Airedale comments on Some Thoughts Are Too Dangerous For Brains to Think - Less Wrong

15 Post author: WrongBot 13 July 2010 04:44AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (311)
Tags: rationality identity psychology bias

Comments (311)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 13 July 2010 12:07:34PM 13 points [-]

I’ve also observed that people who come to believe that there are significant differences between the sexes/races/whatevers on average begin to discriminate against all individuals of the disadvantaged sex/race/whatever, even when they were only persuaded by scientific results they believed to be accurate and were reluctant to accept that conclusion. I have watched this happen to smart people more than once. Furthermore, I have never met (or read the writings of) any person who believed in fundamental differences between the whatevers and who was not also to some degree a bigot.

This is something I haven't observed, but it's seemed plausible to me anyway. Have there been any studies (even small, lightweight studies with hypothetical trait differences) showing that sort of overshoot? If there are, why don't they get the sort of publicity that studies which show differences get?

Speaking of AIs getting out of the box, it's conceivable to me that an AI could talk its way out. It's a lot less plausible that an AI could get it right the first time.

And here's a thought which may or may not be dangerous, but which spooked the hell out of me when I first realized it.

Different groups have different emotional tones, and these kept pretty stable with social pressure. Part of the social pressure is usually claims that the particular tone is superior to the alternatives (nicer, more honest, more fun, more dignified, etc.). The shocker was when I realized that the emotional tone is almost certainly the result of what a few high-status members of a group prefer or preferred, but the emotional tone is generally defended as though it's morally superior. This is true even in troll groups, who claim that emotional toughness is more valuable than anything which can be gained by not being insulting.

Comment author: Airedale 13 July 2010 03:38:36PM *  9 points [-]

I’ve also observed that people who come to believe that there are significant differences between the sexes/races/whatevers on average begin to discriminate against all individuals of the disadvantaged sex/race/whatever, even when they were only persuaded by scientific results they believed to be accurate and were reluctant to accept that conclusion. I have watched this happen to smart people more than once. Furthermore, I have never met (or read the writings of) any person who believed in fundamental differences between the whatevers and who was not also to some degree a bigot.

This is something I haven't observed, but it's seemed plausible to me anyway. Have there been any studies (even small, lightweight studies with hypothetical trait differences) showing that sort of overshoot? If there are, why don't they get the sort of publicity that studies which show differences get?

I would also be interested in hearing if there are any studies on this subject. For me, much of WrongBot's argument hangs on how accurate these observations are. I'm still not sure I'd agree with the overall point, but more evidence on this point would make me much more inclined to consider it.

Also, WrongBot, it seems possible that the observations you've made could have alternate explanations; e.g., the people that you have witnessed change their behavior based on scientific results may not have been as originally unbiased or reluctant to change their minds on these subjects as you had believed them to be.

In other words, there may be a chicken/egg problem here. Did these people that you observed really become more bigoted/discriminatory after accepting the truth of certain studies, or did (perhaps subconscious) bigotry actually lead them to accept (and even seek out) studies showing results that confirmed this bigotry and gave them "cover" to discriminate?

Comment author: WrongBot 13 July 2010 06:29:06PM 2 points [-]

I didn't look hard enough for more evidence for this post, and I apologize.

I've recently turned up:

  • A study on clapping which indicated that people believe very strongly that they can distinguish between the sounds of clapping produced by men and women, when in reality they're slightly better than chance. The relevant section starts at the bottom of the 4th page of that PDF. This is weak evidence that beliefs about gender influence a wide array of situations, often unconsciously.

  • This paper on sex-role beliefs and sex-difference knowledge in schoolteachers may be relevant, but it's buried behind a pay-wall.

  • Lots of studies like this one have documented how gender prejudices subconsciously affect behavior.

  • And here's a precise discussion of exactly the effect I was describing. Naturally, it too is behind a pay-wall.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit