I mean no disrespect, but could you please refrain from making this discussion about specifically american politics?... Covid in america and Trump seem to usually distract the topic completely from its trails. I'm sure there are threads that are specifically about those things. — Qmeri
So, for me, this issue has seemed like culture and human needs stepping on the area of science and wanting to brute-force a specific result out of it, regardless of whether we have nearly enough data to make any such conclusions. — Qmeri
It's not a scientific statement. It's an a priori for a legal framework. It has an implication that all people are owed a reasonable degree of fairness as a result or implication of personhood. Which is in line with the concept of equitable.Or this way. Consider the proposition, "All men are created equal." What do you make of it? Is it true? Does science support it? Do you understand it? Does science even understand it? — tim wood
It's not a scientific statement. It's an a priori for a legal framework. It has an implication that all people are owed a reasonable degree of fairness as a result or implication of personhood. Which is in line with the concept of equitable. — Cheshire
Exactly the point. Clearly ftrom a scientific POV, no two things are the same or equal, ever. So were left with whatever the OP's point is, and I suspect he has no point because he has no real science. — tim wood
Forgive me if i'm wrong but I think you're talking more about the application of expression in freedom of speech, and how certain notions of thought are generally frowned upon, therefore not equalizing all forms of expression, and hence not a "freedom" of speech. Yeah, I think you would be correct on that, but is that especially bad? In my opinion there's just some things that should be considered "wrong" and deserve a lack of respect, because it has no merit to society to fuel those kind of thoughts. — john27
It seems that in our current culture, you are only allowed to be on one side of that scientific debate: "Genetics do not affect peoples performance or potential. And there absolutely are not even slight differences in the average capabilities of any human populations." Which would simply be an extraordinary and rare observation about a biological species, since evolution pretty much needs variation in capability to work and for many other reasons. — Qmeri
Quite a large portion of the "equality debate" at least in the internet seems to be about the scientific questions of how genes affect us, our performance and how different are we because of genetics. — Qmeri
Name two different human genetic populations.It seems that in our current culture, you are only allowed to be on one side of that scientific debate: "Genetics do not affect peoples performance or potential. And there absolutely are not even slight differences in the average capabilities of any human populations." Which would simply be an extraordinary and rare observation about a biological species, since evolution pretty much needs variation in capability to work and for many other reasons. — Qmeri
The title says the modern equality movement. A movement is not a methodology of discourse. I'm not sure what a methodology for discourse would be outside of legislative order and process. If you can figure out what your talking about; perhaps we can discuss it.You are not talking about the methodologies of discourse on equality — Qmeri
Its been my experience that if there is to be a discussion about something, it's useful to have some clarity about what that something is. And if in this case we are not to know what equality is, then your topic becomes, "This thread is about how people talk about X." Well, people talk about X in all kinds of ways; one might even say Y ways.But that is another topic... This thread is about how people talk about equality... You are continuously forcing this discussion to be about what equality actually is, — Qmeri
Name two different human genetic populations. — Cheshire
Perhaps you have a certain kind of equality in mind. Do you? If you do, what kind do you have in mind? — tim wood
The title says the modern equality movement. A movement is not a methodology of discourse. I'm not sure what a methodology for discourse would be outside of legislative order and process. If you can figure out what your talking about; perhaps we can discuss it. — Cheshire
Ps. This is a subject about the modern equality movement and its methodologies and how the discourse on the subject of equality has changed. It is not trying to argue or make claims about whether or not people are equal nor does it describe my views on that subject. — Qmeri
↪180 Proof its just a term I have come up with to describe how in modern western countries equality is fought for and defended... Everytime anyone does anything that promotes equality, he is technically a part of that equality movement... This subject is about the most usual methods equality is fought for and defended... And how some methods werent used that much in the past. — Qmeri
Name two different human genetic populations.
— Cheshire
Finns and the swedes, texans and new yorkers, ancient people in britain and ancient people in china, your family and the family next door... Any two different populations are two different genetic populations... And depending on what you study... For example trying to find possible genetic causes for a disease, or using ancient dna to figure out peoples movements and such about history... It is often very useful to compare the genetics of different populations. — Qmeri
In your subject of genetics, taking you to be able to speak with at least minimum authority on that topic, what even does equality mean? Or is it the whole ball game to say that equality in this (your) case means exactly equivalence with respect to some well-defined parameter or standard, and nothing else?
The idea being that value judgments of any kind no part of genetics. — tim wood
From time immemorial. But then it's not genetics any more but value systems and arguments and their uses and misuses. It's tempting to say we live in a nasty piece of history at the moment when values and arguments are perverted. But a closer reading of history shows that's nothing new. Is it your position that value judgements based on genetics are invalid as to the genetics itself - perhaps that no value judgments should be based on genetics?I don't think value judgments are or should be a part of genetics... But genetics can be used and is being used as justifications and arguments for value judgments. — Qmeri
And you want to determine their sameness? Or just place arbitrary value judgements on differences that you find appealing? Somewhere in-between perhaps? — Cheshire
From time immemorial. But then it's not genetics any more but value systems and arguments and their uses and misuses. It's tempting to say we live in a nasty piece of history at the moment when values and arguments are perverted. But a closer reading of history shows that's nothing new. — tim wood
Is it your position that value judgements based on genetics are invalid as to the genetics itself - perhaps that no value judgments should be based on genetics? — tim wood
This thread is about how people talk about equality... You are continuously forcing this discussion to be about what equality actually is — Qmeri
Wouldn't the concern be a function of the genes you carry and your counterparts family history regarding genetic disorders?Well, let's say I want to reproduce with someone, but it turns out that 80% of that persons family has a very serious genetic disorder. That would most certainly be a factor in my value judgment of whether I want to reproduce with that person. — Qmeri
This is rather specific. Is this what you have in mind primarily, but are avoiding discussing outright?And in terms of political value judgments... For example knowing whether or not and how much the differences in school test scores is affected by genetics makes a huge difference on what is the best way to deal with such differences. — Qmeri
This thread is about how people talk about equality... You are continuously forcing this discussion to be about what equality actually is — Qmeri
Nowadays, the modern equality movement does not respect the freedom of speech too much… At least where I live, arguing against people being genetically equal is pretty much a taboo and you get almost immediate social repercussions for it — Qmeri
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.