[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Flags  
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]

 No.5437[View All]

File: 1591077416589.jpg (45.42 KB, 817x613, 817:613, untitled.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

would have posted on /pony/ but I'm pretty sure this is a political issue.

I recently came across the following article https://medium.com/equality-includes-you/what-white-people-can-do-for-racial-justice-f2d18b0e0234
And among the 75 items it lists that white people can do to actively support anti-discrimination, it mentions starting a book club, and reading a few recommended books. I would love to try this with all of you.

I once had a friend who spoke out violently about this issue, but he hurt me to the point that we had to end our friendship. Still, the issues he faced are real, and I am glad to have found something I can do to help support his plight. I would love if you could join me in actively reading and discussing books on racial prejudice, as recommended by this article.
97 posts and 27 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.5708

>>5706
>There are plenty of white people with only one parent...  And there are plenty of black people with two parents
>>5703
>Having two parents is a big one, so, probably white, as the rate of that is from what I understand significantly higher.

Your choice in selectively not including that later portion of the sentence that you are quoting makes it exceptionally difficult for me to presume hear you do not have dishonest intentions when it comes to this argument.

It seems to me you are more than happy to miss represent people in order to get your way, and so I am left wondering, why should I bother continuing a conversation with somebody who is so evidently unwilling not only merely to listen to what I have to say, but actually represent me honestly and his argumentation?

Seriously, man, how it am I supposed to take this?
Either you are out right miss representing me, or you only read half my sentence. I explicitly made reference to the probability, no likelihood. I never once said black families can't have two parents.

if you want to have this conversation further, I am going to insist that whenever you quote me, you quote the full sentence, as right now, it looks like you are intentionally lying about what I say.

>"I'm not racist! You're the one who's racist!" is not an argument. Ignoring and making excuses for systemic racism is racist. Ignoring the words and experiences of black Americans is racist. I have not called you a racist. But it would help if you stop doing racist things if you are not one.
I have not done, excuse, advocated for, or said anything racist whatsoever.
I have not ignored black experiences, nor was my argument merely "I'm not racist! You are!".

If you like the intellectual maturity to handle a conversation like this, I would advise avoiding it. As is, all you have repeatedly done is make shit up.
I do not consider dishonest misrepresentation and your own bigotted presumptions who be much of an argument, nor evidence of some racism you think I am guilty of committing.

 No.5709

>>5708
I really don't have the energy to continue this conversation, so feel free to end it. We are supposed to be talking about systemic racism, not making up excuses for why it doesn't exist.

 No.5710

>>5709
Good thing I never did that, and that is nothing but a lie on your part

 No.5711

>>5710
It's literally all you've been doing. Looking for anything to blame for these problems but the system. Black families, black crime rates, etc. And trying to find excuses for why any complaints aren't real. Barack Obama was successful, so it's not the systems fault. Asians are smart so it's not the systems fault.

What would you call any of that but making excuses for why systemic racism isn't a real issue?

 No.5712

>>5711
What I have repeatedly said time and time again was that a better alternative for the focus should be on policies that help disadvantaged parties regardless of race.
my whole contention here was that there are better avenues then biggotted legislation that is objectively racist.

There are systemic problems of racism, yes. It's just that I do not believe it is the primary contributing factor to the state of the black community, and more over, I do not think more racism will help them as seems to be proposed.
I think that racist legislation only breeds resentment. Moreover, I do not think that handouts and diversity quotas will actually help the poor Urban black communities. The primary issues I see in those communities are the result of poverty and single parenthood.

all of this I had said prior, if you bothered to read what I said, instead of simply making up your own interpretation of why I say what I do.

 No.5713

>>5712
> It's just that I do not believe it is the primary contributing factor to the state of the black community

You're wrong. And doing that give the appearance of dismissing those concerns.

>I do not think more racism will help them as seems to be proposed.

I curious why you keep characterizing trying to address and correct systemic racism as "racism". If that isn't what your are doing, then explain why you keep using that specific word.

>I do not think that handouts and diversity quotas will actually help the poor Urban black communities.

