Outlawing certain word combinations… is that how you personally stop believing in something? — NOS4A2

No. That was a cheap shot at certain Republicans. I guess I'm just frustrated with them.

Is this about banning CRT and LGBTQXN in elementary schools?

Banning "Latinx" and the rainbow flag on public property.

What Mr Adams did is inexcusable (ie, there’s no reasonable excuse and explanation to make it completely OK).

It is not unforgivable, though. IF... he would disavow his statements, and apologize SINCERELY (not a clever non-apology), perhaps we could all learn from this experience.

He refuses however. He’s cranked up the speakers playing Tom Petty’s song “I Won’t Back Down” waving a rattlesnake flag. He is a rock. He is an island.

Wonder if he’ll purge his music collection of anything influenced or performed by Blacks or other non-Whites. Might be slim pickings. He can keep his Schlager music albums thankfully! :cool:

Banning "Latinx" and the rainbow flag on public property.

Public property is state property. The state decides the flags, like you get to decide what flags go on your property.

Both parties seek to ban “latinx” from use in official state nomenclature like they would any other offensive term.

Public property is state property. The state decides the flags, like you get to decide what flags go on your property. — NOS4A2

I understand that. I don't think they're addressing an existing problem, though. They're just stretching their bigotry muscles.

Both parties seek to ban “latinx” from use in official state nomenclature like they would any other offensive term. — NOS4A2

Why is it offensive?

Did someone say it was a sin? I said it was false, unjust, and pernicious. — NOS4A2

You wrote:
"Adopting it [false taxonomies] for good intentions or for whatever other reason doesn’t absolve one of it."

This suggests that there is something inherently wrong with what you call 'false taxonomies'. That all false taxonomies, or maybe just this particular one, have an intrinsic property of evil or whatever. I don't know the metaphysics of how inherent negative properties bind with false taxonomies.

Going back to the example of red and green apples, if you recall I pointed out earlier that they are of the same species and appear nearly identical other than color. If I'm not mistaken the categorization of red/green apples would qualify as a 'false taxonomy', according to your thinking. Now if I were to adopt this false taxonomy, say I was at a farmers market and innocently requested a green apple from a farmer, you seem to think that I would require absolution for this transgression. That can't be right, can it?

Are you implicitly racist? — NOS4A2

I'm pretty sure that I have implicit racial biases, yes. Actually, I'm rather explicitly racist against Portagee's due to some young adult experiences.

I would avoid the equating of human races to breeds, or in your case, different cultivars of apples, because those arise through artificial selection, whereas human variation does not. We’ve cultivated the varieties of apples and the taxonomy reflects those varieties. The taxonomy of plants lack the influence of social, cultural, and political factors. Comparing human phenotypical difference to differences between breeds have historically been used to justify discrimination and cruelty.

No one said anything about intrinsic properties of evil. I explicitly said they were false, unjust, and pernicious.

I'm pretty sure that I have implicit racial biases, yes. Actually, I'm rather explicitly racist against Portagee's due to some young adult experiences.

How do you know you have implicit racial biases if implicit bias is unconscious, and you are unaware of them?

The taxonomy of plants lack the influence of social, cultural, and political factors. — NOS4A2

You just pointed out that varieties of apples are cultivated by humans. :lol:

How do you know you have implicit racial biases if implicit bias is unconscious, and you are unaware of them? — NOS4A2

One way subconscious biases are revealed is in snap judgments where there's no time for consideration.

You just pointed out that varieties of apples are cultivated by humans. :lol:

Would you compare human races to dog breeds?

One way subconscious biases are revealed is in snap judgments where there's no time for consideration.

So because of this you believe you hold a racist attitude towards certain out-groups.

Would you compare human races to dog breeds? — NOS4A2

Dog breeds are also cultivated by humans. They're influenced by social and cultural factors, in other words, though not necessarily political as far as I can tell.

So because of this you believe you hold a racist attitude towards certain out-groups. — NOS4A2

You apparently consider "holding a racist attitude" and "having implicit racial biases" to be synonymous. :roll:

Would you compare human races to dog breeds? — NOS4A2

Dog breeds are also cultivated by humans. — praxis

Comparing humans to animals is a very slippery slope as we don't treat humans as we do animals, even if many think (as I do) that humans are just intelligent animals.

we don't treat humans as we do animals — ssu

If only that were true. :broken:

Anyway, NOS is still trying to explain why adopting a “false taxonomy” requires absolution when applied to humans but not to anything else… I think. He stated that humans are special because they’re influenced by “social, cultural, and political” factors. I pointed out that both apple and canine varieties (also “false taxonomies”) are also influenced by human social, cultural, and perhaps even political factors. In fact, they wouldn’t exist at all without the influence of humanity and its culture.

