You can’t back yours up. I can’t back mine up. Mine stands, by default.
You don’t get to declare that your position is the default position. That’s ridiculous. Argue your points or drop them. Don’t just say that your opinions are the default and expect everyone else to just accept that. Do you think that is going to fly here?
Nope, you’re wrong here too. When we have plenty of evidence that something existed in the past, the default position barring contrary evidence is that the thing still exists.
Thank you. Unlike you, I did substantiate my views to the greatest extent possible with historical and current data. However, you are far better at trying to stall.
Ha! Sorry, but you’re just making this up. We don’t need to look to the past to glean what people think today. Hell, it’s probably the worst way to arrive at where the thinking is. You’re placing an ridiculous burden on an opponent to to “prove” that some bad piece of thinking from the past is no longer commonplace. You just made this up because if people buy into it it helps your argument. I’m not buying it one bit.
You don’t have to buy it, since you already agreed that those caricatures are in fact caricatures (most of them, anyway) that are at least somewhat widely held. My “default” argument was a direct response to Terr’s “default” argument; demonstrating that, in such a discussion, the argument can be stated in a way that can make any assertion the “default” assertion.
Again, “known” or “recognized” does not equal “held” or “believed”.
- they needn’t be linked to the past. 2) Just because a belief existed in the past does not make the default position that it exists now.
Do I really have to prove to you, with evidence, that the world isn’t flat, the sun doesn’t revolve around the sun, and that a black man can, in fact, hold high elected office?
Please.
Since nobody has lifted a finger to try to support this contention - or anything at all other than crime stats - it really doesn’t matter if the burden of proof is large or small.
They’re identical to the caricatures of the past. I asked Terr if this was a coincidence, and he didn’t answer. You can answer if you like.
There’s a great deal of evidence it does exist now, ranging from movies to some of the stereotypes you’ve posted yourself. We just can’t cite survey data for how many people believe each stereotype because nobody’s polling for that as far as I know.
Can you name any other beliefs that are so widely “known” or “recognized” throughout society, that no one actually “holds” or “believes”? How can such things become so well known if no one at all actually believes them? Can you explain that phenomenon? Sounds pretty out there to me.
I take it you missed my second sentence on an edit.
I already have seen such evidence, so I already believe it. No idea what your point is here.
Yes, I did not see that second sentence. But my point is that you can’t just take some belief held in the past and assume that is still a belief held in the present, unless someone can provide you with evidence that it is not the case. You’d be imposing a ridiculous burden of proof on every facet of a discussion.
Did I say “no one”? I am sure there are some. Just not widely held.
As for an example - ok. Flat Earth. Everyone recognizes it. Very few believe it.
I’m not sure everyone recognizes that view, and the stereotypes iiandyiii posted were a good deal more specific. How they came to be widely known if nobody believes them is still a mystery you haven’t explained. I posted an example of another stereotype that’s been a significant part of U.S. political discourse for 30 years, so I think that’s pretty widely believed. Of course the view of black men as scary violent predators has a place in our politics, too.
The notion that a stereotype from a hundred years or so ago should be the default for what people think now is ridiculous in the extreme. In fact, the default should take into account the very obvious changes that have been made and assume that those stereotypes no longer exist. THAT is a more reasonable default position. It may not necessarily be true, but it’s more reasonable as a starting point.
Terr has admitted the widespread belief in several of these caricatures (black men are violent, aggressive, dangerous, etc.) – he just thinks they’re “true”, so they don’t count as caricatures.
I just looked at the “revolving door” ad that you linked to - did you realize there are like a dozen or more criminals going through the revolving door and only one is black?
Too bad it’s true. I showed you a very clear demonstration of how black men were viewed in the late 19th century and you can see for yourself how well it matches up with what’s being posted in this thread and how our culture looks at black men. This stuff about defaults is bullshit anyway, as Terr didn’t initially object to the idea that these ideas exist and only started arguing about the “default” later, presumably because it makes his argument look bad.
Your grasp of the irrelevant is impressive. Willie Horton’s face is on the screen for half of that 30-second ad. It’s also worth noting that Lee Atwater was responsible for that ad, and he would later acknowledge that a lot of his campaign work for Republicans was racially tinged and exploited the public’s distrust of black people.
As Marley23 has noted, there is plenty of evidence in the form of media depictions and other cultural artifacts for these stereotypes still being in existence. Polling, which in this sort of thing may be nearly impossible because so many of these stereotypes are unconscious, might be mostly unhelpful on this question.
That’s a completely different argument, i.e., that caricatures are not caricatures if they reflect enough of reality. We can argue that cleanly without bringing up beliefs people had a hundred years ago. In fact, that’s what has been argued. His argument is based on modern day crime statistics.