They are not long-term solutions. But like I said, the only long-term solution is to tear down society and replace it with something better. Which would be a very messy processes, and far worse than affirmative action. But given the choice between doing absolutely nothing and a short-term solution, I would choose the latter.

 No.5714

>>5706
>"I'm not racist! You're the one who's racist!" is not an argument.
It's the conclusion of an argument.  The argument was made in the above posts throughout this thread.

>>5707
>They can just say "Oh, well that doesn't happen anymore! Racism is fixed." As >>5696 tried to do with workplace discrimination and housing.
If I was looking to sell a house, I'd sell it to the person who offered me the best deal, regardless of race.  I expect the vast, vast majority of people would do the same.  If you think there is any non-tiny percentage of the population who would refuse an better offer from a black person in favor of a worse offer from a white person, I'd like to see some evidence.

As for workplace discrimination, I'm sure there are some willingly racist employers and hiring committee members.  And there is also more subtle systemic racism that hurts many black candidates a small amount relative to their white peers.  If you had made this carefully qualified claim, I wouldn't have objected.  I objected because you instead made a much stronger claim that you didn't support with any evidence.

 No.5715

>>5713
>I curious why you keep characterizing trying to address and correct systemic racism as "racism".
He isn't!  He is characterizing particular solutions as racist, when such solutions discriminate against people on the basis of race.

 No.5716

>>5714
>I expect the vast, vast majority of people would do the same.

And people in the black community are telling you you are wrong. Why are you trusting your own guess over their actual testimony?

 No.5717

>>5716
>Why are you trusting your own guess over their actual testimony?
I have a strong prior that people wouldn't willingly shortchange themselves economically like that.  Hearing a few second-hand (or third-hand, etc.) anecdotes is not sufficient evidence for me to update my belief.

 No.5718

>>5713
If you want to say racially prejudiced practices of the past resulted in a bad start point for many, I'd agree.
I would also agree that there is currently some bigotry from those in positions of power.
I'd even call out politicians as being predatory when it comes to Black voters.
But, I do not think the black community would have a sudden U-turn into a utopia if you got rid of that. I think a better solution would be to target the social and economic factors that seem to have a larger impact.
Especially since I think the best way to fight against racism is to demonstrate their presumptuous to be wrong. Not give handouts which allows the racist to claim victimhood.

>I curious why you keep characterizing trying to address and correct systemic racism as "racism"
It depends on the measures done, but, essentially, any policy that discriminates on the basis of race is, objectively, racist
Scholarships based on race, diversity quotas, reparations, that type of deal.

>But like I said, the only long-term solution is to tear down society and replace it with something better
Alternatively, you could address the poverty, education, and fatherlessness, which would rather drastically help the most disadvantaged.

Personally, when faced with a choice of only a short-term solution with long term damages, or nothing, I look for other possible solutions.
In this case, I think they exist

 No.5719

>>5716
I'm sure someone, somewhere, does.
Most anything will happen simply because of the number of people in the world.

The question is, is it a common enough occurrence to create a massive problem responsible for black poverty?
I have not seen evidence to say so thus far.

 No.5720

>>5715
Precisely this.

There are plenty of ways to address racism without being racist. I am personally in favor of stricter background checks for those involved in the judicial process.
We must ensure our courts remain neutral, after all. That is something worth exploring and addressing.

 No.5721

>>5717
There is sufficient evidence out there. I'm not an expert in this, so all arguing with me is going to do is make you discredit the knowledge I have and dismiss the issue. But if you really were interested in changing your beliefs, the information is not hard to find. That leads me to believe you are not interested in updating your beliefs.

>>5720
I don't think that word means what you think it means.

>>5719
And how much have you researched this topic? What books on it have you read? Documentaries watched? People inteviewed?

 No.5722

>>5721
>There is sufficient evidence out there.
You've asked us to provide evidence for our claims.  It's only fair to ask you to do the same for your claims.

 No.5723

>>5721
>I don't think that word means what you think it means.
He literally quoted a dictionary definition of "racism" in >>5640.

