Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by orangeblobman:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by orangeblobman:
No no, not at all. But lets use our common sense. No one would hold that sign up and expect it to be interpreted in a positive way. I am not for playing games and setting traps. Like I said, common sense would dictate that that kid on the bike meant it in a bad way. I am not saying the parties were good or bad, I was not involved and am not very political in nature, but really, what is the use of making that sign?
Well I agree that it is generally bad when any group does not have diversity. I'm a psychology professor and I teach a course on stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination, actually, and enjoy this topic a lot. Prejudice can occur at many levels of conscious awareness. I don't think many of these people are intentionally or consciously racist or prejudiced. Some may be but I suspect most are not and are generally good people who have just developed very different attitudes than I have and than most of our country right now. "Less conscious" prejudice (which we call implicit prejudice) is a much more complicated topic.
[Edited by - bonn1997 on 04-18-2009 12:17 PM]
Why is it bad when a group does not have diversity? It is worse, I feel, when diversity is thrust upon a population that is, was, doing fine without it. So, as a psychology professor, do you think that forcing diversity on a population might have something to do with these 'less conscious' prejudices?
You'll have to explain what you mean by "forcing diversity" if you want me to answer the question. If you're talking about affirmative action, then my answer is no, prejudice was around way before affirmative action and will continue regardless of what happens with affirmative action. Based on my own readings of the literature, I believe prejudice, or at least a preference for those most similar to us and a bias against those dissimilar, is an inherent component of human existence. The best we can do, in my opinion, is to try to reduce it and have programs that compensate for it in areas where scientific studies show that prejudice is abundant.
RE: Diversity: There's a lot of evidence that groups of people with diverse opinions and experiences tend to make better decisions than homogeneous groups. I'm not going to go into it in detail but suffice it to say this was one of the many reasons the (mostly Republican-appointed, btw) US Supreme Court ruled a few years ago in favor of affirmative action programs.
So, you believe that a preference for those most similar to us is an inherent component of human existence, and yet your opinion is that we should reduce it? Eat and breathing is an inherent component of human existence as well, should we try to reduce this?
And as far as diverse opinions and experiences resulting to better decisions, sure, I agree. But the word 'diverse' is applied in too broad of a way in this sentence. There are different types of diversity.
As far as what I meant by 'forcing diversity'-- just the fact that this back and forth started when I questioned the intentions of the stoner on a bike is evidence of a forced diversity. Otherwise, the comment about the kid on the bike wouldn't have led us to the issues we're discussing now.
WE AIN'T NOWHERE WITH THIS BUM CHOKER IN CARMELO. GIVE ME STARKS'S 2-21 ANY DAY OVER THIS LACKLUSTER CLUSTEREFF.
4/18/2009 7:55 AM
