VisorCentral.com - One Year On

Pages (24): « First ... « 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 » ... Last »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page

VisorCentral.com (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/index.php)
- Off Topic (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=6)
-- One Year On (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/showthread.php?threadid=26965)

Posted by John Nowak on 10-18-2002 12:44 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer
I never said I would label someone as wanting war simply because of their religion, but I don't feel bad for having that thought cross my mind.

Incidentally, this is a point I do disagree with.

We all make assumptions; we're all prejudiced one way or another. I might assume someone believes in "X" because he is "Y", but I believe strongly that it is fundamentally wrong for me to make that assumption.

Posted by KRamsauer on 10-18-2002 04:44 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by John Nowak

Incidentally, this is a point I do disagree with.

We all make assumptions; we're all prejudiced one way or another. I might assume someone believes in "X" because he is "Y", but I believe strongly that it is fundamentally wrong for me to make that assumption.

Hm.... I guess it comes down to my belief that wanting war in the mid-east doesn't make one a good or bad person, so having that thought cross my mind doesn't put somoene at an advantage or a disadvantage. If I were to think someone were stupid/smart, ugly/pretty or anything else loaded with value simply because they were of a certain religion that would make me feel bad, and as I result I don't think that way. :-)

Posted by K. Cannon on 10-18-2002 02:45 PM:

So, we're all friends again, until someone tells me I look fat in these jeans?

(I'm kidding. No response required.)

Posted by Toby on 10-18-2002 03:54 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer
Hm.... I guess it comes down to my belief that wanting war in the mid-east doesn't make one a good or bad person, so having that thought cross my mind doesn't put somoene at an advantage or a disadvantage.

Just out of curiosity, why do you have this irrational fixation on 'advantage/disadvantage'?

quote:
If I were to think someone were stupid/smart, ugly/pretty or anything else loaded with value

Those terms have no inherent value any more than the original does.

quote:
simply because they were of a certain religion that would make me feel bad, and as I result I don't think that way. :-)

So, ultimately, it is all about feelings after all? You're only selfish about the feelings that matter to you? OK.

Posted by Toby on 10-18-2002 03:58 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon
So, we're all friends again, until someone tells me I look fat in these jeans?

(I'm kidding. No response required.)

I decline to answer that question until I consult my statistics books.

Posted by K. Cannon on 10-18-2002 04:03 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
I decline to answer that question until I consult my statistics books.

Are you presuming you know how tall I am?

Posted by Toby on 10-18-2002 04:05 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon
Are you presuming you know how tall I am?

Well, statistically, we know that you're shorter than me.

Posted by K. Cannon on 10-18-2002 04:07 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
Well, statistically, we know that you're shorter than me.

Right. Clearly, I'm the same height as your wife.

Posted by KRamsauer on 10-18-2002 04:10 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon
So, we're all friends again?

(I'm kidding. No response required.)

Fighting.....urge.....must.....respond.....keep.....pointless.....thread.....alive..... NO I won't.

Posted by KRamsauer on 10-18-2002 04:13 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
Just out of curiosity, why do you have this irrational fixation on 'advantage/disadvantage'

Because it is wrong to disadvantage someone for something overwhich they have no control or don't deserve to be discriminated over. Being a jerk, I will discriminate against you, as we all do. Being a Jew, Hindu, male, female, black, white, gay, straight, short, tall, skinny, heavy (and the list goes on) are not bases for disrespect and therefore why should I feel bad about knowing said traits before meeting someone? It's a kind of "rational liberalism" (hehehe, I coined a term, how academic of me): using rational thought to acknowledge reality while preserving the benefits of a "race-blind" (to pick one example) ideology.

Posted by K. Cannon on 10-18-2002 04:14 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer
Fighting.....urge.....must.....respond.....keep.....pointless.....thread.....alive..... NO I won't.

We'll show that darn Josh with his pesky Inane Ramblings thread!

Posted by KRamsauer on 10-18-2002 04:14 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
Well, statistically, we know that you're shorter than me.

And unless you have some weird tendency to hate short people, such judgements (thought not necessarily accurate) do no harm.

Posted by KRamsauer on 10-18-2002 04:15 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon

We'll show that darn Josh with his pesky Inane Ramblings thread!

Darn tootin.

Posted by Toby on 10-18-2002 05:03 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon
Right. Clearly, I'm the same height as your wife.

Yes, statistics say that it must be so.

Posted by Toby on 10-18-2002 05:19 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer
[...] Being a jerk, I will discriminate against you, as we all do. [...]

This sentence really doesn't make much sense. Are you trying to say that you're a jerk, and hence since all jerks discriminate, you will discriminate against me? I'd think not, but that's really what it says. Regarding the rest of what you said, what exactly is rational about assuming that you know traits of an entire population based on a potentially valid survey of a _different_ or a subset of that population. IOW, even _if_ you saw a lead-tight survey of the opinions of Jews in a certain population (which we never saw cited, so we still can't establish that it was anything more than anecdotal) about the war in Iraq, what makes you think that it applies to _any_ other Jew? That's the logical flaw which I originally was talking about.

Posted by Toby on 10-18-2002 05:25 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by KRamsauer
And unless you have some weird tendency to hate short people,

No, I'm not Randy Newman.

quote:
such judgements (thought not necessarily accurate) do no harm.

*sigh*

Posted by K. Cannon on 10-18-2002 05:30 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
No, I'm not Randy Newman.

But, do you love L.A.?

Posted by KRamsauer on 10-18-2002 05:31 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
This sentence really doesn't make much sense. Are you trying to say that you're a jerk, and hence since all jerks discriminate, you will discriminate against me? I'd think not, but that's really what it says. Regarding the rest of what you said, what exactly is rational about assuming that you know traits of an entire population based on a potentially valid survey of a _different_ or a subset of that population. IOW, even _if_ you saw a lead-tight survey of the opinions of Jews in a certain population (which we never saw cited, so we still can't establish that it was anything more than anecdotal) about the war in Iraq, what makes you think that it applies to _any_ other Jew? That's the logical flaw which I originally was talking about.

Reading the next sentence should have clarified it, but I meant "If you are jerk, I will discriminate against you, as we all do." You never once mentioned through that whole discussion your point was revolving around sampling one population and applying those findings to another. That is so incredibly stupid I figured no one would even bother to bring it up! Clearly we cannot do that. I never claimed we could. Remember I was claiming that knowing the traits of population allows you to infer individual traits. You read that as my saying knowing one population's traits can allow you to predict other populations' traits? I never said anything of the sort, and I wish you'd have mentioed it in as many words earlier.
What I'm not sure you understand is that it is perfectly valid to use a sub-sample to derive hypotheses about the population. So long as prior to sampling there is no reason to believe the sample will differ systematically from the population. Of course the people I meet differ systematically, and I never claimed I was a random number generator.

Posted by Toby on 10-18-2002 05:32 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by K. Cannon
We'll show that darn Josh with his pesky Inane Ramblings thread!

No, I don't think this thread is any match for the humor and disturbing beauty of Inane Ramblings. Although, this thread makes an interesting proof for my wife that I'm not the most socially dense and one-track minded person on the face of the Earth.

Posted by KRamsauer on 10-18-2002 05:34 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
No, I don't think this thread is any match for the humor and disturbing beauty of Inane Ramblings. Although, this thread makes an interesting proof for my wife that I'm not the most socially dense and one-track minded person on the face of the Earth.

You are definitely closed to reason though, as what I've been trying to explain is simply the logic behind inferential statistics, about as rock-solid as thought gets.

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:33 AM.

Pages (24): « First ... « 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 » ... Last »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page