No, but many people will derive the former from the latter. See the Levin link Chuck11 posted in the other thread for an exaxmple of this kind of thinking.
If the level of disparity is of such magnitude that it cannot be explained by reasonable differences in average ability, then that would consitutute evidence of discrimination.
I’m with Brazil, Shodan et al in what the primary issue of assumption of different average abilities for different ethnic groups is . But I don’t think you have to do away with statistical analysis either. Whether different groups have different average abilities is debatable, but it’s obvious that there is no group of which all members are retarded, and any disparity that needs to rely on that assumption for an explanation has to be explained otherwise.
Yes, you can say that, because you’re capable of reasoning and correctly interpreting statistical data.
My uncle, on the other hand, HAS uttered the phrase “Affirmative action is stupid, because those n*ers aren’t smart enough to be in college on their own and everyone knows it.”
Policy folk have been trying to figure out why ‘black kids aren’t learning’ for the last four decades. In the 70s, it was determined they ‘didn’t know English and that’s why they can’t read’. (See: Labov, who helped make the case for AAVE.)
The idea that ‘black kids won’t learn anyway’ is the driving force between many new education policy pushers.
In some areas, it’s called vouchers, school choice, reform, privatization. Today…we just blame it on teachers.
If it was discovered that blacks are generally smarter than whites it would be common topic of conversation. White guys are the only noholdsbarred targets left in America today. Any data pointing to white smarts would be summarily dismissed as racist.
What about blaming inequality on a more statistically successful group? Has that ever happened? Ashkenazi Jews would be expected to be overrepresented in cognitively demanding roles based on IQ. Perhaps you would prefer to attribute that to structural unfairness in favour of jews?
I wouldn’t say structural unfairness. But structure is a major part of it. If you look at educational institutions (schools, religious activities, family life), economic incentives and opportunities, and how educational activities are rewarded, you will likely find an explanation for how various communities approach education.
I thought it was Christians who were the last acceptable target in America. Or was it men? Or Republicans? Or fat people? Or maybe fat white Republican Christian men?
I mean, that Rush Limbaugh - how persecuted is that guy?
Actually, it’s a guy named Bob in Manhattan. You haven’t heard of him because, well, would you go out in public if you were the last acceptable target in America? Of course not.
Well there’s an asymmetry about the history and demographics of the US, hence an asymmetry about the way particular groups can be described.
Whites still make up the majority of the US population, and there are a great many current and past white americans of great distinction. Nobody would take seriously the notion that “All white people are the same”.
OTOH there are plenty of people that would think such things of minority groups.
This is one reason why you can poke fun at white people in a way you cannot about minorities (not that I do this myself).
Similar logic applies for men vs women. In the West at the moment I think that it’s much more tolerated being rude to/about men than women.
But again, you could consider it a response to our history which for a long time has been the other way round.
And no-one really takes things like “men are dumb” that seriously while the majority of, say, famous scientists, are men.
What have I distorted? The fact that you can’t debate what I’ve said in anything approaching a rational manner & then have the gall to say I’m distorting things is pitiful.