Einstein: The Negro Question (1946) • Hacker News Board

Re: Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)

#71

Post by lnanek2 » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 7:04 PM UTC

mariodiana wrote: post #4

The thing I like is the reference to Aristotle. Today, there are some people who are too quick to brand anyone who disagrees with their enlightened views as a "moron" or worse. There's no winning hearts and minds that way. It's better to gently point out the mistakes of those who are otherwise worthy of respect, in the hopes that this will spur others towards self-reflection, than to castigate and put people on the d…

I think the Aristotle point is a very bad one. People captured in war are flat out inferior to people who won the war or battle. They lost and were enslaved after all. It immediately makes the person arguing for equality have to start falling back on, well, they are really equal in ability it is just they had poor circumstances or luck, trust me even though they lost they are equal!

If we had everyone in the country run a race and the fastest were forced to move to the west coast and the slowest forced to move to the east coast and we waited a generation, people would start saying west coast people are fast in general. And they wouldn't be incorrect. So I don't see anything wrong with Aristotle saying the group of people who end up slaves are inferior, they provably are because they've been tested and selected for failure.

Saying Greeks are superior to Iranians or some other general pronouncement about ethnicity and attributes may not be correct, the DNA of the human race is mostly the same between ethnicities anyway, but saying Greeks are superior to the group of people they defeated in battle and enslaved in person is a tautology.

Re: Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)

#72

Post by nyolfen » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 7:07 PM UTC

lexcorvus wrote: post #60

Many a sincere person will answer: "Our attitude towards Negroes is the result of unfavorable experiences which we have had by living side by side with Negroes in this country. They are not our equals in intelligence, sense of responsibility, reliability." I am firmly convinced that whoever believes this suffers from a fatal misconception. Although it has clear political implications, the last part of the quote-withi…

oh noo the racists will be called racist, such material oppression

Re: Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)

#73

Post by yummyfajitas » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 7:08 PM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #59

itjustdontwork wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately Why is it unfortunate? No white person in their right mind would honestly prefer to live in a half-black community over an all-white community. Sure, they may say they would to save political face, or to look benevolent or "tolerant" and progressive, but deep down? No. The difference in crime rates and quality of life is just astounding. To prefer to live amongst more blacks is to prefer to be more at r…

I think you need to take a look at crime statistics again. They're income-based, not race-based. In the United States, poor often also means minority, but it's not race that makes inner cities violent. It's destitution, and the desperation it causes.

I'm not remotely defending his thesis (and my life choices contradict his claims pretty well) but you are simply wrong about the crime stats. To choose one category of crime, blacks make up about half of of murderers. However, there are twice as many poor whites as there are poor blacks.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/c...

http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceeth...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_Sta...

Further, international comparisons suggest you are wrong about American-style "destitution" causing crime. I know many professionals (I live in India) who are far more "destitute" than any poor American (at least in terms of goods and services they can afford). Strangely they don't turn to crime at anywhere near the rates Americans (of any race) do.

Re: Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)

#74

Post by BuckRogers » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 7:08 PM UTC

lnanek2 wrote: post #71

mariodiana wrote: post #4

The thing I like is the reference to Aristotle. Today, there are some people who are too quick to brand anyone who disagrees with their enlightened views as a "moron" or worse. There's no winning hearts and minds that way. It's better to gently point out the mistakes of those who are otherwise worthy of respect, in the hopes that this will spur others towards self-reflection, than to castigate and put people on the d…

I think the Aristotle point is a very bad one. People captured in war are flat out inferior to people who won the war or battle. They lost and were enslaved after all. It immediately makes the person arguing for equality have to start falling back on, well, they are really equal in ability it is just they had poor circumstances or luck, trust me even though they lost they are equal! If we had everyone in the country…

I don't think one side losing in a war means anything at all about the individuals who participated. An army could have the best soldiers and lose due to the general (not to mention resources among other things including being on an off-day, or just mistakes).. I don't think what you're suggesting is anything but sophism. The same kind Aristotle was using.

