A thing that I find interesting here is the relative weighing of different types of inadmissible evidence in the same instance. For example: I am your exemplar white southerner. However, I also wear all black and tall stompy boots, and generally present as some variation of goth/punk. Neither of these things are properly admissible for most social purposes, but in some social contexts the appearance will make it very apparent I am not racist, and in some contexts it makes it harder to convince people of that.
As a largely irrelevant but amusing aside, the demographic from whom I receive the most compliments on my boots is middle aged and elderly black ladies.
The word stereotype is tricky. We tend to use the word stereotype interchangeable with delusional racist prejudices and the like that are either completely made up or so out of proportion in terms of probability or extent that they got a massive negative information value compared to assuming the person behaves like a random person without the attribute one attaches that stereotype to.
My intercultural theory prof used to have a part in his lecture where he would talk about how the human mind could not work without stereotypes to deal with the world's complexity and how we should stop pretending to have non, rather aim for the right ones, be aware that individual variation is stronger than variation between groups, be aware of the biases, start to correct ones stereotypes if one knows more about a cultural subgroup etc.
Essentially, a large part of applied intercultural research is about getting the right stereotypes and know the limits of application without pretending to never use them, one would learn there. He convinced me. A few years later, he would give up on the word and make up a new word for non-delusional stereotypes, confusing everyone. So much to the defence of stereotypes in general.
Now if the white Southerner applies for an NGO with a great CV, I’d say we are already at the point where the general white southerner stereotype is not just tactically inadmissible, or where it is no excuse since we got high stakes, time and opportunity to collect specific information, but also already wrong for the subgroup of white Southerners who apply for NGO jobs with great CVs.
A thing that I find interesting here is the relative weighing of different types of inadmissible evidence in the same instance. For example: I am your exemplar white southerner. However, I also wear all black and tall stompy boots, and generally present as some variation of goth/punk. Neither of these things are properly admissible for most social purposes, but in some social contexts the appearance will make it very apparent I am not racist, and in some contexts it makes it harder to convince people of that.
As a largely irrelevant but amusing aside, the demographic from whom I receive the most compliments on my boots is middle aged and elderly black ladies.
Never.
We disagree: http://paulgraham.com/heresy.html
What specific feature of Paul Graham's article do you think is contradictory to mine?
That truth is more important.
In what way do you see the refusal to use information against someone as a denial of the truth?
How do you not?
The word stereotype is tricky. We tend to use the word stereotype interchangeable with delusional racist prejudices and the like that are either completely made up or so out of proportion in terms of probability or extent that they got a massive negative information value compared to assuming the person behaves like a random person without the attribute one attaches that stereotype to.
My intercultural theory prof used to have a part in his lecture where he would talk about how the human mind could not work without stereotypes to deal with the world's complexity and how we should stop pretending to have non, rather aim for the right ones, be aware that individual variation is stronger than variation between groups, be aware of the biases, start to correct ones stereotypes if one knows more about a cultural subgroup etc.
Essentially, a large part of applied intercultural research is about getting the right stereotypes and know the limits of application without pretending to never use them, one would learn there. He convinced me. A few years later, he would give up on the word and make up a new word for non-delusional stereotypes, confusing everyone. So much to the defence of stereotypes in general.
Now if the white Southerner applies for an NGO with a great CV, I’d say we are already at the point where the general white southerner stereotype is not just tactically inadmissible, or where it is no excuse since we got high stakes, time and opportunity to collect specific information, but also already wrong for the subgroup of white Southerners who apply for NGO jobs with great CVs.