‹ First  < 20 21 22
 
   
 

Feminism…

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  14868
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
16 April 2018 18:05
 
Jb8989 - 16 April 2018 01:08 PM
Libertarian - 16 April 2018 10:51 AM

“Pray tell? I think you might find that applying an idealistic natural selection schema to social systems theory is trickier than you think.”

I’m sure it will be very tricky. I think applying a “successful” version of affirmative action will be a lot trickier than that though and I’ve never heard of one that I thought would be best for people overall


“The class system sits on top of racism, no doubt. In America after Native American apartheid and before slavery, poor white immigrants landing in the northeast were the most oppressed people. Slavery changed that and now poor black, poor white and poor minorities are all screwed similarly in a lot of ways. The thing that you gotta understand about social systems is that whatever ones are in place by the time you get (t)here, are the one’s you’ll have to deal with. Regardless of whether they favor you or not, changing them is time consuming and multi-faceted. You’re also confalting need based programs with your ideas on affirmative action. Of course I think there are enough bright people in all races to fill quotas so that there doesn’t need to be rediculious retention rates setting people up for failure. Again, I think race should be ONE factor to consider, not that it should substantially overcompensate for someone otherwise hugely underqualified. Then it just becomes a matter of performance, and some of that is on the individual, some on the school and some on the trade.”

I think maybe I should elaborate. Sure class is a big factor but even if you don’t agree with the idea of racial differences in IQ being caused by genetics surely you don’t deny that there is a genetic difference in IQ between people in general. There are a huge number of ways in which any individual can be disadvantaged or privileged. There are so many I don’t think I could fit them all into an encyclopedia. They come in many forms, biological, parental, social, political etc. The idea that you could somehow find a system that gives everyone a fair go seems beyond the pale to me. To me the logical solution is to not add more bias to the mix especially when that bias is designed to pick the person who isn’t the best.


“Does it even matter if we’re as a society moving toward a dominantly mixed race?”

This argument is equally good at opposing affirmative action as it is at opposing those who oppose affirmative action


“Do you have any evidence supporting prestigious university retention rates ruining minority lives who attended as part of a quota? If so, we may have a talking point. But I also think you’re conflating performace with IQ. Most jobs are skill based and learnable without a need for a superior IQ.”

Just think about this for a bit, it all logically flows. People who aren’t as smart don’t do as well at university and are more likely to drop out. Dropping out of a prestigious university is generally worse than succeeding in a university that is less good or getting a job. I’m not sure what part you actually disagree with to provide evidence on.
I didn’t expect to have to defend the position that smart people were better at things. Are you asking me to defend this position?


Just keep in mind that my claim is actually that you should have a strong and water tight argument to justify the position that you want to discriminate based on race.

You now just seem to be supporting discrimination against dumb people. Which I can assure you is already a big part of the existing system.

I could be convinced to favor discrimination against the clueless…, but they usually end up competing for a Darwin award in any case.

 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  5882
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
17 April 2018 04:09
 
burt - 16 April 2018 06:05 PM
Jb8989 - 16 April 2018 01:08 PM
Libertarian - 16 April 2018 10:51 AM

“Pray tell? I think you might find that applying an idealistic natural selection schema to social systems theory is trickier than you think.”

I’m sure it will be very tricky. I think applying a “successful” version of affirmative action will be a lot trickier than that though and I’ve never heard of one that I thought would be best for people overall


“The class system sits on top of racism, no doubt. In America after Native American apartheid and before slavery, poor white immigrants landing in the northeast were the most oppressed people. Slavery changed that and now poor black, poor white and poor minorities are all screwed similarly in a lot of ways. The thing that you gotta understand about social systems is that whatever ones are in place by the time you get (t)here, are the one’s you’ll have to deal with. Regardless of whether they favor you or not, changing them is time consuming and multi-faceted. You’re also confalting need based programs with your ideas on affirmative action. Of course I think there are enough bright people in all races to fill quotas so that there doesn’t need to be rediculious retention rates setting people up for failure. Again, I think race should be ONE factor to consider, not that it should substantially overcompensate for someone otherwise hugely underqualified. Then it just becomes a matter of performance, and some of that is on the individual, some on the school and some on the trade.”

