Delaware students can now choose their own race (Yes, RACE!) under new regulations.

[o_O.Q]

sundin13 said:

o_O.Q said:

1) i never argued that the classifications people use are necessary, but i was arguing that they are inevitable

is necessary to call social awkward people nerds? is it necessary to call attractive women babes? is it necessary to call people who play video games gamers?

 

2) "If you don't wish to answer my question"

""To conclude, I will first ask, why would it be harmful to move away from skin color based classification systems?""

as i stated above and in my other posts its not about whether its harmful or necessary, its about human behavior and our endless attempts to make sense of our environment which leads always to categorisation

to look at this as whether its about necessity or harm is stupid because the assumption is made that you can just snap your fingers and turn off human behavior where you don't want it manifesting itself

3) "What loss in utility is present by allowing self-identification within a school system which does not allow any form of discrimination based on race?"

asking students to identify as one option out of a set of options is inherently discriminatory... since they are choosing one over the other

you understand that is the definition of discrimination right?

1) So you think that we should maintain race as a broad classification system in schools because people will use it to describe people anyways? That doesn't really make sense. Should we also put an area to define whether you are a slut, nerd or bitch on the SAT?

2) Then why the big fuss about the use of race in schools? I am not arguing against the use of words, I am arguing against the reification of them. If you don't believe that any harm will come from this regulation, why complain about it? What is the problem here? 

3) That is ridiculous. It is discriminating against words, not people. That is like saying "how can a school say it is anti-discriminatory when it utilizes HP brand printers? WHADDABOUTDELL?!" 

 

This seems absurd to me. It seems like you are trying to tell me there is absolutely nothing wrong with the school's decision and no conceivable harm that will come of it, but you will argue against it because you like calling people black. Not only is that a non-sequitur, but it is also a ridiculous defense of race as a concept.

"So you think that we should maintain race as a broad classification system in schools because people will use it to describe people anyways?"

lol i love how you took a general conversation and to run away from the point you specified it down to a level i was not addressing

 

"Then why the big fuss about the use of race in schools? I am not arguing against the use of words, I am arguing against the reification of them. If you don't believe that any harm will come from this regulation, why complain about it?"

same answer as above

 

"That is ridiculous. It is discriminating against words, not people."

no, come on now, this id about them picking their race and you yourself said that the school does not allow for discrimination based on race

so its completely contradictory and that's the inevitable end result of this relativistic nonsense

but don't get me wrong i don't object to the policy, i'm just saying that based on what you said it contradicts itself

 

". That is like saying "how can a school say it is anti-discriminatory when it utilizes HP brand printers? WHADDABOUTDELL?!" "

well this would be relevant if you specified it to discrimination between pc manufacturers... to reiterate as you yourself said the school is against discrimination based on race and yet this policy is all about encouraging discrimination based on race

 

" It seems like you are trying to tell me there is absolutely nothing wrong with the school's decision and no conceivable harm that will come of it"

well i never said that i don't think harm will come from this because i actually do, i think it'll add to the new trend of people throwing objectivity away to indulge in fantasy but that's besides the point, i'll reiterate that i don't object to the policy

 

"you will argue against it because you like calling people black. Not only is that a non-sequitur, but it is also a ridiculous defense of race as a concept."

well i never said that i personally like identifying people by their race... all i said is that classifications based on appearance (which includes regardless of whether you acknowledge reality or not includes the physical characteristics used to identify race) are inevitable

for example, that will likely play a big part in you selecting your girlfriend or boyfriend

 

"Not only is that a non-sequitur, but it is also a ridiculous defense of race as a concept."

i suppose to be ridiculous i'll just again if you are denying that unless a person is blind they'll be able to differentiate between a black guy and an asian guy?

i mean you've already conceded this.... so i'm not really getting how you can justify posting this nonsense again?