View Single Post
  #228  
Old 10-18-2018, 12:41 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Are you even reading what you're writing?
Yes. If we are doing an analysis of racism in the law and you tell me how you lonely you felt in law school. That is not data.

Quote:
No, I'd call it a datum.
That is meaningless in this conversation. Data as we are discussing it is a pool of information that we can use to test a hypothesis. A single point of data is useless. An emotional rendition of that data through storytelling is more entertaining but just as useless.

Quote:
I'm not being insulting here, honestly, but are you a second-language English speaker?
Third but I speak and read at native levels. I think the confusion you are sensing is the result of thinking that all information is data. While the saying that "the plural of anecdote is not data" is too simplistic its not entirely inaccurate either. A couple of anecdotes is not really enough information to draw any conclusions or develop any sort of policy.

Quote:
"Logic and reason" is how you get gas chambers and Unit Unit 731.

Whee, this is fun. Ok, your turn for using argumentum ad passiones.
You started it. Logic and reason did not get us gas chambers. The desire to exterminate people did. Whether they used gas chambers or firing squads, it was the desire to exterminate that did it unless you think the extermination of jews was logical and rational.

Unit 731 was inhumane.

We are talking about CRT. Is CRT using loosey goosey emotional arguments to stop genocide or human medical experimentation? Of course not.

Quote:
Yes, funny that. Almost ironic, really...
I can point to where they are not being logical. Can you point me to where I am not being logical?

The scientific racists are not being rebutted by arguments that logic and reason can be ignored. They are being rebutted by better logic and reason. You are rebutting logic and reason with anecdotes, feelings and emotions.

You have the scientific racists cherry-picking information, ignoring other variables, and using the raw unanalyzed data to reach their conclusions (sort of like how iiandyiiii is taking 37 deaths out of 3000 to imply that cops like killing young black males). Objective facts, logic and reason are almost always better for minorities and the politically weak than subjectivity. If subjectivity is working in your favor, you have to wonder how politically weak you are.