= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Jiro comments on Stranger Than History - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (329)
It means "yes according to what you literally said, no according to what you'd have to mean for what you're asking to make any sense".
The reduction in discrimination against Jews has a progressive component and an anti-progressive component. So literally speaking, a "significant part of the reason there is less discrimination" is progressive. But the whole thing is not.
Since you have specified that the club is WASPy, you are no longer asking whether someone would approve of discrimination against Jews, you're asking if they would approve of discrimination against Jews and in favor of white Christians--a subcategory of that. It is entirely plausible that that subcategory of discrimination is more supported by the right, while discrimination against Jews in general is not
Also, the question asks if P(not progressive|discrimination) is large. Even if this is true, it would not imply that P(discrimination|not progressive) is large.
I didn't ask about the whole thing -- I asked about a "significant part." But anyway, let's do this: Please tell me the three most prominent American industries over the last 50-years in the United States where (1) there has been a reduction in employment discrimination against Jewish people; and (2) the reduction was primarily anti-progressive in terms of its' "component."
So are you saying that reduction of discrimination against Jews in favor of White Christians probably is, for the most part, consistent with modern progressive political views?
And even if that were true, it wouldn't matter. Because the real question is which is more consistent with modern progressive political views -- continuing to keep Jews out of the country club or letting them in. I take it you concede that it's the latter?
But I brought up the example. To refute the example, you have to show that discrimination against Jews in general has gone down due to progressive thought, not just that a component of it has.
Now you're asking about whether P(no discrimination|progressive) > P(discrimination|progressive), which is a different question. The answer to this one is also "yes to what you just literally asked".
It's also true that P(no discrimination|not progressive) > P(discrimination|not progressive).
That may be so, but I was asking a question in order to understand and scrutinize your position. When I ask a question, and instead of just answering it you guess or imagine what argument is behind the question, and then respond to the argument and don't answer the question, it increases the confusion and makes me suspect you are trying to dance around the issues.
Actually not, I was asking exactly what I asked. Anyway, I take it you concede that reduction of discrimination against Jews in favor of White Christians probably is, for the most part, consistent with modern progressive political views?
When you ask a question that is very peculiar as a request for information, but completely understandable as an attempt to make a fallacious argument while maintaining plausible deniability about exactly what your argument is, that increases the confusion too.
Perhaps, but I have not done so. Anyway, the simple way to respond to such a question and deal with the issue is to say "Yes, I agree with X but I don't think it undermines my position for reason Y. Are you trying to make argument Z?"
I did answer it/ The answer is yes.
:confused: The post you are responding to does not contain a question I have asked you. Besides which, it has taken a lot of patience to get answers out of you.
I assume that just now you were responding to this question:
I don't claim that there is an industry where the reduction in discrimination against Jews is primarily anti-progressive, but rather where the reduction is in approximately equal measures progressive and anti-progressive.
Ok, can you give me 3 examples of such industries?
Also, are you saying that reduction of discrimination against Jews in favor of White Christians probably is, for the most part, consistent with modern progressive political views?
Pretty much every industry that has a lot of people who aren't progressive.
Same answer as before: the answer to the literal question you asked is "yes", but the answer to a version of it that is meaningful would be "no". That question as you ask it has no bearing on what you're using it to prove.
So can you please name 3?
Well perhaps it does and perhaps it does not, but it's useful to understand what we agree about so as to get a bettter handle on what we disagree about.
So, just so we are clear, you agree that just looking at discrimination against Jews in favor of White Christians, reduction of this type of anti-Semitism is consistent with modern progressive political views. Agreed? (And yes, I totally understand that you don't believe that this fact rebuts your position.)
I deduce that it has decreased in many industries from the fact that it has decreased in general. This means that I know that it has decreased in more than 3 industries without being able to name 3 industries. Of course, I could name three random industries and have a high chance of being correct, but if I did so you could then complain that I had no statistics specific to each one.
:confused: I am not just asking for industries where job discrimination against Jews has decreased. I am asking about industries where job discrimination against Jews has decreased AND according to you that reduction is roughly equal in terms of progressive and non-progressive components.
I take it you are unable to identify even one such industry?
I will accept that discrimination against Jews has decreased in pretty much every industry. But that's not the critical issue in this exchange and you know it perfectly well. Your claim is that there exist industries where the reduction in job discrimination against Jews is roughly equal in terms of progressive and non-progressive components. I am very skeptical that any such industries exist and I would like you to name 3 AND show me your evidence that this is the case for them.
Can you even name three American industries which have had a reduction in discrimination against Jews in hiring which reduction was NOT reduction of discrimination against Jews in favor of White Christians?
Just like discrimination against Jews has decreased in pretty much every industry, discrimination against Jews has decreased with a non-progressive component in pretty much every industry too (except for industries that don't have many non-progressives).
Please name three such industries. If it's "pretty much every industry," it should be extremely easy for you.
Also, note that you claimed there exist industries where the reduction in job discrimination against Jews is roughly EQUAL in terms of progressive and non-progressive components. I am very skeptical that any such industries exist and I would like you to name 3 AND show me your evidence that this is the case for them.
Finally, can you even name three American industries which have had a reduction in discrimination against Jews in hiring which reduction was NOT reduction of discrimination against Jews in favor of White Christians?
Quite likely this is the last time I will ask you for evidence or examples to back up your claim. If you continue to fail to provide them, I will conclude that you have nothing to go on besides your own wishful thinking.