LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 45
1 members and 44 guests
Flinty_McFlint
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 08:55 AM.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-09-2018, 03:22 PM   #2251
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 23,019
Re: icymi above

Quote:
You're not wrong, but you're also not hearing what I'm saying. Murray presents his work as scientific, though it is riddled with bias. When you pretend it's possible to engage in "a scientific assessment of instances where the victims of a systemic oppressed acquired responsibility for remaining oppressed," you are doing the same thing as Murray -- using "science" as a pretense for engaging in something that inevitably will reflect the bias and oppression of the culture.
I get what you're saying. It's a mischaracterization of what I'm saying. I'm saying a scientific study assessing in what ways an oppressed group's actions contribute to that group's disadvantaged circumstances can be performed. Murray is saying he can and has performed it. (From what I read, he has not. Not even close. He's made all kinds of reckless leaps.) Those are two different statements.

Quote:
I think the notion that you can somehow measure and "assess" the "responsibility" of a discriminated group for its condition, let alone with "science," is total nonsense.
Why? We do it in courts all day every day. A person claims discrimination caused career earning losses. The defense counters that not all of the claimed losses were caused by the discrimination -- that some were caused by the plainitff's own decisions. How is this controversial? The concept of a superseding cause is Torts 101.

Quote:
I tried to make that clear when you first referred to the idea, and I asked you for a published example where someone had done that. If someone tells me they are going to write a book assessing the Gypsies' responsibility for their genocide by German Nazis, and that they are going to do it with science, I would expect that person to be wearing a tin-foil hat and driving a cab, at best.
This is where you're engaging in sleight of hand. No one has asserted that any oppressed group is responsible for its own oppression (Gypsies being responsible for the Nazis killing them). That would be absurd. But one can test whether over time, a group's own actions have contributed to its current disadvantages. To use your example, if Gypsies in Europe today suffer certain disadvantages, some of those would accrue from Nazi persecution, others would not. There would be myriad causes.

Quote:
Is there some accepted and respected model in the world for what you think you are talking about?
I don't know and I don't care. What's at issue is whether it's conceptually possible. And you've made no compelling rebuttal that it isn't.

Quote:
Honestly, the thing that comes closest to me is Murray's projected of blaming blacks' genes for their treatment by the culture, and using that as a justification to cut social spending and taxes for the rich.
Again, that he fails to credibly apply science does not mean that conceptually, if one wanted to apply scientific rigor in an unbiased fashion, it could not be done. I'm sure it has been done somewhere, but I'm not interested in that, as that's not necessary to answer the abstract question of whether it could be done.*

Quote:
Murray at least blames genetics rather than choices by blacks. And you have dumped on Murray, so he is not your pole star. So what's your model here?
See immediately preceding point.

Quote:
eta: Maybe you are thinking about comparative negligence and contributory negligence, and following the lead of the great Justice Traynor in Li v. Yellow Cab in thinking that it's rational for even a victim to be deemed to bear some responsibility?
You still haven't answered my question. Is it your position that a group once and persistently discriminated against can not be responsible to any extent for anything it does afterward?

_______
* I also don't really want to see the study done, or read the results of any that were done. It'd involve too much identity politics-style generalization. I do not believe one can assess people based on their background "groups" at all, and that one can only credibly assess people individually. I'm only accepting the notion that assessing people based on their groups is valid for purposes of this discussion.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Last edited by sebastian_dangerfield; 08-09-2018 at 03:35 PM..
sebastian_dangerfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 03:38 PM   #2252
Adder
I am beyond a rank!
 
Adder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 16,039
Re: icymi above

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
I'm saying a scientific study assessing in what ways an oppressed group's actions contribute to that group's disadvantaged circumstances can be performed.
I'm with Ty in thinking that this isn't even hypothetically possible, but more importantly, why? What are we going to learn? "Oh, it turns out you're responsible for your own oppression, so gtfo?"

Quote:
But one can test whether over time, a group's own actions have contributed to its current disadvantages.
I should be directing you to go read TM again, but to restate, how do you divorce a "group's own actions" (whatever that means) from the context in which they acted?

And even if it was possible, how is "black people smoke 17% more weed than would be expected as a reaction to systemic oppression" useful information? Would it allow us to stop caring about the systemic oppression? No. (Although that's Murray's goal)

Quote:
Gypsies
Just to keep up my role as PC Police, Roma and Sinti, people.

Quote:
in Europe today suffer certain disadvantages, some of those would accrue from Nazi persecution, others would not.
As with most (all?) ethnic prejudice in Europe, the Nazis were/are not alone in discriminating against Roma and Sinti people, they just took it a lot farther.
Adder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 04:03 PM   #2253
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 23,019
Re: icymi above

Quote:
I'm with Ty in thinking that this isn't even hypothetically possible, but more importantly, why? What are we going to learn? "Oh, it turns out you're responsible for your own oppression, so gtfo?"
I agree. The area of inquiry has little upside in my estimation.

