On the other hand, lots of neglected use of sociodeterminism to hurt poor, eg programs to take Aboriginal children away from their parents to be raised by whites, on the grounds that it was immoral to expose them to all the social problems of Aboriginal society.
-
-
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
The same "if you believe in biology, then you must hate the poor" arguments were used to oppose theory of evolution when it came out. After a while everyone just agreed that you could believe in biology and think evolution was important without hating the poor.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
If you think racism is under every rock, maybe it seems like you have to destroy Science as collateral damage in fighting it. As I've written about before, every single poll about racism shows it to be around as popular as belief in reptilian shapeshifters, maybe 1% or 2% more
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
My philosophy is pursue science, especially the kinds that have most consistently made the world better in the past, trust people not to be insane monsters motivated by hatred, distrust people who say everyone who disagrees with them is insane hateful monsters, hope for best.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
And - sorry to continue this thread - but one more thing that bothers me. Right now we live in a world where people who shoplift small items are locked in cages for thirty years and frequently raped.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
This is your people - the people who think crime is totally just a random personal flaw with no genetic correlation - who did this. What exactly do you think biodeterminists are going to do that's *worse*?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
The only importance genes have had on the legal system so far is that a few criminals have gotten let off because they had genes that predisposed them to crime (see the BBC article linked before for the story).
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
I don't think that makes sense, but I'm glad people are finally asking the question "Are criminals just lazy and evil, or might they be fighting a hard battle against tendencies they were born with?"
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
I'm not sure it's worth fighting as hard as you are to protect the current system. I'm not sure thinking that everything is just laziness and upbringing is ushering in as beautiful a golden age for the poor and disadvantaged as you think.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
Whatever you think Science's track record is, I'm not sure "random completely false socially accreted prejudice" is that good a source of social progress either.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
If I thought current structure - epistemological, social, criminological - was worth protecting, I'd be more willing to keep quiet about its scientific inaccuracies. But I see mass incarceration, execution of innocents, etc, coexisting with crime rates typical of 3rd World
-
-
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
The team who figured out the role of lead in criminality and helped reduce lead levels have done ten thousand times more to free the incarcerated and help the poor then every single person condemning Science as problematic over the last century.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @slatestarcodex @circusarmy
If you want me to shut up about some things that could actually give us the knowledge to fix this in order to protect the current system - then for the love of God, give me something worth protecting.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 2 more replies
New conversation -
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.