4 ms·

There is a pretty easy way to eliminate bias in medical school admissions: blind applications. This is widely cited as a success for orchestral auditions (whic

There is a pretty easy way to eliminate bias in medical school admissions: blind applications. This is widely cited as a success for orchestral auditions (which resulted in women being hired at a higher rate) and a demonstration that bias exists, yet strangely the solution is opposed by most activists. It's almost as if those same activists are afraid a blind application process might reveal admissions are biased the other way for medical schools.

Retra 11y ago
The problem is not a matter personal/selection bias, but of historical or cultural bias. I.e., if some communities are given poorer educations, they will naturally perform worse when tested against it. The solution is not to exclude them from opportunities that value education, because then they will be incentivized to avoid furthering their educations. Additionally, a small amount of fear can cause a lot of damage. If people have an impression that they can't get accepted because of their race, they tend to avoid even trying, which results in undervalued education, and more unqualified minorities. AA in this sense provides a measure of reassurance. (Even if people are racist, you may still get a job in spite of that, so you might as well still put in the effort.) Which is better than fostering whole minority culture that has given up on success. Because that tends to lead to crime, selfishness, and hopelessness. Secondly, the goal isn't simply to hire the top performers. That's short-sighted. The goal is to produce a better performing society in the long run. To do that, your orchestra will have to hire worse performers for now.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  ...historical or cultural bias. What you describe is not bias, it's some groups being actually less qualified. Further, you don't even get the incentives right. If the message sent is "we let anyone qualified in without even looking at who you are", that provides incentives for anyone to acquire education. If people have an impression that they can't get accepted because of their race, they tend to avoid even trying, Given that Asians can't get accepted because of their race, yet keep trying, that doesn't appear to be true. If your theory is true, at what point do you expect Asians to avoid even trying? When that point occurs and Asians don't avoid trying, will you change your views?
  - Retra 11y ago
    >What you describe is not bias, it's some groups being actually less qualified. They are less qualified due to historical and cultural bias, not due to their race or gender. As to the rest of your post: I disagree. Maybe it's time for you to bring out some reliable studies, because I am really not going to take your word for it.
    - yummyfajitas 11y ago
      What, specifically, do you disagree with or want a study for? The claim that race-blind procedures generate identical incentives for identical black/asian students? That's not a study, it's a 2 line proof that could go on any econ 101 midterm. If outcome(x.copy(race=asian))=outcome(x.copy(race=black)) for all x, then U(outcome(x.copy(race=asian)))=U(outcome(x.copy(race=black))) for any utility function U, thus marginal utilities (i.e. incentives) must also be identical. Similarly, I'd be unable to come up with a study proving that d/dx x^2 = 2x. I guess you'd disagree with that claim too?
      - Retra 11y ago
        First, drop the bad attitude. I already know calculus, so obviously I won't disagree with what I already know. But this: > If the message sent is "we let anyone qualified in without even looking at who you are", that provides incentives for anyone to acquire education. and this: > Given that Asians can't get accepted because of their race, yet keep trying I don't know to be true. So yeah, you'd need to prove them to me before I agree to them.
        yummyfajitas 11y ago
        I gave you the proof of the former in the message you just replied to. It's not a citation, it's merely two lines of econ 101 math. I'm not going to bother googling for the latter, since I'm sure that will be ignored as well.
        Retra 11y ago

Retra 11y ago

The problem is not a matter personal/selection bias, but of historical or cultural bias. I.e., if some communities are given poorer educations, they will naturally perform worse when tested against it. The solution is not to exclude them from opportunities that value education, because then they will be incentivized to avoid furthering their educations. Additionally, a small amount of fear can cause a lot of damage. If people have an impression that they can't get accepted because of their race, they tend to avoid even trying, which results in undervalued education, and more unqualified minorities. AA in this sense provides a measure of reassurance. (Even if people are racist, you may still get a job in spite of that, so you might as well still put in the effort.) Which is better than fostering whole minority culture that has given up on success. Because that tends to lead to crime, selfishness, and hopelessness. Secondly, the goal isn't simply to hire the top performers. That's short-sighted. The goal is to produce a better performing society in the long run. To do that, your orchestra will have to hire worse performers for now.

yummyfajitas 11y ago
...historical or cultural bias. What you describe is not bias, it's some groups being actually less qualified. Further, you don't even get the incentives right. If the message sent is "we let anyone qualified in without even looking at who you are", that provides incentives for anyone to acquire education. If people have an impression that they can't get accepted because of their race, they tend to avoid even trying, Given that Asians can't get accepted because of their race, yet keep trying, that doesn't appear to be true. If your theory is true, at what point do you expect Asians to avoid even trying? When that point occurs and Asians don't avoid trying, will you change your views?
- Retra 11y ago
  >What you describe is not bias, it's some groups being actually less qualified. They are less qualified due to historical and cultural bias, not due to their race or gender. As to the rest of your post: I disagree. Maybe it's time for you to bring out some reliable studies, because I am really not going to take your word for it.
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    What, specifically, do you disagree with or want a study for? The claim that race-blind procedures generate identical incentives for identical black/asian students? That's not a study, it's a 2 line proof that could go on any econ 101 midterm. If outcome(x.copy(race=asian))=outcome(x.copy(race=black)) for all x, then U(outcome(x.copy(race=asian)))=U(outcome(x.copy(race=black))) for any utility function U, thus marginal utilities (i.e. incentives) must also be identical. Similarly, I'd be unable to come up with a study proving that d/dx x^2 = 2x. I guess you'd disagree with that claim too?
    - Retra 11y ago
      First, drop the bad attitude. I already know calculus, so obviously I won't disagree with what I already know. But this: > If the message sent is "we let anyone qualified in without even looking at who you are", that provides incentives for anyone to acquire education. and this: > Given that Asians can't get accepted because of their race, yet keep trying I don't know to be true. So yeah, you'd need to prove them to me before I agree to them.
      - yummyfajitas 11y ago
        I gave you the proof of the former in the message you just replied to. It's not a citation, it's merely two lines of econ 101 math. I'm not going to bother googling for the latter, since I'm sure that will be ignored as well.
        Retra 11y ago