3 ms·
This stuff really makes my head spin. I consider myself a rationalist, a Bayesian even. If something is true, I'd like to believe it; if something is false, I'd
by kremlin 13y ago
This stuff really makes my head spin. I consider myself a rationalist, a Bayesian even. If something is true, I'd like to believe it; if something is false, I'd like to believe it is false.
Whatever is true of race, I would like to believe. Even if it's politically incorrect, or even if it's not, I would like to believe whatever is true.
But I don't know what to believe. There doesn't even seem to be a noticeable leaning in the evidence for one side or the other. Experts in the appropriate fields say 'There is no scientific basis for the concept of race.' Experts in the appropriate fields also say 'Clearly there are racial differences.'
Is it a semantic issue mostly? Are some people just afraid of the inconvenient truth? Or is the other side peddling an 'inconvenient truth' for racists-motivated reasons? I am not coming close to having a grasp on this issue.
I only want to believe that which is true.
- bayesianhorse 13y agoRacism is not about having a belief about a property. That "Bayesianism". Racism is defined as making a judgement of value across ethnical boundaries. "Blacks in the US get sick more often" is not racism, it's a scientific belief with evidence. "Africans are genetically more prone to have bad health" is a belief without enough evidence, which might be fueled by a subconscious judgement. "We don't need to put an effort into improving African-American Health, because they are disease-riddled anyway" clearly is a value judgement and devoiding a part of the human species of rights the other part enjoys.