• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Split Thread Diversity Equity and Inclusion and merit in employment etc

arthwollipot said:
How do we know that less than 21% of orchestral musicians in America are from minorities? We count them, of course.

If opportunity were equitable, we'd see correlation between those numbers and demographics. We don't. Therefore opportunity currently is not equitable.
Click to expand...
You're assuming that all ethnicities, all races, all communities, all sub-cultures are equally interested and excited about applying for all the same jobs equally.

The problem with DEI is it assumes this, when it very well may not be true. DEI also assumes anytime a job demographics does not totally represent the general racial and ethnic dynamics of the greater community, discrimination is afoot.



The basic idea that "where there is underrepresentation there IS discrimination", is highly illogical and flawed.
 
Last edited:
Trausti said:
You're definding the blank slate? I give you the 2024 US International Math Olympiad team, who took first place. White people (especially women) are underrepresented. Why? Lack of opportunity.

IMO-2024-full-team-2048x1089.png
Click to expand...
jt512 said:
Assumed without evidence.

Actually, assumed in the face of contradictory evidence. What percentage of kindergarten teachers are male?
Click to expand...

The people who elected Team Incompetent White Guy to burn down the country are absolutely who we should be listening to on this subject. The best and the brightest.
 
Last edited:
Hercules56 said:
You're assuming that all ethnicities, all races, all communities, all sub-cultures are equally interested and excited about applying for all the same jobs equally.

The problem with DEI is it assumes this, when it very well may not be true. DEI also assumes anytime a job demographics does not totally represent the general racial and ethnic dynamics of the greater community, discrimination is afoot.



The basic idea that "where there is underrepresentation there IS discrimination", is highly illogical and flawed.
Click to expand...

DEI does not assume that. DEI just wants to make sure everyone has access to the same opportunities.

Look at how badly Trump-voting mouth-breathers miss this important point.

The question isn’t why there aren’t more white people on a math team or male kindergarten teachers, but rather: Are white people and men afforded the same access to those opportunities?
 
johnny karate said:
DEI does not assume that. DEI just wants to make sure everyone has access to the same opportunities.

Look at how badly Trump-voting mouth-breathers miss this important point.

The question isn’t why there aren’t more white people on a math team or male kindergarten teachers, but rather: Are white people and men afforded the same access to those opportunities?
Click to expand...
You're wrong.

The logic of DEI is that wherever there is racial or ethnic underrepresentation, discrimination must be planned and afoot.

It's silly for you to suggest otherwise.
 
Hercules56 said:
You're wrong.

The logic of DEI is that wherever there is racial or ethnic underrepresentation, discrimination must be planned and afoot.

It's silly for you to suggest otherwise.
Click to expand...
And, as noted before, a lot has been lumped into DEI, both with good intentions and ill intentions. Hence, from the start, using "the logic of DEI" like that is a red flag.

Going further, that's not even really the logic for that subset topic. Rather, the concept you invoked there would be more accurately described as "whereever there is racial or ethnic underrepresentation that can reasonably be attributed to some extent to discrimination/artificial causes and the effects thereof, historical or current, action should be taken to right that artificially created situation." Certainly, what specific action should be taken is subject to debate and some suggestions are just bad, but that doesn't somehow make all DEI logic some single arbitrary favored or unfavored line of attempted argument. Given how pervasive and long-lasting said artificial causes in the US have been, of course, trying to pretend that distinctly less than even a single lifetime is enough time to make discrimination itself vanish like magic, much less the effects of many generations of discrimination and suppression, is far more silly than claiming that discrimination has no part in how things play out.

In practice, much disproportionate representation truly is related to discrimination. Not all, certainly, and even where that's in play, it's often not the only factor in play, but that's just reality. Corrective suggestions vary, but there's a huge conceptual difference between efforts to allow the interested, but historically discriminated against, to lift themselves up and close the gaps if they have the desire and efforts to force some arbitrary forced outcome to close the gaps immediately. Just about all who support DEI support the former. Relatively few support the latter.
 
Last edited:
Aridas said:
And, as noted before, a lot has been lumped into DEI, both with good intentions and ill intentions. Hence, from the start, using "the logic of DEI" like that is a red flag.

Going further, that's not even really the logic for that subset topic. Rather, the concept you invoked there would be more accurately described as "whereever there is racial or ethnic underrepresentation that can reasonably be attributed to some extent to discrimination/artificial causes and the effects thereof, historical or current, action should be taken to right that artificially created situation." Certainly, what specific action should be taken is subject to debate and some suggestions are just bad, but that doesn't somehow make all DEI logic some single arbitrary favored or unfavored line of attempted argument. Given how pervasive and long-lasting said artificial causes in the US have been, of course, trying to pretend that distinctly less than even a single lifetime is enough time to make discrimination itself vanish like magic, much less the effects of many generations of discrimination and suppression, is far more silly than claiming that discrimination has no part in how things play out.