 No.5724

>>5721
>I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Prejudice based on race.

What do you think it means?

>And how much have you researched this topic? What books on it have you read? Documentaries watched? People inteviewed?
Remind me, which one of us made the claim?

the burden of proof is on you. I've given citations for several of my positions already. Every single time I've asked you to do return the favor, you've chosen to dodge.

Leads me to suspect you do not have the facts on your side.

 No.5725

>>5719
"I'm not denying systemic racism"
"I have not seen evidence to say systemic racism exists."

Do you see how you are coming off as disingenuous?

>>5722
How about the books this thread is literally about? Have you read them?

>>5723
But he's applying it in a disingenuous way. He's only using the word "racism" because the word has weight, when most people know that these problems are tiny compared ot the problems faced by minority people in America.

>>5724
>Leads me to suspect you do not have the facts on your side.

Because unlike you, I don't need proof racism exists. That request is asinine to anyone who actually lives it. And for the record, I have given proof. You've dismissed it and ignored it every single time. It's getting tiresome. People like you are part of the problem.

 No.5726

>>5725
>"I'm not denying systemic racism"
>"I have not seen evidence to say systemic racism exists."
>
>Do you see how you are coming off as disingenuous?
Who are you quoting?

 No.5727

>>5725
"I'm not denying systemic racism"
"I have not seen evidence to say systemic racism exists."
>Do you see how you are coming off as disingenuous?
Considering I am not the one who has to make up quotes? No.
For that, I would suggest buying a mirror.

You keep assuming my position for me.
I've already told you my position.
I would appreciate it if you went off of that, rather than making up your own frankly dickish presumption.

>Because unlike you, I don't need proof racism exists. That request is asinine to anyone who actually lives it.
I am not you, you are not me. I have been told by people they have quite literally seen God. I have been told by people they have quite literally seen personally aliens.

I cannot see what you see. All I can do is responded to what you can prove in reality.

If this is as rampant and damaging as you suggest, there should be ample evidence.

>And for the record, I have given proof. You've dismissed it and ignored it every single time.
Really? Where?
I have only seen individual cases cited by you. Hardly examples of rampant and exceptionally damaging racism so wide spread as you seen to think it is.

>He's only using the word "racism" because the word has weight, when most people know that these problems are tiny compared ot the problems faced by minority people in America.
I am using the word because I believe racism is a flat wrong act.
Much as stealing, assault, or murder.
The reason is irrelevant. The action is wrong.

 No.5728

>>5725
>How about the books this thread is literally about? Have you read them?
I haven't.  Have you?  If you have, perhaps you can point me to the relevant portions?

>>5725
>But he's applying it in a disingenuous way.
Huh?  Words have meanings, and he is using the word in accordance with its exact meaning.

>>5725
>I don't need proof racism exists.
None of us do.  The issue is quantitatively, how much of an effect does racism have, compared to other factors.

 No.5729

>>5728
>None of us do.  The issue is quantatively, how much of an effect does racism have, compared to other factors.
This.
simple population means that there's pretty much a person out there with about any view.
I am sure there are racist. I am sure there are racist in positions of power that abuse power.

I am not convinced that this is the rule. That this is commonplace.
I certainly am not convinced that it is responsible for all the social and economic ills facing the black community

 No.5730

>>5726
>>5727
In >>5712 he says that he believes that systemic racism exists
>There are systemic problems of racism, yes.

But then immediately says he does not think it's a real problem.

>it's just that I do not believe it is the primary contributing factor to the state of the black community

Talking out of both sides of his mouth "It exists, but it doesn't matter."

he then repeats this idea that it exists but isn't an issue in >>5719
> have not seen evidence to say (systemic racism is a problem) so thus far.

 No.5732

>>5728
I am in the process of getting a copy, but the local library is closed. I already know most of the information in this book, though, as it is my lived experience. The source is for the benefit of you, people ignorant to these issues who are making assumptions about it based on their own limited experiences and knowledge.

