Well its not...not always. Sometimes race can be a much stronger/reliable basis, such is the case with Osteoporosis or certain genetic diseases.

Well its not...not always. Sometimes race can be a much stronger/reliable basis, such is the case with Osteoporosis or certain genetic diseases.

It seems to me that precision medicine will account both for racial and individual characteristics, without the need for race or ethnic categorization.

My apologies then. I just didn’t see the term ‘phenotype’ used on my first few reads for some reason.

I agree with most of what you said. We cant outlaw racist feelings. We can strike down racist laws and protect the rights of US citizens, which means victims have to bring complaints.

I look at it like this. “Race-thinking” (Arendt’s term) leads to, by necessity, a hierarchy of races. The belief that the species can be subdivided into races is the foundation, the ideology, upon which racism is founded. — NOS4A2

I think you are misunderstanding Arendt. I don't think she would agree with or find your your 'color-blindness' shtick interesting in this age, if not problematic. It was also Arendt that said if you are going to resist racism - you must not do it blindly (as this is the way to make a difference) - as you keep posing.

Well, maybe. I dont see how though. If you can tell by someones race whether or not they are suffering from a genetic disorder or not, how isnt that useful? Should we take it iff the table just because racist might skew it to support their ideology? I do not like ceding anything to racists.

NB: toon "ogre" = forum troll. :smirk:

Riiiiiiiiight ... Ok, Shrek. :up:
— 180 Proof

Great! I'm so glad that you finally see the error in your logic, Donkey. — Harry Hindu

Well, thank you, Harry! All the cool kids think Donkey is dope - without him, Shrek'd still just be another grousing old palm-blistered chicken choker. I've tried to help you with that, but I guess, Harry, the analogy has it limits.

:cool:

"BLUE FLOWER, RED THORNS, BLUE FLOWER, RED THORNS... THIS WOULD BE SO MUCH EASIER IF I WASN'T COLORBLIND!"

~Donkey (2001)

I’m not passing off Arendt’s thinking for my own. I am simply using the word she employed here:

Race-Thinking before Racism

As for racial-colorblindness, that is an idea expressed by the likes of MLK and Nelson Mandela. As for “white privilege” and arguments against color-blindness, these are ideas from academia, from privilege in the general sense.

:clap:

it's a claim about a group of individuals, but you cannot apply it to all members of the group without generalizing, which is where i think there's room for error. — VagabondSpectre

One cannot ever apply it to an individual. The mass measurement is a different order claim. If I'm talking about a certain trend of occurance in a population, I'm not talking about an individual, not even individuals who are part if the trend.

If I want to describe the individual, I need a different concept, a specific description of them. "X group are 30% poorer" does not give "Sam is of X group and they own 30% less money" and vice versa.

The enduring problem i can get past is that trying to understand individuals as a function of their race or other identity leads to a lower-resolution understanding of any given individual (that is to say: to understand the individual, we must look most closely at the individual). When it comes to those who bear guilt, the same statistics based heuristic becomes rhetorically problematic.

Following on from the above, this does not happen. There is no move to a lower understanding of an individual because the measurement of trend was never measurement of an individual in the first place.

Trends descirbe a social trend, not an individual. We cannot draw implications about an individual from a trend. The trend is it's own particular fact of society, concurrent to individuals who we might describe. (which is why, for example, the presence of a rich black individual doesn't take a away the trend poverty amongst black people as a group. Or convesely, why the destitute whitw person doesn't take away a trend of wealth in thre group).

There are no generalisations to make. All are false because they amount to a catergory error, a confusion of one kind of description (trends in a population) for another (description of an individual), even in cases where an individual might have a trait identified in a trend.

I'm out of time again, the rest will have to wait for another day.

:up:

I've read that, but I think in a broader context of her work to see you using the (term) the way you are, I don't think would be her intentional usage of the term to defend your position.

Great, now I want to watch Shrek. :lol:

↪180 Proof

Great, now I want to watch Shrek. :lol: — Swan

Ah yeah, watchin' dat ass! :razz:

Judging people according to their character and not their race does not involve not talking about racism. It is simply to refuse being racist, in my mind. — NOS4A2

The problem is that we are not rational beings and can't simply choose to be color-blind. It's something that we need to work towards, and that work necessarily involves seeing color.

Try one of these implicit association tests to get a feel for your biases:

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html

The problem is that we are not rational beings and can't simply choose to be color-blind. It's something that we need to work towards, and that work necessarily involves seeing color.

That sounds more of an admission of guilt than a statement of fact.