In practice, much disproportionate representation truly is related to discrimination. Not all, certainly, and even where that's in play, it's often not the only factor in play, but that's just reality....
Click to expand...

Very few if any attempts have ever been made to prove this.

It is simply accepted dogma. Because some people think it simply makes sense. And because some people simply want this to be the reason.
 
Hercules56 said:
Very few if any attempts have ever been made to prove this.

It is simply accepted dogma. Because some people think it simply makes sense. And because some people simply want this to be the reason.
Click to expand...
It's like looking at the demographics of the NHL or the NBA and simply assuming this is due to discrimination. Which we all know is absolute ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊.
 
Hercules56 said:
Very few if any attempts have ever been made to prove this.

It is simply accepted dogma. Because some people think it simply makes sense. And because some people simply want this to be the reason.
Click to expand...

The idea that there haven’t been countless studies demonstrating exactly what Aridas is talking about might be the dumbest claim I’ve seen since you claimed that undocumented immigrants don’t pay income tax. Just profoundly deep ignorance.
 
Hercules56 said:
Very few if any attempts have ever been made to prove this.

It is simply accepted dogma. Because some people think it simply makes sense. And because some people simply want this to be the reason.
Click to expand...
Accepted dogma that generations of discrimination and suppression have had real effects? There's plenty of evidence of that, across the board. Even skipping over the more direct applications there, the effects of those generations of wrongs on the average wealth of said group, alone, and many things related to that would easily produce various disparities that don't easily vanish, much less the cumulative cultural effects.

How much effect for any specific case in question does vary significantly, of course, depending on a bunch of factors. Going back to orchestras, because they're a relatively easy example that's been discussed well enough in this thread to provide more of a base, average wealth is a fundamental aspect in which groups are more likely to even compete. To borrow words from another, for ease's sake -

Black musicians’ low participation in American orchestras often begins with issues of access and resources. It is expensive to become a working classical musician, and even more expensive if you want to play in a professional orchestra. In addition to owning a quality instrument, attending summer festivals to extend your training year-round, and taking auditions that can cost upwards of $1,000 per trip, you also have to have access to the knowledge that will help you be successful during this process. This information is usually held by teachers and mentors with professional orchestra experience, who can shed light on the ins and outs of navigating blind auditions and advancing through multiple rounds. Yet the cost of lessons and coachings with these teachers places this critical knowledge behind a paywall.
Click to expand...

That is absolutely a fundamental issue at hand there when it comes to the question of why there's disproportionate representation in the field. Not even remotely the only one, but one that is certainly affected by the generations of discrimination and suppression that continually increased the average racial wealth gap. It's also not an issue that the orchestras themselves can meaningfully address, unlike the issue of hiring discrimination which changing to blind auditions has done much to address for the musicians. The various disparities shrunk after switching to blind auditions and that was a DEI success story. That a small subset continued to push for much more radical action and to try to force an arbitrary composition outcome, as I expect they likely had been even before blind auditions were adopted, does not negate that.

Much more could be said, of course, but I think that's enough there for the moment.

Hercules56 said:
It's like looking at the demographics of the NHL or the NBA and simply assuming this is due to discrimination. Which we all know is absolute ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊.
Click to expand...
I think that I'm just going to sum this up as a category error argument and an appeal to overgeneralization. Sports teams hiring is not particularly representative of more normal hiring practices, given that as theprestige pointed out, they're far more of a product than a normal employee is. I'm also going to say that we don't all know that that is absolute ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊. Not least because, again, direct discrimination is rarely the only factor in play when it comes to disparities. Also, as orchestras switching to blind auditions easily demonstrates, removing the opportunity to judge based on irrelevant factors like skin color does have real effects on overall composition, even if it doesn't magically make various underlying issues vanish.
 
Last edited:
Hercules56 said:
Its a fair analogy.

NHL and NBA clearly dont reflect the demographics of their city or country. But nobody makes a fuss over it.

Why?
Click to expand...

Unless there’s a reason to think that anyone is being denied access to the opportunity to be in the NHL or NBA due to discrimination, I’m not sure why you would expect anyone to make a fuss.
 
johnny karate said:
DEI does not assume that. DEI just wants to make sure everyone has access to the same opportunities.

Look at how badly Trump-voting mouth-breathers miss this important point.

The question isn’t why there aren’t more white people on a math team or male kindergarten teachers, but rather: Are white people and men afforded the same access to those opportunities?
Click to expand...
Can you explain how you are able to tell if someone has been affored opportunity just by looking at their skin color? Is this some divine power gifted to you by angels?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom