Judge Rules Harvard’s Race-Conscious Admissions Constitutional?
“Even assuming that there is a statistically significant difference between how Asian American and white applicants score on the personal rating, the data does not clearly say what accounts for that difference,” she wrote. “In other words, although the statistics perhaps tell ‘what,’ they do not tell ‘why,’ and here the ‘why’ is critically important.”
Wow. This is an example of exquisite reasoning. That police officers could pull the trigger more often on an innocent black person than on an innocent white person may not really be an issue because the "what" may be known but not the "why".
That Hitler committed genocide may have been acceptable if we didn't know of his anti-semitic stance, right? Of course, knowing only the what" "without the why" is exculpatory.
That Hitler committed genocide may have been acceptable if we didn't know of his anti-semitic stance, right? Of course, knowing only the what" "without the why" is exculpatory.
When do we understand that the "why" doesn't change the what". Sooner or later, if you dig long enough" every why will have an innocent enough explanation.
Focusing on the emotional (or social) why" over the rational "why" is a sure way to get rid of any clarity. Read this https://vbala99.blogspot.com/2019/01/family-tv-serials.html.
Read also the sequel to this post. (https://vbala99.blogspot.com/2019/10/molesting-isnt-crime.html).
Additional reading
Read also the sequel to this post. (https://vbala99.blogspot.com/2019/10/molesting-isnt-crime.html).
"Any algorithm that intentionally or not results in discriminatory treatment of women or any other protected class violates New York law,” from the link below.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/billybambrough/2019/11/11/iphone-maker-apples-new-credit-card-has-an-awkward-problem/Additional reading
No comments:
Post a Comment