Author Topic: Ethics question (Read 1843 times)

capt. apathy · « **Reply #45 on:** September 11, 2003, 10:06:22 AM »

Quote

This isn't a PC matter of calling people negroes, blacks or african-americans. It is about perceptions and causes. If somebody claims that black men have a higher death rate due to violence and a higher incarceration rate because blacks are just more violent and lawless that is racist.

as I understood the origanal conversation, no real mentions as to why black males had a higher rate. as I read it he just pointed out that when you compare the 2 cities, detroit did have a higher incedent of gun violence, but it also has a very large population of people who are statistacally at a very high risk for being involved in it while the canadian city didn't as high of rates of gun violence, it also didn't have as big of a population of high risk individuals. and that this could explain the difference in gun violence rates just as easily as canadas atni-handgun laws.

I saw no mention of speculation as to why young black males are more likely to be involved in gun violence. thats an area where the ground gets shakey and opinions could be taken as racist.

but I don't see how pointing out the facts without speculation can be seen as racist.

midnight Target · « **Reply #46 on:** September 11, 2003, 10:54:06 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Leslie
It sounds like deductive reasoning to me MT. Please tell me if it's not, and what kind of reasoning it is.

Les

I thought my response to Rip was pretty clear. "Culture" is a poor excuse AFAIC. There is NOTHING racist about the numbers. The racism comes from the conclusions.

Saying Detroit is dangerous because it has a large Black population is racist. Saying Detroit is dangerous because of the high unemployment rate among young males, especially Balck males is not racist.

almost forgot.... Actually seems more inductive to me Leslie.

miko2d · « **Reply #47 on:** September 11, 2003, 12:45:12 PM »

midnight Target: I believe you aren't a racist Rip, however this statement seems very racist. You cannot necessarily attribute the high crime rate to race. It may be due to economics, unemployment rate, single parent families etc.

Actually intelligence as a major cause and culture as a secondary one. Studies indicate that all those factors you've listed are consequences rather than independent causes. There are authoritative studies that carefully investigate the influence of any single factor by equalising all the rest. Like NLSY (National Longitudinal Survey of Youth). NLSY79 involved a representative sample of 12,686 young men and women and NLSY97 9000.

Your figures are correct, your conclusions are suspect.

They would be if he was telling something that he came up with himself and that was all the data the world had. In fact he referred to the vast body of studies and was speaking in context of which she might not have been aware but could easily access.
Just because he did not cover every aspect of those studies in a single breath to show their completeness, does not mean that there is no data to substantiate his claim that "the culture is at fault".

Human communication always comes in chunks - sentenses and phrases. Latching up to a signle utterance and decrying it as "unsubstantiated" without waiting or asking for substantiation or looking it up is a just dirty trick to win an argument. Here is an example from your own mouth:

midnight Target: Saying Detroit is dangerous because it has a large Black population is racist. Saying Detroit is dangerous because of the high unemployment rate among young males, especially Balck males is not racist.

Of course it is! So you accuse blacks of being incapable of work, and being bad parents rather than more likely to commit crime. How is your post less racially offencive or more substantiated than Rip's?

Rip - as long as you do not treat individuals you deal with differently on account of their race, you are not a racist, no matter what you think or believe about their race as a statistical aggregate.

miko

midnight Target · « **Reply #48 on:** September 11, 2003, 02:45:03 PM »

Quote

Of course it is! So you accuse blacks of being incapable of work, and being bad parents rather than more likely to commit crime.

You assume too much... which makes you look less than intelligent. I accused no one of anything. I merely pointed out the difference between the attribution of a statistic to a RACE and to a CIRCUMSTANCE.

I would be willing to bet that there are more criminals with the last name "Chan" than any other last name in the world.

Did their last name make them criminal? Did their race make them criminal? Did the fact that there are more Chan's than any other last name make them criminal?

Holding the belief that one race is inherently more intelligent than another is racist too. Just so you know.

Gunthr · « **Reply #49 on:** September 11, 2003, 04:53:17 PM »

Quote

Holding the belief that one race is inherently more intelligent than another is racist too. Just so you know. - MT

Racism is defined this way in one dictionary:
Racism:
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

I agree that holding the belief that one specific race is inherently more intelligent than another is not a correct position to take - not because it puts the believer at risk of being labled racist or because it is politically incorrect - but because it has not been scientifically shown to be true. At least not to my satisfaction.

I think that it is entirely possible that one race can have in its gene pool traits that are expressed as higher "intelligence." Why would this be so hard to believe?

The problem is that intelligence is a construct that has never been universally defined to my knowledge, especially its expression in relationhip to the surrounding environment - the old nature vs nurture thing.

Furthermore, there is no common definition of "race." For example, most studies allow participants to identify thier own race, yet I can assure you that in Detroit there are very few pure blooded black people.

I have as much a problem with people who insist all races are genetically equal as I do with those who say that one race is superior to another in intelligence. I need to see proof, via sound scientific studies. So far, I do not think anyone has completed any definitive work that is widely accepted and non-controversial. This illustrates how complex the subject is.

rc51 · « **Reply #50 on:** September 11, 2003, 06:51:21 PM »

Heres the problem folks.
People still have the mentality of races!
like black race or white race.
How bout the truth for once.
there is but one race of humans.
You got it THE HUMAN RACE.
Like the late Dr King said judge me on the content of my character
not the color of my skin.
So when people stop grouping people in neat little box's blacks over here and whites over here then maybe we will mature past this race bullchit.
Whether you believe or not God or the creator spirit what ever you call him.
Created all men.
White and black must all grow up and live in peace.
Learn from each culture expand you mind and your heart will follow.
To hate is only to cheapen your own soul.

