your life instead of analysing and refuting bullshit racist argument #453054624.
        rectang 2y ago
        Characterizing "rather low intelligence of the Negro population" (not educational attainment, but "intelligence") as "likely correct" is shocking. But it's also not an uncommon perspective on HN. Lots of "The Bell Curve" truthers here.
rectang 2y ago
I’d go so far as to characterize HN as a hotbed for scientific racism. It’s an inevitable consequence of the guideline to “assume good faith”.

s1artibartfast 2y ago

What was the basic observation that disproves it? It was a statement about a specific group of people in a specific situation. I assume most of it was based in contemporary reality. You could probably say the same thing about other places today and be correct. I think the part that you're missing is that it wasn't a statement about blacks in general, but a particular community of incredibly poor people with zero education. syphilis was in fact rampant in that community, and I imagine that with zero access to healthcare or even detection, they were fairly fatalistic about it. People were more likely to have it than not have it by a huge margin.

wizzwizz4 2y ago
You're asking me to provide a recorded observation, as evidence that the people recording "facts" didn't make observations. My theory (as stated) doesn't expect that evidence to exist! If this were debate club, that would be a foul. Fortunately for my ELO rating, they did make observations that contradicted their bigotry. Per the great-grandparent: >> In reality, the promise of medical treatment, usually reserved only for emergencies among the rural black population of Macon County, Alabama, was what secured subjects' cooperation in the study. (Racists always do this. Such comorbidities are part of why we have a special name for this special category of "being wrong".)
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  >You're asking me to provide a recorded observation, as evidence that the people recording "facts" didn't make observations. My theory doesn't expect that evidence to exist! I Don't understand either if your statements. You said the characterization of Marcon County was obviously wrong, but say there's no possible evidence way they could have known this. >reality, the promise of medical treatment, usually reserved only for emergencies among the rural black population of Macon County, Alabama, was what secured subjects' cooperation in the study What are you trying to say here? Is this bad? They gave medical care to people who wouldn't have it otherwise. Getting Medical Care is a reason people of all Races enroll in clinical trials and it's still true today
  - bobthepanda 2y ago
    Normally you need to confirm a stereotype with data, not verify it after the fact. The treatment funding ran out during the study period, so this stopped being a benefit but the study continued anyways.
  - wizzwizz4 2y ago
    They had a positive belief. Conventionally, people come to positive beliefs after observing evidence*. I'm accusing them of not doing this. They absolutely could have known better; they simply chose not to look. *: Exception: beliefs about Other Groups of People, which are conventionally formed by looking at Our Group of People, then inventing ways that Other Groups of People are different and/or worse.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      OK, I see what is going on. I believe they were likely correct and basing their opinion directly from observational data. Syphilis was rampant and education was extremely low. You think they were wrong, and assume observational data would refute it.
      - wizzwizz4 2y ago
        In this case, observational data did refute it. >> [list of stereotypes] contribute to […] the prevailing indifference with regards to treatment. >> the promise of medical treatment […] secured subjects' cooperation in the study However, you're right: I was actually using the heuristic "racists are full of shit". This heuristic is pretty useful, because it means you can do useful things with your life instead of analysing and refuting bullshit racist argument #453054624.
      - rectang 2y ago
        Characterizing "rather low intelligence of the Negro population" (not educational attainment, but "intelligence") as "likely correct" is shocking. But it's also not an uncommon perspective on HN. Lots of "The Bell Curve" truthers here.

rectang 2y ago

I’d go so far as to characterize HN as a hotbed for scientific racism. It’s an inevitable consequence of the guideline to “assume good faith”.