AnonymousCoward2 Posted August 19, 2016 Posted August 19, 2016 Listening to Stef, when speaking about anything that might implicate anything negative about a certain group (yes, I am talking about blacks in particular), there is always this infactual caveat pushed: "Still, you know we cannot say anything about individuals based on aggregated tendencies among a certain population". From the perspective of science its pretty much a "eeehhh... say what?!"-moment, as it is a logical contradiction. It's a bit like "the gamblers fallacy", in the misrepresentation of probability. Proposition 1: People with red caps are more five times more likely to involved in assaults and armed robberies than people with green caps. Proposition 2: Not every person with a red cap has ever been involved in an assault or an armed robbery. Proposition 3: Based on the two propositions stated above, we cannot say anything about the individual likelihood of a person being involved in assaults or armed robberies. The last proposition is an obvious logical fallacy, as the group of "red caps" are made up of individuals contributing to the overall group mean and thus pushing population mean to become 5x that of the "green caps". The population mean is just a simple average of each individuals behaviour alltogether. If the random green cap has a 2 % assualting me in the street, then the random red cap has 10 % chance of assaulting me. If I do not observe these differences and take the necessary precautious - carry a gun/avoid neighbourhoods with red caps/etc., I would every else hold equal, simply run a bigger risk around red caps. How would that be beneficial for me as a person to simply ignore this? I reckon that humans in general does not understand probabilities, its a complex topic and the human mind prefers to instead draw general conclusion in over/understating the probability of an event occuring (we are like binary machines with 0 and 1s). Still if you are to make an informed decision, i.e. choose to one with results in highest expected utility for you as a person, you have to learn to work it through with a correct and factual assessment of reality - not how you would like it to be. Secondly, everybody please drop this idea of seeking recognition on the terms of your philosophical enemies, for then you are still subject to their ideological hegemony of imposed (preferably, white) guilt. You do not make your arguments or state the facts on the benefit of women, black, gipsies, poor or whatever - you do it because its true and you are capable of making your judgements based on the facts, nothing else. Please.
Recommended Posts