I think maybe I should elaborate. Sure class is a big factor but even if you don’t agree with the idea of racial differences in IQ being caused by genetics surely you don’t deny that there is a genetic difference in IQ between people in general. There are a huge number of ways in which any individual can be disadvantaged or privileged. There are so many I don’t think I could fit them all into an encyclopedia. They come in many forms, biological, parental, social, political etc. The idea that you could somehow find a system that gives everyone a fair go seems beyond the pale to me. To me the logical solution is to not add more bias to the mix especially when that bias is designed to pick the person who isn’t the best.


“Does it even matter if we’re as a society moving toward a dominantly mixed race?”

This argument is equally good at opposing affirmative action as it is at opposing those who oppose affirmative action


“Do you have any evidence supporting prestigious university retention rates ruining minority lives who attended as part of a quota? If so, we may have a talking point. But I also think you’re conflating performace with IQ. Most jobs are skill based and learnable without a need for a superior IQ.”

Just think about this for a bit, it all logically flows. People who aren’t as smart don’t do as well at university and are more likely to drop out. Dropping out of a prestigious university is generally worse than succeeding in a university that is less good or getting a job. I’m not sure what part you actually disagree with to provide evidence on.
I didn’t expect to have to defend the position that smart people were better at things. Are you asking me to defend this position?


Just keep in mind that my claim is actually that you should have a strong and water tight argument to justify the position that you want to discriminate based on race.

You now just seem to be supporting discrimination against dumb people. Which I can assure you is already a big part of the existing system.

I could be convinced to favor discrimination against the clueless…, but they usually end up competing for a Darwin award in any case.

True, but without the delightfully clueless there’d be less funny stuff to laugh at. And who would I assign stuff to when I need to stall? Hahaha

 
 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  14868
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
17 April 2018 08:39
 
Jb8989 - 17 April 2018 04:09 AM
burt - 16 April 2018 06:05 PM
Jb8989 - 16 April 2018 01:08 PM
Libertarian - 16 April 2018 10:51 AM

“Pray tell? I think you might find that applying an idealistic natural selection schema to social systems theory is trickier than you think.”

I’m sure it will be very tricky. I think applying a “successful” version of affirmative action will be a lot trickier than that though and I’ve never heard of one that I thought would be best for people overall


“The class system sits on top of racism, no doubt. In America after Native American apartheid and before slavery, poor white immigrants landing in the northeast were the most oppressed people. Slavery changed that and now poor black, poor white and poor minorities are all screwed similarly in a lot of ways. The thing that you gotta understand about social systems is that whatever ones are in place by the time you get (t)here, are the one’s you’ll have to deal with. Regardless of whether they favor you or not, changing them is time consuming and multi-faceted. You’re also confalting need based programs with your ideas on affirmative action. Of course I think there are enough bright people in all races to fill quotas so that there doesn’t need to be rediculious retention rates setting people up for failure. Again, I think race should be ONE factor to consider, not that it should substantially overcompensate for someone otherwise hugely underqualified. Then it just becomes a matter of performance, and some of that is on the individual, some on the school and some on the trade.”

I think maybe I should elaborate. Sure class is a big factor but even if you don’t agree with the idea of racial differences in IQ being caused by genetics surely you don’t deny that there is a genetic difference in IQ between people in general. There are a huge number of ways in which any individual can be disadvantaged or privileged. There are so many I don’t think I could fit them all into an encyclopedia. They come in many forms, biological, parental, social, political etc. The idea that you could somehow find a system that gives everyone a fair go seems beyond the pale to me. To me the logical solution is to not add more bias to the mix especially when that bias is designed to pick the person who isn’t the best.


“Does it even matter if we’re as a society moving toward a dominantly mixed race?”

This argument is equally good at opposing affirmative action as it is at opposing those who oppose affirmative action


“Do you have any evidence supporting prestigious university retention rates ruining minority lives who attended as part of a quota? If so, we may have a talking point. But I also think you’re conflating performace with IQ. Most jobs are skill based and learnable without a need for a superior IQ.”

Just think about this for a bit, it all logically flows. People who aren’t as smart don’t do as well at university and are more likely to drop out. Dropping out of a prestigious university is generally worse than succeeding in a university that is less good or getting a job. I’m not sure what part you actually disagree with to provide evidence on.
I didn’t expect to have to defend the position that smart people were better at things. Are you asking me to defend this position?


