3 ms·
> For example, the gay couple would not necessarily be credible experts on all, or even most, gay relationships. So? > Membership in a group doesn't qualify u
by Gormo 13y ago
> For example, the gay couple would not necessarily be credible experts on all, or even most, gay relationships.
So?
> Membership in a group doesn't qualify us to speak on behalf of all the group's members
The boundaries of groups are usually pretty arbitrary in the first place.
No one is ever speaking on behalf of anyone else, unless that someone else explicitly invited them to do so. When people express their opinions, they're expressing their opinions, so it's likewise an error to interpret one party's opinions as necessarily being those of anyone else.
I agree that no one should presume to speak for others, but this has nothing to do with the notion I'm arguing against here, that being that people's political views must somehow be validated by data in order to be credible.
- hawkharris 13y agoNo one is ever speaking on behalf of anyone else, unless that someone else explicitly invited them to do so. I beg to differ. In fact, it's very common for people to extrapolate based on their own experiences and speak for others whom they see as being in the same situation, whether the situation has to do with race, economic status or sexual orientation. Therefore, if people are arguing for a policy that affects many people, not just themselves, their proposal should be backed by some expertise other than just personal opinion.
- Gormo 13y ago> it's very common for people to extrapolate based on their own experiences and speak for others No; it's very common for people to presume to extrapolate based on their own experiences, and to presume to speak for others. But they're not actually speaking for others.