But you need to understand the causes to know what sorts of causal interventions will produce changes in the behavior. That seems like a plausible assumption across many domains. Example: you won’t reduce the toxins in the drinking water unless you know what causes it.
-
-
Replying to @jttiehen
Helen Pluckrose Retweeted Helen Pluckrose
Please see the original thread and this one where I have said all I want to say about this. https://twitter.com/HPluckrose/status/998130191561101312 … Obviously, you must be able to investigate this with volunteers & it could be productive. I'll object to attempts to intrude & thought-police in wider life.
Helen Pluckrose added,
Helen Pluckrose @HPluckroseYep. There are two competing beliefs about what will end racism. 1) Focusing intensely on race to become alert to how racism operates on many implicit levels. 2) Treating race as irrelevant to normalise evaluating people individually & make casual racism socially unacceptable. https://twitter.com/IonaItalia/status/998068548156166144 …Show this thread1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose
The issue is orthogonal to the identity politics/classic liberal distinction. For example, I can be a classic liberal who thinks implicit bias exists and causally influences behavior and therefore I ought to grade blindly to limit my biases. None of that goes against liberalism.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jttiehen
Absolutely you can. This is definitely liberal. It does not require any thought policing of anyone else. Please see the rest of the original thread where I said this.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Suppose I then pass along this idea to colleagues. “Hey, I think it might make sense for you to grade blindly too, since we all have biases.” Has that crossed the line into thought policing? If not, isn’t that pretty similar to what a lot of the focus on implicit bias amounts to?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jttiehen
Grading blindly is an excellent idea for many reasons. No, taking reasonable practical steps to minimise bias is not what I am talking about in my tweet threads. I think the worrying attitudes I am talking about are pretty clear but if you don't understand them, you don't.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Fair enough. I’m mostly familiar just with how certain academics talk about implicit bias, but if you tell me there are people on tumblr or whatever who think of it differently, I can’t speak to that—you may be right.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jttiehen
Yes, this was in response to someone claiming all white people are racist. However, you can look to Medina, DiAngelo, Bailey, Applebaum, Wolf, McIntyre, Ahmed, Boler and many many more feminist & critical race epistemologists for the source of such claims.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
1. This is separate from the original point regarding implicit bias. 2. This claim may be true or false, but it doesn’t seem in principle more objectionable than, say, Haidt claiming all people have certain moral foundations which often operate unconsciously...
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jttiehen @HPluckrose
3. I agree there’s a *practical* matter of how to combat racism, but I’d want to give researchers wide berth in *theorizing* it how they see, unconstrained by such practical considerations. So for example...
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
How have you interpreted me as saying researchers shouldn't theorize?! Please read the thread. I meant exactly what I said and nothing else.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.