Just keep in mind that my claim is actually that you should have a strong and water tight argument to justify the position that you want to discriminate based on race.

You now just seem to be supporting discrimination against dumb people. Which I can assure you is already a big part of the existing system.

I could be convinced to favor discrimination against the clueless…, but they usually end up competing for a Darwin award in any case.

True, but without the delightfully clueless there’d be less funny stuff to laugh at. And who would I assign stuff to when I need to stall? Hahaha

True, didn’t know they kept you in a stall though.

 
Libertarian
 
Avatar
 
 
Libertarian
Total Posts:  187
Joined  26-03-2018
 
 
 
17 April 2018 09:09
 
Jb8989 - 16 April 2018 01:08 PM
Libertarian - 16 April 2018 10:51 AM

“Pray tell? I think you might find that applying an idealistic natural selection schema to social systems theory is trickier than you think.”

I’m sure it will be very tricky. I think applying a “successful” version of affirmative action will be a lot trickier than that though and I’ve never heard of one that I thought would be best for people overall


“The class system sits on top of racism, no doubt. In America after Native American apartheid and before slavery, poor white immigrants landing in the northeast were the most oppressed people. Slavery changed that and now poor black, poor white and poor minorities are all screwed similarly in a lot of ways. The thing that you gotta understand about social systems is that whatever ones are in place by the time you get (t)here, are the one’s you’ll have to deal with. Regardless of whether they favor you or not, changing them is time consuming and multi-faceted. You’re also confalting need based programs with your ideas on affirmative action. Of course I think there are enough bright people in all races to fill quotas so that there doesn’t need to be rediculious retention rates setting people up for failure. Again, I think race should be ONE factor to consider, not that it should substantially overcompensate for someone otherwise hugely underqualified. Then it just becomes a matter of performance, and some of that is on the individual, some on the school and some on the trade.”

I think maybe I should elaborate. Sure class is a big factor but even if you don’t agree with the idea of racial differences in IQ being caused by genetics surely you don’t deny that there is a genetic difference in IQ between people in general. There are a huge number of ways in which any individual can be disadvantaged or privileged. There are so many I don’t think I could fit them all into an encyclopedia. They come in many forms, biological, parental, social, political etc. The idea that you could somehow find a system that gives everyone a fair go seems beyond the pale to me. To me the logical solution is to not add more bias to the mix especially when that bias is designed to pick the person who isn’t the best.


“Does it even matter if we’re as a society moving toward a dominantly mixed race?”

This argument is equally good at opposing affirmative action as it is at opposing those who oppose affirmative action


“Do you have any evidence supporting prestigious university retention rates ruining minority lives who attended as part of a quota? If so, we may have a talking point. But I also think you’re conflating performace with IQ. Most jobs are skill based and learnable without a need for a superior IQ.”

Just think about this for a bit, it all logically flows. People who aren’t as smart don’t do as well at university and are more likely to drop out. Dropping out of a prestigious university is generally worse than succeeding in a university that is less good or getting a job. I’m not sure what part you actually disagree with to provide evidence on.
I didn’t expect to have to defend the position that smart people were better at things. Are you asking me to defend this position?


Just keep in mind that my claim is actually that you should have a strong and water tight argument to justify the position that you want to discriminate based on race.

You now just seem to be supporting discrimination against dumb people. Which I can assure you is already a big part of the existing system.

Very close. Discriminating based on what value you can provide and in general intelligent people are better at creating value. Just give the job to the person that can do it the best.

Are you not in favor of capitalism?

I suppose I shouldn’t have expected completely rational debate but wow I can’t believe I’ve gotta defend positions like not making moral decisions based on what makes you feel good and that capitalism is actually a good thing.

[ Edited: 17 April 2018 09:15 by Libertarian]
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  5882
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
17 April 2018 09:49
 
Libertarian - 17 April 2018 09:09 AM
Jb8989 - 16 April 2018 01:08 PM
Libertarian - 16 April 2018 10:51 AM

“Pray tell? I think you might find that applying an idealistic natural selection schema to social systems theory is trickier than you think.”

