rayiner

21 ms·

481.
by rayiner 3mo ago
My understanding is that Pakistan got what we would understand to be real elections in 1970: https://mygoldenbengal.wordpress.com/2014/11/26/pakistan-vot... . In 1950, the National Assembly was elected not by
482.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> I am saying that claiming that it's immoral to do something about it I'm saying it's immoral to try to correct one injustice by doing a further injustice to an individual who had nothing to do with it. And it's not
483.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> It is very clear that you are not talking about height. It doesn't matter whether it's height or anything else. The point is that there's a fundamental difference between contexts in which you're evaluating an indiv
484.
by rayiner 3mo ago
Your hypothetical fundamentally misrepresents the economics of what happened: > share the proceeds with nu employees … nu employees descendants ,who continue to profit from the previous theft by an order of magnitude Slaveholders were fe
485.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> but most South Asians I know in western countries are from families that were better off than many Americans Affirmative action doesn’t look at a specific individual’s economic history. Virtually everyone who benefits comes from a fami
486.
by rayiner 3mo ago
Maybe I’m out of touch, but 20 years ago expressing a racial preference for dating would’ve gotten you labeled a racist. Is this some new Gen Z thing?
487.
by rayiner 3mo ago
No, I meant in Pakistan. Wasn’t it still technically ruled by Britain at that point? Until the 1956 constitution?
488.
by rayiner 3mo ago
You shouldn’t make “blanket judgments” that apply to every individual Bangladeshi. In a context where you’re evaluating individuals , you should do so without regard to their ethnicity or nationality. In the context where you’re talking ab
489.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> Racism is the thing we decided is immoral, actions based on belief that one group is inferior to another, not any and all notions of groups for any reason. No, what we decided was wrong was using race as a salient factor to discriminat
490.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> people pick partners based on race. Is that morally wrong? Wrong, but not illegal. > What do you mean? Class actions don’t exist? You can’t have class actions based on pre-existing groups (say, “Italians”). You have to define the gr
491.
by rayiner 3mo ago
If I steal something from you and then you retaliate by stealing something from my cousin, then that’s the definition of two wrongs.
492.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> Imprisoning people is wrong, unless the government does it? All so-called lawful punishments of individuals are a form of hope that two wrongs do make a right. In that case, the punishment is not a “wrong” because the person being puni
493.
by rayiner 3mo ago
Even if an individual’s condition today reflects historical injustices to groups, that doesn’t justify discriminating between individuals today based on their group. To your redlining example: it’s true a black american who inherits a house
494.
by rayiner 3mo ago
Discriminating against an individual based on their race is a moral wrong, unlike applying pressure to a pendulum. So your example doesn’t work because it doesn’t raise the disputed moral question. Our system of morality and justice operate
495.
by rayiner 3mo ago
I’ll readily concede dirtyness can be beaten out of a culture. Indeed, elsewhere in this thread I posted the quote from Lee Kuan Yew describing how his was a problem that he solved in Singapore.
496.
by rayiner 3mo ago
I’m not attributing the difference to aspects of culture common to ethnic groups. I’m pointing out that the article itself attributes the benefit to acculturation: > But in Mawlynnong, children are taught to tidy up from a young age, wit
497.
by rayiner 3mo ago
No, because two wrongs don’t make a right. Where else in our society do we justify imposing a moral wrong on a specific individual on the premise that moral wrongs may have been committed against other individuals?
498.
by rayiner 3mo ago
An aphorism is an expression of a general principle. This one seems cliched because it reflects a principle deeply ingrained in our society. We reject “an eye for an eye” and instead say “two wrongs don’t make a right.” We have since Plato’
499.
by rayiner 3mo ago
It's not a "platitude" it's an aphorism. It reflects the principle--already ancient to Plato 2,400 years ago--that we don't solve injustice by shifting that injustice onto innocent third parties. If you can prove wr
500.
by rayiner 3mo ago
Lots of problems in society that are hard to fix. But there's nowhere else in society where our solution to a problem is to subject people who had nothing to do with the problem to unfair treatment. "Two wrongs don't make a r
501.
by rayiner 3mo ago
The food doesn't cause the mindset; not caring about food is a consequence of the mindset.
502.
by rayiner 3mo ago
A study of a top 25 school showed that legacy admitted students had identical scores than non-legacy: https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-why-elite-colleges-... “Among the admitted legacies, grades and test scores were
503.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> they come from advantaged households They also tend to be smarter because smarter people have smarter kids.
504.
by rayiner 3mo ago
It would have been helpful to model the effect of legacy status while accounting for academic indices.
505.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> I believe glass recycling is segregated by color in some countries in Europe. I guess my bar is on the floor lol.
506.
by rayiner 3mo ago
Its rooted in culture and how people are socialized to relate to public spaces and the people around them. Here’s Lee Kuan Yew talking about the same problem he faced in Singapore at first: https://medium.com/@barronqasem&#x
507.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> In a country known for its lack of sanitation, this is no small feat. But in Mawlynnong, children are taught to tidy up from a young age, with many taking to the streets each morning before school to sweep the town of dead leaves and e
508.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> The only context I have is my friend in HVAC from many years ago that went to a school that taught everything manually because they wanted people to have a deep understanding of it. What happens to code in the future when people don&#x
509.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> "We're very safe, we just violently overthrow the shitty government a lot." Basically. Religious and political conflicts that cause people to overthrow their government are unrelated to why people rob and kill their neig
510.
by rayiner 3mo ago
> It feels like that's a tiny challenge to your thesis. Your thesis is that poverty causes crime. I'm pointing out that many poor countries have low crime rates. The existence of political dysfunction isn't a rebuttal, i

More ›