If only that were true. :broken: — praxis

I agree, and that's why we ought treat humans better.

I pointed out that both apple and canine varieties (also “false taxonomies”) are also influenced by human social, cultural, and perhaps even political factors. In fact, they wouldn’t exist at all without the influence of humanity and its culture. — praxis

Taxonomies are good if you can answer some specific questions with using them. Otherwise they aren't so important.

And other animals have affected other species and the environment too. Besides, if it wasn't for one freaking asteroid, dinosaurs would likely roam here and humans wouldn't have inherited this planet (if perhaps not even evolved).

The philosophical problem is that as we are intelligent animals, we can harness our environment and other species to lengths that hasn't happened earlier on this planet, however when we are animals, we are part of the environment too. So, why the difference between us and the biosphere, when we don't make such with other animals?

And you were trying to explain why apple varieties and dog breeds were false taxonomies, and how they relate to anything we’re talking about. In so doing you’ve dug yourself into a racist hole, like Scott Adams.

Right, apparently according to your thinking I’m both an appleist and a canineist.

No, a racist, because you think the taxonomy of races is as valid as the taxonomy of apples and dog breeds, and you admit you hold racial biases.

No, a racist, because you think the taxonomy of races is as valid as the taxonomy of apples and dog breeds, and you admit you hold racial biases. — NOS4A2

Where have I stated that the taxonomy of homo sapiens, canines, or apples is valid? I’ve explicitly stated that each are varieties of their respective species.

Also, it appears to be intentionally misleading to say “hold” racial biases because it implies that I embrace racial biases.

Your troll game is weak this morning.

The philosophical problem is that as we are intelligent animals, we can harness our environment and other species to lengths that hasn't happened earlier on this planet, however when we are animals, we are part of the environment too. So, why the difference between us and the biosphere, when we don't make such with other animals? — ssu

If that’s not rhetorical could you rephrase the question?

I don’t know what you’re stating, to be honest, besides that you harbour racial biases. That’s probably the clearest thing you’ve come up with. We can leave it there.

Again your trollish phrasing with “harbor”, suggesting that I welcome biases.

From your last couple of posts it now looks like you think that adopting the “false taxonomy” of race is racist because it could only be adopted by someone who believes that different races are actually different species. That’s plain stupid, quite frankly.

I bet you do not welcome racist biases at all and that it must pain you to have them. You have my pity.

I don’t really care how you think things look because you haven’t been able to portray with any accuracy what I’ve been saying and I’ve had to correct and clarify too many times to mention. A futile exercise apparently. Have fun.

↪NOS4A2 ...
Your troll game is weak this morning. — praxis

:sweat:

I don’t really care how you think things look because you haven’t been able to portray with any accuracy what I’ve been saying and I’ve had to correct and clarify too many times to mention. — NOS4A2

No, I’m afraid that I got it right in the last post. :grimace:

Everything I say suggests something for you except what I actually suggest. I love being told what I think.

I would suggest that you do more than suggest and actually explain but that is clearly too much to ask of you. One thing is certain, your unwillingness to explain yourself, as well as your trolling behavior, further demonstrates your intellectual dishonesty. I suggest that you somehow become more intellectually honest. It will benefit everyone, including yourself.

So intellectually honest are you that you like to lie about what I said. But at least you were honest enough to admit your racism. So kudos for that.

So intellectually honest are you that you like to lie about what I said. — NOS4A2

Where exactly did I lie?

I bet you do not welcome racist biases at all and that it must pain you to have them. You have my pity. — NOS4A2

So intellectually honest are you that you like to lie about what I said. But at least you were honest enough to admit your racism. So kudos for that. — NOS4A2

Racial biases are pretty much ubiquitous. They're built into the structure of our societies and therefore into the structure of our minds. The best we can do is recognize their reality, not feed them in our behavior but analyse and resist them.

You're conflating those who recognize their biases and potential prejudices (as we all should) with racists who embrace them and act them out.

I could be wrong, but I think this is what NOS is on about. If this link doesn't work for you, just google "Race Social Construct".