But that doesn't mean one gets to say things that aren't true to avoid it. The true answer here is, "We could make such assessments, but it's not going to aid society."

Quote:
I should be directing you to go read TM again, but to restate, how do you divorce a "group's own actions" (whatever that means) from the context in which they acted?
The way courts have been doing it for years. Unless you don't believe people have free will (which, oddly, Harris does not, and has written about at length, enough to be considered an expert on the subject).

Quote:
And even if it was possible, how is "black people smoke 17% more weed than would be expected as a reaction to systemic oppression" useful information? Would it allow us to stop caring about the systemic oppression? No. (Although that's Murray's goal)
Nor should it. If the study were done here, all but a small fraction of the disadvantages would be traceable directly back to systemic oppression. But again, people do not get to say an assessment is impossible, or that no such assessment is credible just because its value would be dubious. They get to say, "We could do that... But we shouldn't." Which is what I think Klein wanted to say but couldn't because I think he thought it would be a capitulation to Harris.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 04:17 PM   #2254
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,252
Re: icymi above

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
I get what you're saying. It's a mischaracterization of what I'm saying. I'm saying a scientific study assessing in what ways an oppressed group's actions contribute to that group's disadvantaged circumstances can be performed. Murray is saying he can and has performed it. (From what I read, he has not. Not even close. He's made all kinds of reckless leaps.) Those are two different statements.



Why? We do it in courts all day every day. A person claims discrimination caused career earning losses. The defense counters that not all of the claimed losses were caused by the discrimination -- that some were caused by the plainitff's own decisions. How is this controversial? The concept of a superseding cause is Torts 101.



This is where you're engaging in sleight of hand. No one has asserted that any oppressed group is responsible for its own oppression (Gypsies being responsible for the Nazis killing them). That would be absurd. But one can test whether over time, a group's own actions have contributed to its current disadvantages. To use your example, if Gypsies in Europe today suffer certain disadvantages, some of those would accrue from Nazi persecution, others would not. There would be myriad causes.



I don't know and I don't care. What's at issue is whether it's conceptually possible. And you've made no compelling rebuttal that it isn't.



Again, that he fails to credibly apply science does not mean that conceptually, if one wanted to apply scientific rigor in an unbiased fashion, it could not be done. I'm sure it has been done somewhere, but I'm not interested in that, as that's not necessary to answer the abstract question of whether it could be done.*



See immediately preceding point.



You still haven't answered my question. Is it your position that a group once and persistently discriminated against can not be responsible to any extent for anything it does afterward?

_______
* I also don't really want to see the study done, or read the results of any that were done. It'd involve too much identity politics-style generalization. I do not believe one can assess people based on their background "groups" at all, and that one can only credibly assess people individually. I'm only accepting the notion that assessing people based on their groups is valid for purposes of this discussion.
An example: European Jews were persistently discriminated against. Some Zionists relocated to Israel and then did some things for which they might be held responsible. Are Zionists a "group"? Is Zionism to blame for anything that followed? Not sure, but perhaps. So my answer to your last question there shouldn't be "no."

But your idea of a "study," somehow "scientific," is total nonsense.

You said,

Quote:
No one has asserted that any oppressed group is responsible for its own oppression (Gypsies being responsible for the Nazis killing them). That would be absurd. But one can test whether over time, a group's own actions have contributed to its current disadvantages. To use your example, if Gypsies in Europe today suffer certain disadvantages, some of those would accrue from Nazi persecution, others would not. There would be myriad causes.
You do something tricky with an unclear distinction between "oppression" and "disadvantages" here. What's the difference? If what you say is right, why couldn't a Nazi in 1945 have said, hey, Gypsies in Europe suffer, sure, but one can test over time the extent to which their own actions have contributed to their current situation? And the Nazi might say that this could be done with a study, scientifically. Why would that have been wrong?
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 04:43 PM   #2255
Adder
I am beyond a rank!
 
Adder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 16,039
Re: icymi above

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
The true answer here is, "We could make such assessments, but it's not going to aid society."
I honestly have no idea how it could be done.

Quote:
The way courts have been doing it for years.
The courts have been making determinations about individual cases. (1) Do you honestly think they've been doing it well? (2) How do you do it for entire groups of people in the aggregate?

Btw, the answer to 1 is definitely not.

Quote:
Unless you don't believe people have free will (which, oddly, Harris does not, and has written about at length, enough to be considered an expert on the subject).
I don't know what Harris has written, but I do know there's a scientific case that we do not have free will.
Adder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 04:46 PM   #2256
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,252
Re: icymi above

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder View Post
The courts have been making determinations about individual cases.
Courts are applying laws, which establish standards by which one can decide who is responsible. Responsibility is human construct, not a brute fact of nature.