I’m sure it will be very tricky. I think applying a “successful” version of affirmative action will be a lot trickier than that though and I’ve never heard of one that I thought would be best for people overall


“The class system sits on top of racism, no doubt. In America after Native American apartheid and before slavery, poor white immigrants landing in the northeast were the most oppressed people. Slavery changed that and now poor black, poor white and poor minorities are all screwed similarly in a lot of ways. The thing that you gotta understand about social systems is that whatever ones are in place by the time you get (t)here, are the one’s you’ll have to deal with. Regardless of whether they favor you or not, changing them is time consuming and multi-faceted. You’re also confalting need based programs with your ideas on affirmative action. Of course I think there are enough bright people in all races to fill quotas so that there doesn’t need to be rediculious retention rates setting people up for failure. Again, I think race should be ONE factor to consider, not that it should substantially overcompensate for someone otherwise hugely underqualified. Then it just becomes a matter of performance, and some of that is on the individual, some on the school and some on the trade.”

I think maybe I should elaborate. Sure class is a big factor but even if you don’t agree with the idea of racial differences in IQ being caused by genetics surely you don’t deny that there is a genetic difference in IQ between people in general. There are a huge number of ways in which any individual can be disadvantaged or privileged. There are so many I don’t think I could fit them all into an encyclopedia. They come in many forms, biological, parental, social, political etc. The idea that you could somehow find a system that gives everyone a fair go seems beyond the pale to me. To me the logical solution is to not add more bias to the mix especially when that bias is designed to pick the person who isn’t the best.


“Does it even matter if we’re as a society moving toward a dominantly mixed race?”

This argument is equally good at opposing affirmative action as it is at opposing those who oppose affirmative action


“Do you have any evidence supporting prestigious university retention rates ruining minority lives who attended as part of a quota? If so, we may have a talking point. But I also think you’re conflating performace with IQ. Most jobs are skill based and learnable without a need for a superior IQ.”

Just think about this for a bit, it all logically flows. People who aren’t as smart don’t do as well at university and are more likely to drop out. Dropping out of a prestigious university is generally worse than succeeding in a university that is less good or getting a job. I’m not sure what part you actually disagree with to provide evidence on.
I didn’t expect to have to defend the position that smart people were better at things. Are you asking me to defend this position?


Just keep in mind that my claim is actually that you should have a strong and water tight argument to justify the position that you want to discriminate based on race.

You now just seem to be supporting discrimination against dumb people. Which I can assure you is already a big part of the existing system.

Very close. Discriminating based on what value you can provide and in general intelligent people are better at creating value. Just give the job to the person that can do it the best.

Are you not in favor of capitalism?

I suppose I shouldn’t have expected completely rational debate but wow I can’t believe I’ve gotta defend positions like not making moral decisions based on what makes you feel good and that capitalism is actually a good thing.

You’re projecting. Your premise has flaws. There’s no reality where genetics causes race which both causes and explains IQ disparities among and between them. You’re oversimplifying how nonlinear certain behavior can be. Your perspective seems like you think that cultural systems and biology exist in a static environment. That’s not correct. Brain capacities are both interrelated and innerdependant on external events; some foreseeable, many not. Some changeable, some not.

Plus, society already has organizations set up that rate, judge, compare and measure people based off merit and value. Some people live in brutally competitive spaces.

Basically, you’re receiving relevant feedback and rational diologue. You might just not like what you’re hearing. Help me understand what I’m missing?

[ Edited: 17 April 2018 09:57 by Jb8989]
 
 
Libertarian
 
Avatar
 
 
Libertarian
Total Posts:  187
Joined  26-03-2018
 
 
 
18 April 2018 08:57
 
Jb8989 - 17 April 2018 09:49 AM
Libertarian - 17 April 2018 09:09 AM
Jb8989 - 16 April 2018 01:08 PM
Libertarian - 16 April 2018 10:51 AM

“Pray tell? I think you might find that applying an idealistic natural selection schema to social systems theory is trickier than you think.”

I’m sure it will be very tricky. I think applying a “successful” version of affirmative action will be a lot trickier than that though and I’ve never heard of one that I thought would be best for people overall


“The class system sits on top of racism, no doubt. In America after Native American apartheid and before slavery, poor white immigrants landing in the northeast were the most oppressed people. Slavery changed that and now poor black, poor white and poor minorities are all screwed similarly in a lot of ways. The thing that you gotta understand about social systems is that whatever ones are in place by the time you get (t)here, are the one’s you’ll have to deal with. Regardless of whether they favor you or not, changing them is time consuming and multi-faceted. You’re also confalting need based programs with your ideas on affirmative action. Of course I think there are enough bright people in all races to fill quotas so that there doesn’t need to be rediculious retention rates setting people up for failure. Again, I think race should be ONE factor to consider, not that it should substantially overcompensate for someone otherwise hugely underqualified. Then it just becomes a matter of performance, and some of that is on the individual, some on the school and some on the trade.”