Do you have any non-white friends? They might be a good source of information on this topic if you are truly interested. I'd like for you to go and tell them that systemic racism is not an issue and tell me how they react.

>Words have meanings

Certain words also gain connotations and implications as they are used. You understand this, right?

>quantatively, how much of an effect does racism have, compared to other factors.

How can you quantify this if you do not experience the issues we are discussing and have very few people in your life who do? Unless you have many black friends and you discuss this topic with them often. That could still be the case depending on your answer to my earlier question.

But assuming you are far removed from the black or non-white experience, then what gives you any insight to how prevalent these issues are or how much they affect people of color?

 No.5733

>>5730
>But then immediately says he does not think it's a real problem.
Read what that actually says. It doesn't say what you think it does. The words in that post have meaning. They have definition.
I never said it wasn't a problem.

>he then repeats this idea that it exists but isn't an issue in
Nope. This is another example of you dishonesty misquoting me.

"The question is, is it a common enough occurrence to create a massive problem responsible for black poverty?
I have not seen evidence to say so thus far."

I never said it wasn't a problem, I very clearly have maintained my position that it isn't the biggest ail to the black community.

 No.5734

>>5732
>But assuming you are far removed from the black or non-white experience, then what gives you any insight to how prevalent these issues are or how much they affect people of color?
Facts. Data. Statistics. Studies. Information. Science. Logic. Rationality.

These are all great ways to learn and understand something.
It disconnects from how people "feel", yes, as people are not always rational
However, it does show how things are.

 No.5736

>>5734
>Facts. Data. Statistics. Studies. Information.

Those can all be skewed and biased.

>Logic. Rationality.

Can be influenced by a person's emotional investment. For example, investment in upholding a broken system or admitting that one might benefit from that broken system because of one's race.

 No.5738

>>5736
True, but that's why it's best to examine them for yourself. Not cause to dismiss them outright.

>Can be influenced by a person's emotional investment
Then the logic will be flawed, and that will be demonstrable.

 No.5740

File: 1592481650279.png (519.13 KB, 1080x1080, 1:1, image.php.png) ImgOps Google

>>5707
>You cannot let those people do that.
Nobody here poses me any actual threat.  At least as far as I know.

I have learned about being as respectful as possible, which means being a good pony.  When humans get defensive, especially about something that involves authorities, it's probably related to some of their moral needs.  I need to figure out about human moral needs and be respectful.  On the other hand, I don't have to let humans hurt me or others like me.

Is systemic racism a human moral need?  I think you will say no.  What people in general would say would depend on the wording.  Resisting change is an impulse, but is it a respectable one on its own?  Some would probably say challenges to systemic racism is resisted on ground deeper than an impulse to not change, as well.  (Unraveling systemic racism isn't quite like moving the couch to the other side of the room; it's not an arbitrary change.)  I guess, which position is the good position?  I think I know your answer, I guess I have to ask myself.

 No.5742

>>5738
That's only true if one comes at the topic from a completely objective viewpoint. Are you familiar with the concept of "confirmation bias"?

 No.5744

>>5742
It's still miles better than only going from experiences told to you.
Since you bring up confirmation bias, well, there it is.

 No.5745

>>5744
No one is asking you to go by only the experiences of people. There is data on this. This thread is all about data on this. But all I see is people trying dismiss it without even looking for it. That's confirmation bias. Only looking at data that agrees with the position you already hold and discarding anything that doesn't agree with it.

 No.5746

File: 1592548204005.png (51.65 KB, 592x768, 37:48, sakura-1506040648562.png) ImgOps Google

>>5745
>There is data on this.
Then link to some!  Provide some evidence that more than e.g. 1% of home sellers would refuse to sell to a black man, in favor of a white man who bids a lower amount.

 No.5747


 No.5748

>>5745
>
>>5732
>"How can you quantify this if you do not experience the issues we are discussing and have very few people in your life who do? Unless you have many black friends and you discuss this topic with them often. That could still be the case depending on your answer to my earlier question."

If there's data on this, I would suggest you provide it rather than dodge around the question. That's the trouble.