Animal · « **Reply #51 on:** September 11, 2003, 07:06:10 PM »

^^^Exactly^^^

But, sadly, there is the false illusion of race, built on centuries of ignorant racism. This false illusion is already ingrained in society.

For example, if a group of blacks are treated like criminals who would never amount to anything, denied jobs, etc. Then they will act like that. They have no other choice, their behavior was imposed on them.

Hence you see these troubling numbers of black aggression, etc.

But its not race specific, through history there are plenty of examples of exactly the same thing happening with groups from every "race"

Its a vicious cycle, but thankfully, its slowly being broken, because people are beginning to open their minds and realise that their fears and misconceptions are based on simple ignorance.

Gunthr · « **Reply #52 on:** September 11, 2003, 07:20:07 PM »

I find in my day to day life that its easier just to divide people into one of two catagories: Either you're an prettythanghole or you are Not An prettythanghole.

The problem is, most of us have a little bit of prettythanghole in us, so you have to carefully observe for a little while before making up your mind about a person...

beet1e · « **Reply #53 on:** September 12, 2003, 06:33:55 AM »

LOL - never thought I'd see the word "Ethics" in a thread title on this board. Had to check to see I was on the right board!

Rip, I have discussed this issue with a friend of mine in the US - a black guy. We discussed gun ownership, but not so much which group of people gets killed the most by guns.

I am sure that certain English black minority groups are no different from those in the US, and we too would have a bloodbath if guns were freely available. Some might say that those deaths "wouldn't matter", but the sort of carnage that we could expect in our cities if guns were to be freely available is not something the British public wants to see.

lazs2 · « **Reply #54 on:** September 12, 2003, 08:16:01 AM »

so there is no cultural difference between blacks and whites that would make pointing out the homicide issue relevent?

You would be wrong if you pointed out the disparity in the homicide issue?

seems best to point out every factor.

why do I know that most serial killers are white males? Would it be helpful to ignore the fact and say that they were "just people"?

lazs

midnight Target · « **Reply #55 on:** September 12, 2003, 10:07:29 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2

why do I know that most serial killers are white males? Would it be helpful to ignore the fact and say that they were "just people"?

lazs

It would have been most helpful during the DC sniper case.

Gunthr · « **Reply #56 on:** September 12, 2003, 10:15:17 AM »

You just have to be careful about what conclusions you draw from the data. You have to remember that correlations do not necessarily indicate cause and effect, and they can be totally misleading.

For example, lets say that colleges become convinced that a predictor of success in college is a person's height. The colleges might then proceed to admit only those students who are 6 foot tall or more.

Eventually, you will observe that most of the people in higher paying jobs are 6 foot tall, or higher. You would see an apparent correlation between 6 foot height and earning ability. The problem with this is that the correlation between height and earning power is a false one - an invention, a self-fulfilling prophecy. We cannot accurately conclude from this correlation that 6 footers have more earning ability than shorter persons, or that shorter persons do not have as great an earning potential, although the temptation to do so is strong.

However, that said, I believe that humans are "hard wired" to be racists. Its the most natural thing in the world to categorise people according to skin color, or religeon, or nationality or what have you. That is why you have to tread carefully when discussing these issues in general terms. We are all prey to our own points of view and our human tendancy to jump to conclusions. (Jumping to conclusions is related to survival.)

I agree with Animal, that the concept of race can be misleading. I also agree with Miko 2d that as long as you treat individuals fairly, you won't go too far wrong.

GrimCO · « **Reply #57 on:** September 12, 2003, 10:18:00 AM »

The problem is people sometimes put distinctions on themselves... African Americans, Latin Americans, etc... I always figured we were all just Americans. I suppose dinstinctions are somewhat necessary in the issues of racism, etc... But I wish they weren't.

Also, crying wolf all the time regarding incidents of racism takes away from the credence of the valid ones which occur.

midnight Target · « **Reply #58 on:** September 12, 2003, 10:26:21 AM »

I've been accused of jumping on the racism bandwagon before. In this case however, I don't think I have. I think Rip's original statement could be construed as racist and I can understand the reation of his coworker.

I also said I don't think Rip is a racist.

Gunthr · « **Reply #59 on:** September 12, 2003, 11:24:55 AM »

MT, I don't think you are being fair to Ripsnort.

I think he was pointing out a correlation between young blacks and violent crime, along with his opinion that those same conditions do not exist in Windsor - making it an unequal comparison in their discussion.

Is there in fact a correlation between young blacks and violent crime?
(probably yes)
Do those same conditions in fact exist in Windsor?
(probably no)

Is it an unfair comparison in their discussion?
Yes! - I think so anyway.

I don't think we have to conclude that the statement is a racist one ... as did the young lady. It sounds to me like he only pointed out a correlation... and she made the leap to racism. Next time, Ripsnort needs to make his points more clearly, knowing as we do that people all have their own biases.

You can lay the blame for this whole thing at the feet of Michael Moore, with his quick and easy swipes at America that are often very misleading. In my opinion, that is.