I think maybe I should elaborate. Sure class is a big factor but even if you don’t agree with the idea of racial differences in IQ being caused by genetics surely you don’t deny that there is a genetic difference in IQ between people in general. There are a huge number of ways in which any individual can be disadvantaged or privileged. There are so many I don’t think I could fit them all into an encyclopedia. They come in many forms, biological, parental, social, political etc. The idea that you could somehow find a system that gives everyone a fair go seems beyond the pale to me. To me the logical solution is to not add more bias to the mix especially when that bias is designed to pick the person who isn’t the best.


“Does it even matter if we’re as a society moving toward a dominantly mixed race?”

This argument is equally good at opposing affirmative action as it is at opposing those who oppose affirmative action


“Do you have any evidence supporting prestigious university retention rates ruining minority lives who attended as part of a quota? If so, we may have a talking point. But I also think you’re conflating performace with IQ. Most jobs are skill based and learnable without a need for a superior IQ.”

Just think about this for a bit, it all logically flows. People who aren’t as smart don’t do as well at university and are more likely to drop out. Dropping out of a prestigious university is generally worse than succeeding in a university that is less good or getting a job. I’m not sure what part you actually disagree with to provide evidence on.
I didn’t expect to have to defend the position that smart people were better at things. Are you asking me to defend this position?


Just keep in mind that my claim is actually that you should have a strong and water tight argument to justify the position that you want to discriminate based on race.

You now just seem to be supporting discrimination against dumb people. Which I can assure you is already a big part of the existing system.

Very close. Discriminating based on what value you can provide and in general intelligent people are better at creating value. Just give the job to the person that can do it the best.

Are you not in favor of capitalism?

I suppose I shouldn’t have expected completely rational debate but wow I can’t believe I’ve gotta defend positions like not making moral decisions based on what makes you feel good and that capitalism is actually a good thing.

You’re projecting. Your premise has flaws. There’s no reality where genetics causes race which both causes and explains IQ disparities among and between them. You’re oversimplifying how nonlinear certain behavior can be. Your perspective seems like you think that cultural systems and biology exist in a static environment. That’s not correct. Brain capacities are both interrelated and innerdependant on external events; some foreseeable, many not. Some changeable, some not.

Plus, society already has organizations set up that rate, judge, compare and measure people based off merit and value. Some people live in brutally competitive spaces.

Basically, you’re receiving relevant feedback and rational diologue. You might just not like what you’re hearing. Help me understand what I’m missing?

I can try to elaborate more but I’m not sure what you’re saying I’m saying is wrong. It sounds like you’re saying I won’t acknowledge that there are other factors then culture and biology, yet I have acknowledged this exact point many times.

My whole case is that you simply don’t know what that gap should be because there are many factors that will cause a gap that are completely justified and it would be immoral to try to close that gap based on those reasons.

There’s a point I kinda see you making that’s hard for me to put into words. It seems like you’re sort of saying that western systems/businesses are set up to preference white attributes. There’s a truth to that statement, I try to acknowledge when I see good points. The best way I see for systems/businesses that are “superior” to western systems/businesses to rise through the ranks is a capitalist system. One based on competitiveness and allowing the consumer to choose what he/she wants. The consumer will naturally favor the product he/she prefers. Removing regulations for small businesses and giving tax breaks for small businesses would be a good start. As I understand it most of the political systems are handled by representatives who are voted in and I think all American citizens can vote if they like so I’m not sure what your solution would be there.

I know capitalism isn’t perfect but I’ve never seen a better system. I’m open to your suggestion though.

Let me reiterate that I think you’re not understanding just how serious a thing I believe affirmative action is.
Affirmative action is by definition discrimination based on race.

I was thinking too, I think the left has picked up a pathological obsession with the idea of fairness. Fairness isn’t a good thing if it does harm overall.

 
‹ First  < 20 21 22