When you repeatedly ask for citations from others, but won't provide your own when asked, it's very irritating.

 No.5749

File: 1592565723483.png (48.35 KB, 250x250, 1:1, Gardevoir-282.png) ImgOps Google

>>5747
I read the first two linked pages and found nothing to support the claim I asked you to support.  Based on what I read, however, I will try to steelman your argument and point out that I missed something in the following exchange:

>>5693
>[racism] goes into ... where you can buy a house

>>5714
>If I was looking to sell a house, I'd sell it to the person who offered me the best deal, regardless of race.  I expect the vast, vast majority of people would do the same.

Often there is another party in the real estate transaction: the bank providing a mortgage.  And I will concede that bank lending officers may, likely subconsciously, discriminate against black applicants.  E.g., a marginally financially qualified white applicant might be approved but an otherwise identical black applicant might be denied.

 No.5765

File: 1592956653747.png (132 KB, 619x745, 619:745, Screenshot from 2020-06-23….png) ImgOps Google

>>5630
>I reflect a bit on the connection between ponies and the alt-right.
I'm replying to myself, I know, but a relevant article in the Atlantic is floating around which I'll post for people to read and reflect, if desired.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/06/my-little-pony-nazi-4chan-black-lives-matter/613348/

 No.5769

>>5765
It's probably because the "brony" community and the other sub-groups of pony fandom that emerged out of it originated on 4chan, which is a cesspool of racism and repugnant people.

 No.5771

File: 1593130352235.png (208.55 KB, 872x720, 109:90, ryuuko_chopsticks.png) ImgOps Google

Interesting paper on racial discrimination by police:
https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/main-july_2016.pdf

Abstract:
This paper explores racial differences in police use of force. On non-lethal uses of force, blacks and Hispanics are more than fifty percent more likely to experience some form of force in interactions with police. Adding controls that account for important context and civilian behavior reduces, but cannot fully explain, these disparities. On the most extreme use of force – officer-involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account. We argue that the patterns in the data are consistent with a model in which police officers are utility maximizers, a fraction of which have a preference for discrimination, who incur relatively high expected costs of officer-involved shootings.

 No.5773

>>5771
From the ending of the paper:
====================================

... our results point to another simple policy experiment: increase the expected price of excessive force on lower level uses of force. To date, very few police departments across the country either collect data on lower level uses of force or explicitly punish officers for misuse of these tactics.  The appealing feature of this type of policy experiment is that it does not require officers to change their behavior in extremely high-stakes environments. ... Holding officers accountable for the misuse of hands or pushing individuals to the ground is not likely a life or death situation and, as such, may be more amenable to policy change.

****

The importance of our results for racial inequality in America is unclear. It is plausible that racial differences in lower level uses of force are simply a distraction and movements such as Black Lives Matter should seek solutions within their own communities rather than changing the behaviors of police and other external forces.

Much more troubling, due to their frequency and potential impact on minority belief formation, is the possibility that racial differences in police use of non-lethal force have spillovers on myriad dimensions of racial inequality. If, for instance, blacks use their lived experience with police as evidence that the world is discriminatory, then it is easy to understand why black youth invest less in human capital or black adults are more likely to believe discrimination is an important determinant of economic outcomes. Black Dignity Matters.

====================================

 No.5776

>>5773
Well that kind of inflammatory conclusioning goes so far afield of any possible realistic data set's scope and computability that i conclude its resemblance to absurdity to be facially true from your excerpt alone.

Try this to answer that "i dunno whyyyyy" whining.  Or get some cheese.  Cuz we DO know why.  We're programmed with lies like we dont know why, oh and despiccable victim-shaming there too Ferret.  Not so fancy.

 No.5784

File: 1593302132220.png (674.6 KB, 521x653, 521:653, ryuuko.png) ImgOps Google

>>5776
>Well that kind of inflammatory conclusioning goes so far afield of any possible realistic data set's scope and computability that i conclude its resemblance to absurdity to be facially true from your excerpt alone.
What is so inflammatory about suggesting that we hold police officers accountable for misuse of lower levels of force?