When a group is systematically oppressed (or "disadvantaged"), the law is a tool of oppression (or disadvantage), not an impartial standard. That's the whole point. So how would one "assess" that in a "scientific" way?
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 06:34 PM   #2257
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 84,045
Re: icymi above

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
This is where you're

You still haven't answered my question. Is it your position that a group once and persistently discriminated against can not be responsible to any extent for anything it does afterward?
To what end is that important? A “group” doesn’t feel the pain, individuals do. And this sort of analysis can be used to say “look this one black guy got to be a VP at a bank, so why is this other black guy sitting on a stoop at 3 in the afternoon?” And that’s bullshit because they both had a million facts hit them and lead to where they’re at.

I was talking with a white man about affirmative action in colleges. His kids had just been born and he felt it was very wrong and unfair to white kids. I told him about 3 young black men I knew who were applying to college at that point and who didn’t have fathers in their lives (and this is one example I know the no dad thing could be an overblown stereotype, but it was true for these 3). And I said you cannot say these kids are on equal footing with say, my son. And white guy asked “whose fault is that?”

And the question gave me pause- maybe it’s society’s as the legacy of racism carries over? Or maybe it’s the fathers for not being there? Or maybe it’s the mothers for having a kid with a guy who bails? But who gives a fuck- the kid isn’t at fault and that’s who is living with the harm. So point is why dream up stats, when the potential harm from the stat is bad, and the stat misses any legit point?
__________________
Tan and fit!!!

Last edited by Hank Chinaski; 08-09-2018 at 07:32 PM..
Hank Chinaski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 09:15 PM   #2258
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 84,045
Re: We are all Slave now.

Spoiler for oitnb and in bad taste,







But should we have a trump team fantasy draft with points for accusations indictments please and convictions?
__________________
Tan and fit!!!
Hank Chinaski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 09:41 PM   #2259
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Registered User
 
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Government Yard in Trenchtown
Posts: 18,848
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski View Post
Spoiler for oitnb and in bad taste,







But should we have a trump team fantasy draft with points for accusations indictments please and convictions?
I'm in.

Put lots of Dems in the pool for our bothersiderbro to choose.
__________________
A wee dram a day!
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 09:54 PM   #2260
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 84,045
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy View Post
I'm in.

Put lots of Dems in the pool for our bothersiderbro to choose.
Pleas not please
__________________
Tan and fit!!!
Hank Chinaski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 09:58 PM   #2261
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Registered User
 
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Government Yard in Trenchtown
Posts: 18,848
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski View Post
Pleas not please
You're guilty not you're welcome
__________________
A wee dram a day!
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2018, 11:33 AM   #2262
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 23,019
Re: icymi above

Quote:
An example: European Jews were persistently discriminated against. Some Zionists relocated to Israel and then did some things for which they might be held responsible. Are Zionists a "group"? Is Zionism to blame for anything that followed? Not sure, but perhaps. So my answer to your last question there shouldn't be "no."
I hate the whole concept of "groups." Recall, I'm the one coming to this critical of identity politics.

But that's an aside. We agree that a "group" (since we must lump individuals together for reasons I'm still not certain of) can be responsible for certain of its disadvantages.

Quote:
But your idea of a "study," somehow "scientific," is total nonsense.
I agree it'd be difficult as all hell. But the framework for such an analysis (determining when certain disadvantages are more or entirely attributable to behaviors of the group rather than outside oppressive forces) exists. The notions of superseding cause, and comparative negligence, are not that complicated.

Quote:
You do something tricky with an unclear distinction between "oppression" and "disadvantages" here. What's the difference? If what you say is right, why couldn't a Nazi in 1945 have said, hey, Gypsies in Europe suffer, sure, but one can test over time the extent to which their own actions have contributed to their current situation? And the Nazi might say that this could be done with a study, scientifically. Why would that have been wrong?
The difference is oppression either ends, as in the case of Nazi persecution, or it decreases over time, as in the case of bigotry and racism. (Please don't argue "It has not!" I'm measuring relative to the past.) At a certain point following the end of the oppression or the decrease of the oppression to a certain level, the victims begin to bear some personal responsibility for circumstances. (Again, I hate this analysis, as personal responsibility is an concept focused on individuals, not groups [another of many reasons the concept of identity politics is built on sand]). If you disagree with that point, necessarily, you support the following: "The victims of oppression, even when that oppression ends or decreases, never again share responsibility for their circumstances." That cannot be true, of course.

