o_O.Q said:
sundin13 said:
I suppose I'll reiterate the original point I was making several pages ago, because this conversation has completely gone off the rails and I have no idea what we are talking about anymore:
Race lacks broad relevance as a classification system. As such, it should not be used as a classifier alongside broadly relevant variables such as age. That does not mean that physical characteristics cannot be used in describing an individual. What it does mean is generally two things: One, that grouping outside of those directly observable characteristics should not be performed in a broad setting (meaning that when such characteristics are not directly relevant, they should not be used by grouping by systems and institutions); two, it should not be used as a classification outside of the specific contexts where it holds relevance (note: classification systems are distinct from observations. This means that we should not assume things about an individual based on these characteristics as we would with characteristics such as age (other than those characteristics which are self evident)).
I have to assume that this will find a way to be misunderstood, but I've explained my point as clearly as I can.
|
1) "Race lacks broad relevance as a classification system. As such, it should not be used as a classifier alongside broadly relevant variables such as age."
so why are you advocating for the system described in the op where students are encouraged to pick a race?
shouldn't you therefore be completely opposed to it?
"classification systems are distinct from observations"
this is the most stupid thing i've read in this thread and that is saying something
|
1) This is a move which de-emphasizes race, so I do not believe supporting it contradicts anything I've said.
2) I explained that statement the sentence after I made it: This means that we should not assume things about an individual based on these characteristics as we would with characteristics such as age.