 No.5789

>>5776
Looked like he's quoting the thing he was citing. No need to get all hostile for that. It's not his words, just the thing he found interesting

 No.5790

>>5784
Yes, that is what i found inflammatory.  Critical thinking skills are in top shape in /pol
Obviously this:
>If, for instance, blacks use their lived experience with police as evidence that the world is discriminatory, then it is easy to understand why black youth invest less in human capital or black adults are more likely to believe discrimination is an important determinant of economic outcomes

See, they only suffer because they believe they are discriminated against.  That's rational.

>>5789
it wasnt clear that wasn't his own conclusion.  I dont see him decrying the unconscionability of the words he stated.  

>>5437
I just found out Origin of Species was always white supremacist propaganda.  I always thought it was merely oversimplified but in its proper place as Eugenics rhetoric it suddenly makes sense that the "superior" long-neck giraffe would instantly replace every one of the "inferior" short-neck throwbacks who instantly die in the name of evolution towards perfection of Man.

Good re-education is a great idea.  I recommend Black Like Me.  

 No.5794

>>5790
>Yes, that is what i found inflammatory.  Critical thinking skills are in top shape in /pol
Well, it would help if you >quoted the part of the post you found inflammatory rather than leaving people to guess.

>Obviously this:
>>If, for instance, blacks use their lived experience with police as evidence that the world is discriminatory, then it is easy to understand why black youth invest less in human capital or black adults are more likely to believe discrimination is an important determinant of economic outcomes
>
>See, they only suffer because they believe they are discriminated against.  That's rational.
I don't see what's inflammatory about what was written in the paper.  It's basically saying "Racism by the police in the use of non-deadly force might be psychological damaging beyond the immediate physical violence, so it's important to curb such racism".

>it wasnt clear that wasn't his own conclusion.
I thought saying "From the ending of the paper:" would be clear enough.  I find it harder to read greentext than regular text, so I didn't want to >quote the whole block of text.

>I just found out Origin of Species was always white supremacist propaganda.
Huh???  I don't see how it remotely qualifies as propaganda.  Even if a scientific work is wrong or flawed in certain regards, that doesn't make it propaganda.

> it suddenly makes sense that the "superior" long-neck giraffe would instantly replace every one of the "inferior" short-neck throwbacks who instantly die in the name of evolution towards perfection of Man.
I think you need to re-read the book more carefully.  A careful reading will make it quite clear that there is no "superior" or "inferior" in an absolute sense.  There is only adaptation to a specific environment (including unfilled niches, etc.).  

 No.5795

>>5794
The conclusion clearly stated that black youth dont invest in human capital because they believe they are being discriminated against is to say that they arent being unfairly treated or deprived of opportunity, but only suffer because the illusion of racism makes them unmotivated to improve themselves.

You think that sounds rational?

That explains why Charles Darwin's all but the "best" creatures automatically both dying and disappearing from the genome entirely forever doesn't sound like supremacy to you.

In reality, the superior genome contains the most genes to switch out phenptypes within a few generations to bring the most currently advantaged features into play.  Like a swiss army knife, with many different tools for solving diverse challenges, not just one tool for one situation.

The very notion that the one thats not good today is inherently going to disappear forever replaced by something that is always better, smacks of supremacy to me, and it was in fact the current state of mainstream science in Darwin's time.  And it still is if you examine our still-held "scientific" narratives.

That you doubt it proves the whotewash i am talking about.  Darwin is just another Nazi, oh and there were other evolutionary theory proponents.  If i wasn't so ignorant i'd name several; i only know Erasmus Darwin whose theory of directed evolution, dismissed in my biology class, was actually pretty good considering sexual selection and its more recent acceptance as far more formative in speciation than the trite and improbable drastic constant die-off of the inherently inferior to make way for Man.

I feel im inadequate to the task of deconstructing your programming.  Heres a really good secondary summary if ypu want to learn a bit of reality to dispel your illusion a bit.

