What's the difference between "outcome by merit" and "equal outcome"? "Merit" is not the name of a physical law or constant. — Echarmion
The difference is that “outcome by merit” means the most qualified person gets the job (for example), based upon n the merits of their qualifications. “Equal outcome” is not concerned with merit or qualification in this context, but with making sure their is a diverse range of race/gender etc regardless of qualifications/merit. — DingoJones
The point being made I think is that equality of outcome is more problematic because it doesn’t filter out incompetence or any other undesirable traits, where equality of opportunity does while at the same time is an explicit effort to make sure no one is left out do to race/gender etc. — DingoJones
Think of selecting a panel of doctors to save a loved ones life. You want the panel to have the best doctors right? If you gathered the best and it turns out it’s majority black, white, straight, gay or whatever then equality of outcome demands that some of the best doctors be swapped out so that the panel is diverse. — DingoJones
How do we know that "equal outcome" isn't concerned with merit or qualification? Equality is a value judgement. It can and usually does include considerations for qualifications and experience. Is there any mainstream view which espouses a strict quota system based on some form of identity without consideration of merit? — Echarmion
I'm very sceptical regarding this claim, as I don't see how it would be possible a priori to know whether a given system actually filters out only "undesirable traits". In my view, the only way to check is by looking at the output and comparing it with other metrics to figure out whether or not the process works. "Equality of opportunity" a judgement of an outcome, the term does not describe any specific method. — Echarmion
I think you're ascribing a specific goal to equality, based on a political usage of the word, which is not inherent in the term. — Echarmion
If you want a panel of the best doctors, then the only reasonable application of the term equality is that people on the panel should have the highest qualification possible, regardless of other factors. In other words all factors except qualification should be considered equal (you don't care about their marital status etc). — Echarmion
The Left is constantly pushing their "inclusion" meme which I take as meaning that each GROUP needs to be represented according to their percentage in the population. Merit is of secondary importance.
— synthesis
What's the difference between "outcome by merit" and "equal outcome"? "Merit" is not the name of a physical law or constant. — Echarmion
Are you aware of another functioning economic system? Is feudalism still in operation? How about slavery?Capitalism is the only economic system there is.
— synthesis
Err, what? — Echarmion
That's how equality always operates - you select one or more dimensions of relevance, such as qualification, income, etc. and then the "equal" outcome is the one where those - and only those - dimensions are expressed in the outcome.
Merit purports to do something similar, but merit tends to come with an existing list of which circumstances imply merit and which do not, and that list is politically and ideologically motivated (usually to favour existing elites). — Echarmion
I think efforts toward equality are simply trying to level a playing field that has been tilted to favor some and not others. But bringing it back to level requires a little tilt in the opposite direction from level. You can't fuck a man forever and then expect gratitude when you stop. You gots to pay a little. You say it wasn't your fault? Faults got nothing to do with it. It's a strict liability issue. — James Riley
People need to achieve their potential, whatever it is, and whomever they are...black, white, brown, yellow, purple or blue! — synthesis
Err, what? — Echarmion
Well in the context of race/gender etc I think the idea for some is that the proper metric for a fair group selection is diversity. That idea is about “equality of outcome”, the goal is for the group to have a proper amount of of diversity. A mainstream example would be affirmative action. — DingoJones
The specific method of “equality of opportunity” is usually about creating a system where everyone has a fair shot, an equal playing field.
I agree with your view and on looking at the output, that’s a good way to check what a systems actually doing but I was more talking about system design. Specifically, whether the idea of “equality of outcome” is better than “equality of opportunity”. — DingoJones
Yes, that was the point I was making. I think we are using terms a bit differently, I’m not sure we are in disagreement about the concepts. — DingoJones
The difference is that in the former, you earn your success, in the later you are given success regardless of what you do. — synthesis
Are you aware of another functioning economic system? Is feudalism still in operation? How about slavery?
