Race (Surius thred, no trolls :D )

[Paroxysm]

Ok I have a genuine question for you MPGH and I'd like to hear your opinions:
Supposing that there are differences amongst the races, and assuming that the racial stereotypes we propagate are true, should we treat all people equally, or should we make clear restrictions and allowances based on race?


My Actual Stance:

Genetically we are basically all the same, any sense of superiority of race that we may perceive can easily be chalked off as either confirmation bias or heuristic misinterpretation. Any differences between the races are due to cultural and social pressures and situations that distinguish us, but generally nothing intrinsic.


My Stance for the sake of this thread:

However, if I was going to posit that my proposition was true, we shouldn't treat every race equally. If one race can perform a task more competently than another race, then the superior race should take charge. Much like we ask civil engineers to design bridges, as apposed to people suffering from a serious developmental disorder like down syndrome.

What are your thoughts MPGH?

[whtlight]

I believe different races should be treated differently because all of the black people I have ever met either dont have fathers or are ignorant mother fuckers, Honestly I thunk blacks should be treated with more respect from their family and would be more respected by other races, Same with whites sometimes.

[[MPGH]Liz]

While your stance has merit, it still presupposes that all racial stigmas are accurate, and as your second statement suggest, scientifically speaking, we are all the same. I do think that playing to an individual's strong suit would benefit the whole, but would also stop people from simply challenging themselves to move away from their comfort zone, and try new things. After all we never do find out what were best at, since there is always something else to try.

[Paroxysm]

While your stance has merit, it still presupposes that all racial stigmas are accurate, and as your second statement suggest, scientifically speaking, we are all the same. I do think that playing to an individual's strong suit would benefit the whole, but would also stop people from simply challenging themselves to move away from their comfort zone, and try new things. After all we never do find out what were best at, since there is always something else to try.

Yes, but assuming that all those racial prejudices were true, should we still treat everyone equally? Let's assume that we knew that every single person of Latin-American descendant was a poor physician, and that Asians were the best physicians, would it be morally reprehensible for a hospital to hire a Latino doctor?

[Arhk]

Kind of weird have to go over this.... I believe there are many racial stigmas amongst "black people" (quotes because I find it weird they've segregated themselves enough that it's grammatically correct for me to technically be referred to a skin color as a "people", and the fact I can say "they") which is why I don't usually hang out with black people (even though I am black, I also find it weird we identify ourselves by skin color so distinctly it wouldn't be grammatically correct for me to identify myself by my hair color, i.e rather than saying "I have brown hair" "I am brown hair", but "I have brown skin" "I am black?"). I'm an intellectual and there aren't many non-stereotypical black people out there so I usually end up hanging out with Asians/White people.
~
If the stereotypes were assumed to be true I don't really know I guess I'd keep Asian people in factories and just let the black people keep their own street economy up by causing gang violence and selling drugs, same for Latinos. Exceptions for blacks would be if they were from Egyptian/Arab descent they have a history for being good at mathematical break throughs. If it were white people I'd put incompetent people like Scandinavians, Brits etc. in the mundane middle class of 9-5 and put the Germans, Italians, Swiss, Czech in things like Theories on Physics universe etc. And classical arts like classical painting and classical music, etc.
The only reason I put majority of whites in as middle class is because if I were to go with stereotypes they're very indolent and wouldn't cause too much trouble if we put them into the middle class world. Effectively making it easier for cops to handle crime outbreaks that actually matter, the middle class are important so having indolent people, make them a reliable source for menial tasks of 9-5 they're the least likely to crack under the utter mundane tasks of that kind of life.
I guess I might have subdivided too much sorry ....

[[MPGH]Liz]

Yes, but assuming that all those racial prejudices were true, should we still treat everyone equally? Let's assume that we knew that every single person of Latin-American descendant was a poor physician, and that Asians were the best physicians, would it be morally reprehensible for a hospital to hire a Latino doctor?

