Summary Judgement
This quote reminds me of the countless arguments I dealt with when I would ask a ‘on the whole’ question.
Before anyone waxes stupid, please don’t tell me that all generalizations are invalid because not every member of the given group will conform to a generalization. Intelligent people understand that legitimate generalizations are statements about a group’s general characteristics, not individuals’ specific ones. For example, if I say that men are taller than women, I don’t mean that every man towers over every woman; nevertheless, it is an accurate relation of a general difference between the groups.
One can make generalizations with the implied assumption that not all applicable entities necessarily fall into that generalization. It nice to see others struggling to make such an elementary point to those on the left.
The bulk of the post is looking at police profiling. Clearly this is an example of using summary judgment. The poster makes this astute observation.
Modern dogma holds that diversity is one of the greatest qualities a society can enjoy, that it bestows many advantages. But what does this imply? Well, by definition “diversity” refers to differences among groups. Now, not only is it illogical to assume that every one of these differences will be flattering, the supposition that diversity is beneficial implies otherwise. After all, if diversity is beneficial, it is only because certain groups bring qualities or strengths to the table that others do not. And, if a given group possesses a certain unique strength, then other groups are wanting in that area relative to it.
Any which way you care to slice it, this is a corollary of diversity dogma.
So, ironically, despite the fact that the diversity dogmatists would eschew stereotyping, a version of it imbues their ideology. So it’s not that they don’t have biases relating to generalizations, only that their understanding of group differences is clumsy and primitive, sort of like Archie Bunker but with advanced degrees, the illusion of intellectualism and the inability to be honest with themselves and others. So let’s be honest now.
November 14th, 2007 at 1:52 am
I’m sorry, I must have misunderstood your argument if this article on race pertains to it. I was under the impression that you weren’t talking about Middle-Eastern races, but rather Middle Eastern culture as entirely abstracted from tangible and measurable things like people. If you in fact were making a statement that pertained to Middle Eastern people in aggregate (in other words, several races), I apologize for misinterpreting your earlier statements. This new interpretation improves your position by making it pertinent to tangible or measurable entities.
If you are going to abstract Middle Eastern culture from tangible and measurable things like the people who practice it in aggregate, I am not obliged to tell you whether it is good or bad because any ensuing conversation would be pointless pontification about something that cannot be supported by any tangible or measurable evidence. On the other hand, if you are really talking about Middle Eastern people in aggregate, that lends considerable support to Jamie’s criticism.
The post you link to suggests that there are those on the left who are hesitant to even address the question of whether racial stereotypes are true, especially racial stereotypes that suggest some aggregate superiority of white or Western European individuals. This is an interesting criticism, and for the sake of argument I’ll accept that this may indeed be the case. I offer the conjecture that it may relate to the fact that many on the left have negative opinions about the policy consequences of investigations conducted during the late 19th and early 20th century that appeared to demonstrate that, in aggregate, white and western European individuals were superior. I’m curious whether you think this is a good reason for such hesitation, Steve.
November 14th, 2007 at 11:56 am
I stand by my point that arguing that middle eastern culture on a whole is inferior to western culuture is stupid. There is no defined criteria and no definition of what middle eastern culture consists of….
November 15th, 2007 at 1:23 am
I wonder would you also object to Western Culture being ill-defined in this case as well?
November 15th, 2007 at 3:24 am
Quote 1:
“Before anyone waxes stupid, please don’t tell me that all generalizations are invalid because not every member of the given group will conform to a generalization.”
Quote 2:
“Now, not only is it illogical to assume that every one of these differences will be flattering…”
Wow, sure didn’t take that guy long to make himself into a hypocrite.
PS, I think there’s a difference between the word ’stereotype’ and the phrase ‘accurate generalizations about a group of people’. I don’t think it’s fair to present the over-blown, offensive racial stereotypes that are produced and passed around by white supremacists, have them object to that, and then say ‘well look how stupid they are, to claim that you can never make any generalized statement about any group of people.’ That’s clearly setting up a straw man, and it’s mostly boring to me.
November 15th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
I don’t see the contradiction.
November 15th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
He says that only stupid people attack a generalization by showing that it isn’t 100% absolutely true always in every situation forever. Then, when liberals say ‘diversity is good’, he attacks them by saying ‘clearly there will be some aspects of diversity that are bad.’ IE, he attacks their generalization by saying that some aspects of it will not adhere to the generalization, which is precisely the argumentative move he said was stupid in his the first quote.