Socialism is simply a transfer mechanism, and Communism is state capitalism, and communism, a pipe-dream. — synthesis
For a first approximation, that is probably a good strategy though. If, for a given field, you don't think there are any significant biological differences between the groups involved and the sample size is large enough, results should correspond to the makeup of the population in general. If they don't, something else is going on. Now something else is almost always going on, not necessarily something bad. But it's a legitimate cause for concern if the ratio is way off from what it should be given the makeup of the population. — Echarmion
I consider the dichotomy between equality of outcome and equality of opportunity to be a false one. The terms imply two distinct methods, when in reality it's not a question of method, but of goals. — Echarmion
The fact that they're no longer operational doesn't change that. — Echarmion
But think of all the liars who succeed! You never know who you can trust when they've lost credibility. Like you. Did you misquote me, or not? I mean, how can I pretend to trash your silly arguments on the merits when, at any time, you might say I said something I did not say? Isn't that the hall mark of a society that isn't based on merit? — James Riley
This isn't school.The difference is that in the former, you earn your success, in the later you are given success regardless of what you do.
— synthesis
* citation needed — Echarmion
Are you aware of another functioning economic system? Is feudalism still in operation? How about slavery?
Socialism is simply a transfer mechanism, and Communism is state capitalism, and communism, a pipe-dream.
— synthesis
Neofeudalism arguably exists. But regardless past economic systems did function. The fact that they're no longer operational doesn't change that. — Echarmion
I think socialism is alive and well in the United States. — James Riley
Asian income inequality in the US has many factors. The bottom line is that the average Asian American is behind the average non-Asian American. If your racial stereotype were accurate they'd be above the average. — praxis
Have you never lied? Are you somewhere above the rest of humanity? — synthesis
I don’t think the groups will naturally corespondent to the demographics. Certain professions for example attract certain kinds of people. These professions will naturally have more people of that certain kind. Some fields or areas will not have diversity because the interest in that field or area isn’t all that diverse. — DingoJones
I think you are using those terms idiosyncratically, and that’s why you think it a false dichotomy. Those two things are indeed two methods and they are mutually exclusive. — DingoJones
We should be happy to live in age where material is abundant. The economic system is what it is. You make it the best you can and move forward (the way you do everything else).
Everybody understands what your complaining about but its like yelling at the moon for keeping you awake at night. Some things are what they are. — synthesis
We should be happy to live in age where material is abundant. The economic system is what it is. You make it the best you can and move forward (the way you do everything else).
Everybody understands what your complaining about but its like yelling at the moon for keeping you awake at night. Some things are what they are.
— synthesis
Yeah, sure, economic systems can never be changed (except when they are). — Echarmion
I suspect your next move will be something like "Well, if I lied, I'm sorry, now can we move on?" BS. There is an element of knowing involved here. Confess your sins, my son. It will be cathartic! Then we can move on. It's hard to earn credibility, easy to lose it, and even harder to get it back. When you are in a hole, first stop digging. — James Riley
I shall try to make due in my world of not knowing anything at all. — synthesis
Based on what though? Why would interests just happen to line up with some unrelated demographic grouping? That'd imply precisely that the demographic grouping and the interest are not independent. — Echarmion
Can you tell me what the methods are, then? — Echarmion
Ah, Padawan, the first step in learning is to admit you don't know anything. — James Riley
What have you accomplished in this life? — synthesis
When a better system is possible, people will use it. Why wouldn't they? — synthesis
The problem with the present system is mostly corruption and this is problem with all systems. The simpler and more transparent systems are, the less chances there are for corruption, so this is why many believe that simplification (decreasing size and complexity) is the way to go.
The larger organizations become, the more inefficient they become (although Amazon seems to be an outlier). Governments are particularly prone to this syndrome as accountability is minimal. — synthesis
Based on the traits of each demographic. There are general trends within demographics. (Cultural, biological etc) — DingoJones
It would be specific to each case. It’s a question of what you are building the system to do (equality of outcome or equality of opportunity) and which way is better. The exact method used would be whatever is best suited to equality of opportunity — DingoJones
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.