Hmmm... Given that point, then no it wouldn't be (in all good conscience) a good bet to hire the Latino doctor. Also assuming that there cannot be any variable in character ( Everyone is predetermined to their racial-cultural stigmas) Then society would become segregated. The black populace along with some Hispanic and Native American, would be well below the poverty line. While the rest of America middles somewhere between, middle-low to high class. To make an accurate assessment of just how life would be, we must first identify each racial-cultural stigma, maybe by race first and then under that race subcategories for cultural backgrounds ( IE: Drunk Irish, Loud child bearing Italians, Racist southerners); though in this case there wouldn't be any "racist" behavior as it would be the norm. But to simply answer your question, if all racial stigmas were true and there could be no variables, then no everyone could not be treated equally if society is meant to progress.

[Paroxysm]

Hmmm... Given that point, then no it wouldn't be (in all good conscience) a good bet to hire the Latino doctor. Also assuming that there cannot be any variable in character ( Everyone is predetermined to their racial-cultural stigmas) Then society would become segregated. The black populace along with some Hispanic and Native American, would be well below the poverty line. While the rest of America middles somewhere between, middle-low to high class. To make an accurate assessment of just how life would be, we must first identify each racial-cultural stigma, maybe by race first and then under that race subcategories for cultural backgrounds ( IE: Drunk Irish, Loud child bearing Italians, Racist southerners); though in this case there wouldn't be any "racist" behavior as it would be the norm. But to simply answer your question, if all racial stigmas were true and there could be no variables, then no everyone could not be treated equally if society is meant to progress.

Now if we can play a bit with probability, what portion of the race would have to fit the description of their stereotype such that we could generalize and say that "Blacks are lazy" or "Whites can't dance". At what point does it become a pragmatic necessity, for us to lump everyone with a title and a prefabricated description?

[Arhk]

I think Racial profiling accounts for what you're going for here~
In my post before I was kind of thinking about global segregation rather than particularly the US.

[Corndog]

If a common stereotype is accurate, it should be taken into consideration during any situation that it may apply to. However, the individual in question should also be taken into consideration. Referring to your earlier post, if that Latino man happens to be an excellent doctor, he should be hired whether or not his race has a bad track record with a certain task.

[Arhk]

We could acknowledge racial stereotypes and hope they're correct, or we could look at the individual that's what it essentially comes down to.
~

[Czar]

Tl;dr.

Title ruined it for me.

[Corndog]

Basically Czar, assuming stereotypes are accurate, should they be seriously considered where they might apply?

[Arhk]

If you're not gonna be serious when everyone else is, why even post Gay Hitler...
~
Basing things on stereotypes especially in "professional" situations, ends up making people look stupid, racial profiling amongst cops worked for a good while when people were into the whole black power thing and that all people with the same skin color are brothers, similarly Viva la raza, (similarly ugh "that neighborhood")... But for alot of people racism is tedious and overrated and is only good for some trolling on a forum, or in a completely joking manner.

[[MPGH]Liz]

Now if we can play a bit with probability, what portion of the race would have to fit the description of their stereotype such that we could generalize and say that "Blacks are lazy" or "Whites can't dance". At what point does it become a pragmatic necessity, for us to lump everyone with a title and a prefabricated description?

To generalize (and frankly I do not know where the assumptions in America come from since given their past they are shown to be quite the opposite.) But for the experiment's sake, I would say an overwhelming majority of 61% of the racial populace must abide by those stereotypes to be branded and generalized. This of course allows for the other 39% to do as they wish. Include mortality rates for the specific races, that number can go from 30%- as low as 15% (Throwing random numbers around) then to that you must add the nature vs nurture factor that arises from their specific culture. they grow up seeing things a certain way and being taught a certain way, very few would deviate from that pattern. Which is something we see in today's society. So basically It would be easier to subdue any variables, and just force everyone to abide by their standards. Kinda reminds me of the book 1984.

[Corndog]

MPGH sounds smart right now. I should probably close this tab . This is about as smart as it's going to get and I am just going to make it worse.