I don't think your Nazi study analogy works because you cannot say that Roma people were at all responsible for Nazis murdering them. If fifty years following those murders, Roma people remained uniquely disadvantaged relative to others murdered by Nazis, you can credibly assess how much of that remains attributable to Nazis and how much of it is attributable to Roma culture. (I think you have to drill down to each person in Roma culture to determine if outliers aren't causing an unreliable assessment [80% of Roma doing fine, and 20% dragging them down], but if I do that, I'm abandoning the conceit that assessing people based on their "group" holds validity.)

I'll end this with the repeated caveat that all of these analyses assume a "group" is either responsible or not responsible for the circumstances of its members. People within these groups, however, are impossibly complex. To use these labels to assert who's at fault for or deserves credit for their circumstances is dangerous. But if one is to concede that "groups" are useful categories for purposes of determining responsibility or non-responsibility of individuals, as Harris and Klein did, and people here seem to agree, then a clinical/scientific/anthropological assessment of "group responsibility" can be performed.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Last edited by sebastian_dangerfield; 08-10-2018 at 12:14 PM..
sebastian_dangerfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2018, 12:10 PM   #2263
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 23,019
Re: icymi above

Quote:
To what end is that important? A “group” doesn’t feel the pain, individuals do.
Exactly. This is why I refuse to list my background on any form unless forced to do so. People must ultimately be assessed individually.

Of course a history of oppression should be discussed and racists and bigots who discriminate based on group identity should be vigilantly attacked and marginalized. But the reaction to oppression based on group discrimination isn't further focusing on groups instead of individuals. That's a tennis match of identity politics.

Quote:
And this sort of analysis can be used to say “look this one black guy got to be a VP at a bank, so why is this other black guy sitting on a stoop at 3 in the afternoon?” And that’s bullshit because they both had a million facts hit them and lead to where they’re at.
2. Again, people are impossibly unique. And a lot of life is random.

Quote:
I was talking with a white man about affirmative action in colleges. His kids had just been born and he felt it was very wrong and unfair to white kids. I told him about 3 young black men I knew who were applying to college at that point and who didn’t have fathers in their lives (and this is one example I know the no dad thing could be an overblown stereotype, but it was true for these 3). And I said you cannot say these kids are on equal footing with say, my son. And white guy asked “whose fault is that?”
The truly honest answer would require an assessment of each kid's circumstances.

I know we have to govern and make policy using shortcuts like "groups," but it's really loose, and terribly unreliable. I support affirmative action because I think there needs to be redress and racism persists. I'm even inclined to support reparations if we could statistically come up with an amount of lifetime earnings lost. But again, this stuff is wildly unreliable in comparison to simply assessing people individually.

Quote:
And the question gave me pause- maybe it’s society’s as the legacy of racism carries over? Or maybe it’s the fathers for not being there? Or maybe it’s the mothers for having a kid with a guy who bails? But who gives a fuck- the kid isn’t at fault and that’s who is living with the harm. So point is why dream up stats, when the potential harm from the stat is bad, and the stat misses any legit point?
I agree. But the stats come into play when people become fixated on groups, backgrounds, etc. The Left is doing that on steroids at the moment, and the Right is loving every minute of it, because it's the debate that they've wanted to engage forever. Nothing makes a bigot happier than a discussion of people as groups. It's the bedrock of their thinking.

Harris makes the excellent point in his podcast that the end game is to think of people exclusively as individuals. It's not possible at the moment, but that doesn't mean we should abandon that aim. And we certainly shouldn't backslide into thinking of ourselves as members of some group first, individuals second.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Last edited by sebastian_dangerfield; 08-10-2018 at 12:15 PM..
sebastian_dangerfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2018, 12:52 PM   #2264
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 84,045
Re: icymi above

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
Exactly.
I thought you were saying it is valid to look at what an oppressed group could/should be doing. Then I said "why?" And explained why it doesn't seem valid to me. Then you agree with me? I am really feeling adrift here.

I need to go back to when stuff made sense.


I. Blame. the. Clintons.
__________________
Tan and fit!!!
Hank Chinaski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2018, 01:29 PM   #2265
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 23,019
Re: icymi above

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski View Post
I thought you were saying it is valid to look at what an oppressed group could/should be doing. Then I said "why?" And explained why it doesn't seem valid to me. Then you agree with me? I am really feeling adrift here.

I need to go back to when stuff made sense.


I. Blame. the. Clintons.
I was confused myself, but happy to see someone kick open the door of focusing on people individually.

The point at issue was whether, if we're assessing people as groups (I don't like doing this, but I'm not fighting the hypo), whether it's acceptable to measure how much a group's disadvantages are its own responsibility versus how much are the responsibility of historical (and if continuing, then continuing as well) discrimination and repression of that group.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:30 AM.