Racism and Deskism

What is “racism”? Why is the belief that the appearance and origin of a desk has a good correlation with the desk’s value and usefulness not known as “deskism”, and why is “deskism” unlikely to to destroy one’s career, whereas the belief that the appearance and origin of a human has a good correlation with various desirable or undesirable characteristics is a horrid and unthinkable sin.

Use of the word racism

Use of the word racism

Racism, sexism, and so forth, is the act of using the same kind of reasoning to make inferences about people, as one would use to make inferences about anything else.

Thus in all of history there was never such a word, until the twentieth century, for in the twentieth century, various thoughts about this world have been prohibited, in much the same manner, and for much the same reasons, as various thoughts about the next were prohibited in earlier centuries.

Now some people will say that racism is irrationally making inferences from someone’s appearance and origins, but in practice, no application of Bayes theorem to particular individual cases that includes this kind of information will ever be accepted as rational, thus no application of this information in any real life situation will ever be accepted as rational – though of course those crying “racist” will make an unprincipled exception for themselves.  Knowing that visiting certain parts of the city will surely get them assaulted, they don’t go there, and they spend stupendous amounts of money to ensure that their kids do not go to school with blacks.

Tags: ,

3 Responses to “Racism and Deskism”

  1. Bill says:

    Now some people will say that racism is irrationally making inferences from someone’s appearance and origins, but in practice, no application of Bayes theorem to particular individual cases that includes this kind of information will ever be accepted as rational

    Yes, this is absolutely maddening. Economists have the term “statistical discrimination.” This term just means using Bayes Rule in the context of race/sex/etc. I would say a substantial majority of economists think that statistical discrimination is a social ill which we should work to destroy.

  2. Zach says:

    The art of not hurting people’s feelings is where accusing someone of “Racism” was spawned.

    I’ve argued other places that to accept “Racism” as is usually accused in many cases, is to abandon true rationality and observation.

    What you now call inference. I now call logical and rational observation.

    There are no losers; therefore there are no true winners. Every single person is capable of what every other person is capable of. To say otherwise requires an aroma of rationality, and thus exudes an aroma of truth, and thus is racist. Why is it racist? Because someone doesn’t like it. Thus the truth must be filtered through a lens than finds everything acceptable to most if not all of the populace. If not logically acceptable, then acceptable through explanation with true meanings hidden and strict logical meanings, false.

    The truth hurts, and insofar as it hurts, it is probably true.

  3. Matt says:

    The performance “artist” and the Swedish bureaucrat are merely ahead of the curve.

    If everything is racist, then nothing is. Taken by itself, that might be okay. The problem is that earlier they redefined indecency as a subcategory of racism, so now nothing can be indecent anymore, either.

Leave a Reply