You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Viliam_Bur comments on November 2014 Media Thread - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: ArisKatsaris 01 November 2014 03:42PM

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

Comments (154)

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

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 02 November 2014 11:31:36AM *  8 points [-]

But then why do these stereotypes remain stable across generations?

Not defending the progressives in general here, but there are two very simple explanations for your question.

1) Some stereotypes don't remain stable across generations.

For example, I heard that in the past, pink was considered a "boy color" and blue was considered a "girl color"; or that it was believed that black people would be bad at sport. So, some stereotypes change and some don't; and we would need a meta review to find out whether there is something special about those unchanging stereotypes, or whether it just means that if you flip a coin two or three times, sometimes you will get the same result repeatedly.

2) If a stereotype already exists, it is more easy to keep believing in the existing one (confirmation bias) than to invent a new one.

(Disclaimer: None of this is meant as a general proof that all stereotypes are incorrect. It's only an explanation of how a stereotype that happens to be wrong could remain stable across generations.)

Comment author: Azathoth123 03 November 2014 01:24:15AM 2 points [-]

If a stereotype already exists, it is more easy to keep believing in the existing one (confirmation bias) than to invent a new one.

Except as you've just pointed out:

Some stereotypes don't remain stable across generations.

Comment author: satt 03 November 2014 05:36:19AM 9 points [-]

Identifying a mechanism pushing towards outcome X is not inconsistent with observing that sometimes the outcome not-X happens.