According to the test on race, I have a slight bias against black people. I’m inclined to attribute that to negative depictions in the media that I’ve grown up with, as well as too little personal experience. Up thorough junior college there were no African Americans in any of the schools I attended, for example. I can’t recall having any negative experiences with black people personally, and I have a couple of friends that I’ve known for over a decade that are black.

I suppose that if the test showed no bias it would indicate ‘color-blindness’ in the sense that it’s being portrayed.

That sounds more of an admission of guilt than a statement of fact. — NOS4A2

IMV, we could use more admissions of guilt. Innocence is ignorance, purity fiction. To me knowledge almost requires guilt. That's the toll to be paid, a loss of innocence.

I respect what @praxis did above.

Banno-“Understanding black fellas can be hard”

Yea verily!

Rolling my eyes hard- Black guys everywhere

I love your honesty. I’d be weary of that test, however. Perhaps you’re not as biased as you think.

For years, this popular test measured anyone’s racial bias. But it might not work after all.

I was raised in a fairly diverse neighborhood, so perhaps you’re right. I figure these sorts of fears can be waylaid by travel and human-to-human interaction. The exposure of travel is enlightening. the essential elements of humanity are the same everywhere.

Logic. Your skin color only matters in biological/medical contexts (except between group vs within group variability when classifying by sociological race doesn't vindicate them as biologically relevant categories), and should not not matter in political/judiciary contexts (fiat equality vs equality of opportunity & systemic discrimination aside).
— Harry Hindu

This is the typical "squeaky wheel gets the grease" political tactics where the loudest groups get the special treatment, while the silent majority gets their rights trampled on.
— Harry Hindu

Why did those bloody abos get an apology when I didn't.. — fdrake

Why are you quoting my posts and then editing them without any notification that you edited them (trolling), instead of answering a simple question I asked?

Have your rights been trampled on? — frank

Every time an employer hires a person because they are black. I'm a current participant in the job market.

But this goes back to another thing I said, which perhaps you did miss, and perhaps may even be a response to your retort after reading my first statement. How does one prove that racism occurred? Do I launch an investigation into the corporation because they're showing preference to minorities? Should there be a quota on what percentage of which race each company has? That would be extremely difficult for many small businesses which only operate in a local area where certain race group are more dominate. What is the solution?

My whole point is, if you can use logic and reason to come up with a solution that is better than being part of the problem you're trying to solve, then why not prefer that solution?

So there are two problems with what 180, Banno, fdrake, and unenlightened are saying. One, they have yet to point to racists. All they can do is make these wild general accusations that don't fit observations (being prejudiced). And then their solution is more prejudice.

How does one prove that racism occurred? Do I launch an investigation into the corporation because they're showing preference to minorities? — Harry Hindu

After reading this part, did you laugh out loud as if I had a chance in hell to launch an investigation into the corporation because they're showing preference to minorities, because society would laugh at me. Where would my white privilege be in this instance?

Why are you quoting my posts and then editing them without any notification that you edited them (trolling), instead of answering a simple question I asked? — Harry Hindu

Why did you pretend to be a trans person in another thread you tried this crap in?

Why did you pretend to be a trans person in another thread you tried this crap in? — fdrake

So instead of answering the question to define your own use of terms, you swing at me with this off-topic crap?

If you want to take this to another thread, I'd be happy to.

Have your rights been trampled on?
— frank
Every time an employer hires a person because they are black. — Harry Hindu

Lots of companies have voluntarily adopted diversity quotas. It's marketing. Get a lawyer and challenge the practice if you feel trampled by it.

Lots of companies have voluntarily adopted diversity quotas. It's marketing. Get a lawyer and challenge the practice if you feel trampled by it. — frank

What do you mean, "It's marketing"? What are they marketing and to whom?

Why would you need to declare that you are treating people fairly? Why is it called a diversity quota rather than a fairness doctrine?

What do you mean, "It's marketing"? What are they marketing and to whom? — Harry Hindu

They're marketing their product to a diverse population.

Why would you need to declare that you are treating people fairly? Why is it called a diversity quota rather than a fairness doctrine? — Harry Hindu

These are private companies. They can do whatever they like within the law.

If you dont like it, start your own company.

Nothing surprising. I’m sure that I could easily skew the test results any way that I wanted by priming myself for a particular outcome. The subconscious is not as ridged as we tend to think, I believe.

The fact the we can influence our subconscious suggests to me that we have a responsibility to reduce disparities between implicit and explicit views.

I'm rereading When Colorblindness Isn't The Answer by Anthony B. Pinn at the moment, which takes a decidely different approach to the racial colorblindness issue than I've taken in the discussion so far. I drop this book here during a lull in case anyone - no need to name names - needing to read it does so.