4 ms·
> Also consider the importance of avoiding pitfalls like drug abuse, crippling debt, and unexpected pregnancies. Wouldn't avoiding those things largely fall un
by randomdata 13y ago
> Also consider the importance of avoiding pitfalls like drug abuse, crippling debt, and unexpected pregnancies.
Wouldn't avoiding those things largely fall under the "certain type of person" I mentioned? There are certainly some variables there too, like being born into poverty, but we can, for argument's sake, assume outside factors are otherwise equal when comparing people under this.
- humanrebar 13y agoI understand your point, but I'm pushing back on it because I don't agree that those other factors are trivial when discussing poverty and inequality. To ignore personal behavior in this discussion is to be begging a false cause fallacy. At some level we may just disagree about how fair it is to consider us all fleshy robots and how important it is to consider individuals instead of populations.
- randomdata 13y agoI'm afraid I do not understand your comment as you seem to be echoing what I have stated.
- humanrebar 13y agoOK. Let me rephrase. Hopefully it will clarify. I'm saying ignoring behavior like the ones I mentioned for the sake of argument leads to fallacious reasoning with respect to the causes of (and probably the solutions to) poverty and inequality. You could chalk decisions up to DNA and brain chemistry, but at that point we're having a metaphysical argument. You could say that we should be considering trends in populations and not individual behavior but then we'd be having another philosophical discussion. Or maybe you agree with all that and I'm misunderstanding your point.