Begging the question. There is no strong anti-black (etc.) bias in USA. Education system has a huge pro-black bias (affirmative action), so does hiring in many companies (diversity efforts). Survey evidence contradicts you as well.http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0183356 …
-
-
Cases like Ezra Klein & Sam Harris make me wonder what point there is in discussion. It’s like two incompatible religions arguing over irreconcilable metaphysical assumptions. Are we wasting our time? Or do we merely redouble our patience in hope they eventually see the light?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
One side wants to look at data, other side wants to talk about morality. Which do you think is more likely to be right about reality? http://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen-reply-to-commentaries-on-30years.pdf …
2 replies 2 retweets 6 likes -
You can pretend this and feel better, but the truth is, as you have stated, your race realism relies upon the belief that there is zero bias. And yet we measure bias. Study after study, we measure bias. And everyone knows it’s there. Your beliefs require lying to yourself.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
That's not true. You measure different outcomes. Sometimes bias is obvious, eg affirmative action. Sometimes you attribute results to bias when they are likely to be explained by other factors. People *want* to attribute results to bias, so they do.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Bias is any reason not in the stated criterion. It is not always bigotry, but it is group statistical and not due to the claimed factors. This is important in criminal proceedings and career advancement, where clear criteria are necessary to avoid allowing bigotry and bad forces.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
No, actually, that's not necessary at all and just ends up increasing bureaucratic overhead and inefficiency.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Obviously, those with a vested interest in institutionalising bigotry will claim it’s not necessary. The reason it’s necessary is because that’s how we uncover the bigotry.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
No, you think you're uncovering bigotry but in reality your criteria are just insufficient (eg differences in sentencing for the same crimes without considering the unique facts of each case (protip: black crime tends to involve more cruelty at every charging level))
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
No. When it is unstated, it is just bias. We measure bias. This is found in decades of research, across social process. Only by stating the criteria explicitly and measuring those can we determine which is due to bigotry. You seem to conflate these.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Again, you exclude other confounders and assume it's bigotry as a result (ie you're not measuring bigotry directly), but you aren't actually excluding all the relevant confounders
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.