Quote:
|
You don't see very concerned that we don't use "science" to "assess" the extent to which a given group has been disadvantaged by pervasive bias. Shouldn't you start there, if you're that worried about intellectual consistency?
|
We absolutely do use science to determine that. The basis of the settled argument that certain groups have suffered pervasive bias and attendant disadvantages is rooted in anthropology.
Quote:
|
For my part, I think it's pretty clear that there are systemic harms that have been done to different groups in this country and others, and I generally don't see a need to try to shift the "responsibility" for some of that harm back to the victim, unless it's something other than an exercise in blaming the victim and absolving society. Maybe it isn't, but if you think there's a case to be made you're doing a piss-poor job of making it.
|
You can't do A without doing B. I mean, you could, but it's incomplete. To assess the reasons for current disadvantages, logically, you have to consider all potential causes. This isn't unique to the issue at hand. This is logically applicable to any discussion of causation of anything. All potential reasons must be considered.
