Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

hurdurnotavailable t1_j5fwb1f wrote

Reply to comment by DeltaVZerda in Racial diversity in top tech & biotech companies [OC] by teamongered

There is no problem unless there exists evidence that the differences in outcome are coming from discrimination. This evidence has never been provided... instead it is simply assumed to be true, almost like an axiom (which isn't justified tho). That's why the US' obsession with race is so irrational, while seeming reasonable on the surface.

−16

kdavis37 t1_j5gkn6r wrote

There's never been evidence provided that there's racial discrimination in the workplace, especially related to hiring? Am I understanding your claim correctly?

22

hurdurnotavailable t1_j5gl8qg wrote

There's has never been evidence provided that would justify the claim that the differences in outcome are solely or mostly due to discrimination. There are many other variables that are better at explaining those differences.....

Read "Discrimination and Disparities" from Thomas Sowell to better understand this issue.

Edit: Somehow my comment got messed up. Reddit editor really doesn't like copy&paste.

−11

ZurakZigil t1_j5hqmf5 wrote

...are you for real? Like you have to be joking

8

kdavis37 t1_j5gmyxb wrote

You should read anything from an actual sociologist instead of a talk show host's assistant.

5

YouAreInsufferable t1_j5irsuw wrote

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2821669/

Just one piece of the paper citing other papers on discrimination:

>These include studies that have examined the relationship between discrimination and schizophrenia among ethnic minorities in the Netherlands (Veling et al. 2007), burn-out in U.S. medical students (Dyrbye et al. 2007), daily moods among multi-ethnic U.S. adults (Broudy et al. 2007), cognitive impairment among black and white university students (Salvatore and Shelton 2007), and current rates of psychiatric disorders in a national sample of Asian Americans (Gee et al. 2007b). Discrimination has also been associated with homesickness among college students (Poyrazli and Lopez 2007) and conduct problems among adolescents (Brody et al. 2006).

J Behav Med. 2009 Feb; 32(1): 20.

0

DelcoScum t1_j5g79uo wrote

The problem is that even if the outcome isn't being influenced directly, it is still being influenced.

If the previous generation of your family/community statistically migrated to a career path, you are more likely to follow. For demographics that were discriminated against, this means that they still feel the effects of that discrimination, even though they might not have actually faced the same discrimination (they do, for the record, but were just talking in theory).

So do you ignore the problem or create small changes, and allow the minority to continue to feel the effects of those previous generations, but at the same time being more fair to the current candidates?

Or do you Overcorrect temporarily in an attempt to stimulate those communities and create normalcy throughout every demographic, but at the same time admittedly create a new kind of discrimination?

It's a nuanced discussion with no clear answer. At the end of the day skilled jobs are finite, so someone is going to lose out.

5

vacri t1_j5hmc1r wrote

I like how you ask for evidence of difference in outcome... when the word 'discrimination' itself inherently means a difference in outcome. If someone is discriminated against, it's because they've had a difference in outcome.

What other words in English do you require evidence for their definitions?

−1

hurdurnotavailable t1_j5hsg15 wrote

.... there are other variables that can explain differences in outcome, besides "discrimination". Not sure what you don't understand about that.

2