 No.5797

File: 1593641768767.jpg (445.06 KB, 2827x4016, 2827:4016, Tsukiko-warawanai-neko-wUx….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>5795
>The conclusion clearly stated that black youth dont invest in human capital because they believe they are being discriminated against is to say that they arent being unfairly treated or deprived of opportunity, but only suffer because the illusion of racism makes them lazy and not improve themselves.
The conclusion did not clearly say that.  (Note that I am not saying "The conclusion clearly did not say that".  The order of the words is quite important.)  And IMHO, it didn't even imply that.  Sometimes believing a lie can be beneficial to success, due to human psychology, and especially if coupled with other pre-existing deficits of knowledge.  The paper seems to be saying that the belief itself (regardless of whether it is true or false) causes poorer outcomes.

>>5795
>That explains why all but the "best" automatically both dying and disaplearing from the genome doesn't sound like supremacy to you.
I'm not sure what you mean (in particular, what you mean by "best" or "supremacy") and how you came to such a conclusion as applied to me specifically.

>In reality, the superior genome contains the most genes to switch out phenptypes within a few generations to bring the most currently advantaged features into play.
What do you mean by "superior"?  Darwin doesn't talk in those terms, at least not in an absolute sense.  Again, he talks of adaptation to specific environments.  See also:  https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/XPErvb8m9FapXCjhA/adaptation-executers-not-fitness-maximizers

>The very notion that the one thats not good today is inherently going to disappear forever replaced by something that is always better, smacks of supremacy to me, and it was in fact the current state of science at the time.
[citation needed, in regards to "it was in fact the current state of science at the time"]
I'm pretty sure Darwin recognized that environments change over time and that an adaptation beneficial at one point in time could be harmful at another point in time in the same place.

>>5795
>Darwin is just another Nazi
Darwin died before the Nazi party even existed.

 No.5799

Edit:  if im wrong and you arent deliberately provoking me with deliberate sophistry, then i apologize for my tone because it really feels like you are trying to piss me off on purpose with the misstatements if my words and willfully false reasoning.  Probably me tho, iunno.

>>5797
Now you are strawmanning me hard.

Concluding that a perception is why they fail to invest in their own human capital directly blames them for not helping themselves.

>darwin not eugenics cuz no hitler yet

Your logic is impeccable.  NO ONE was ever a despiccable Nazi before hitler made up the name.  Not Teddy Roosevelt, not Thomas Jefferson.

Go ahead, cling to your lies that you cannot deal are false.

I especially like the way you cast me as attacking or disparaging ypu just becauas i point out your cited material is victim-shaming.

I didnt say YOU were, i said your material was.  Now, i've changed my position.  Your strawmanning and evasion indicate ypu are trying to avoid defending the position while attacking me directly rather than my reasoning.

That tactic strongly suggests that you do think its reasonable to say black people don't participate in improving themselves.  

You do you.  Im out.

 No.5800

File: 1593647529415.jpg (270.54 KB, 1200x900, 4:3, holo-1524346953193.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>5799
>Now you are strawmanning me hard.
I apologize if I misrepresented your position.  But it was not intentional.  I guess I just don't fully understand what you're trying to say.

>>5799
>NO ONE was ever a despiccable Nazi before hitler made up the name.  Not Teddy Roosevelt, not Thomas Jefferson.
Correct.  "Nazi" means something specific.  And Jefferson's philosophy is about as far from Naziism as possible.

>trying to avoid defending the position
What position?

>attacking me directly rather than my reasoning.
I don't think I committed any ad hominem fallacies.  Where do you think I did?

>That tactic strongly suggests that you do think its reasonable to say black people don't participate in improving themselves.  
I wouldn't say "black people don't participate in improving themselves" categorically.  Some people (both black people and white people) fail to improve themselves.

 No.5801

>>5800
See my edit.  Im sorry.

>>5800
Im really pissed off at what Jefferson REALLY said.  Its not just the bits we're told but straight eugenics.  Watch my last video, or don't.

Have a good day.


[]
[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]