That said, I do think Aristotle was insightful enough to realize this. Just a guess, but many times when people say stupid things there were social pressures to make these declarations in support of the existing society.

What you said, could easily be used in attempt to say American slavery was justified. Most people realize taking advantage of people is in no way a demonstration of superiority.

Have you ever made a mistake? Do you crush every mortal that crosses your path? I don't think so.

Re: Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)

#75

Post by schimmy_changa » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 7:08 PM UTC

schimmy_changa wrote: post #49

If this moves you, follow Einstein's logic to today's world and join in the struggle. There are marches today, consider this your invitation! SF: https://www.facebook.com/events/675598982556580/ Oakland: https://www.facebook.com/events/858052834217501/ NYC: https://www.facebook.com/events/959630214065046/ Boston: https://www.facebook.com/events/1559794327598726/ (and I'm sure there's one near where you live as well)

I am not sure why this is being downvoted... People are asking above "What, however, can the man of good will do to combat this deeply rooted prejudice?". One prong of this prejudice is the structure of our justice system, and participating in these marches can help that.

Re: Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)

#76

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 7:10 PM UTC

huxley wrote: post #67

mariodiana wrote: post #4

The thing I like is the reference to Aristotle. Today, there are some people who are too quick to brand anyone who disagrees with their enlightened views as a "moron" or worse. There's no winning hearts and minds that way. It's better to gently point out the mistakes of those who are otherwise worthy of respect, in the hopes that this will spur others towards self-reflection, than to castigate and put people on the d…

I don't think Einstein was being that nice, he was essentially saying that intelligence and education were not guarantees against bigotry and bias. Aristotle proposed in Book 1 of Politics that certain human beings were natural slaves, as different from the free citizens of Athens as human beings were from beasts. He argued that barbarians deserved enslavement because they lacked souls. Back in 1550, Aristotle was ma…

[deleted]

Re: Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)

#77

Post by anigbrowl » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 7:10 PM UTC

wutangson1 wrote: post #28

mariodiana wrote: post #4

The thing I like is the reference to Aristotle. Today, there are some people who are too quick to brand anyone who disagrees with their enlightened views as a "moron" or worse. There's no winning hearts and minds that way. It's better to gently point out the mistakes of those who are otherwise worthy of respect, in the hopes that this will spur others towards self-reflection, than to castigate and put people on the d…

Great point, even considering that Einstein seems to be taking Aristotle and ancient Greek dogma totally out of context. Perhaps, as was and is a tradition in academic circles, he was advocating that contemporary scientists were in fact better and more enlightened than the Greeks. Or, maybe it was a reaction against Hitler's fascination with the ancient Greeks. Yet, Aristotle did not present a clear belief system on…

Socrates' dialogues were documented/written by Plato, not Aristotle. While there was certainly a conception of universal potential in ancient Greek philosophy, I think there was also the comfortable assumption that enslaved peoples were inferior insofar as they had allowed themselves to be enslaved in the first place. You could draw a parallel with the relatively limited role of women in Greek society. I think it's this sort of confirmation bias Einstein was taking aim at.

Re: Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)

#78

Post by dangerlibrary » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 7:11 PM UTC

lnanek2 wrote: post #71

mariodiana wrote: post #4

The thing I like is the reference to Aristotle. Today, there are some people who are too quick to brand anyone who disagrees with their enlightened views as a "moron" or worse. There's no winning hearts and minds that way. It's better to gently point out the mistakes of those who are otherwise worthy of respect, in the hopes that this will spur others towards self-reflection, than to castigate and put people on the d…

I think the Aristotle point is a very bad one. People captured in war are flat out inferior to people who won the war or battle. They lost and were enslaved after all. It immediately makes the person arguing for equality have to start falling back on, well, they are really equal in ability it is just they had poor circumstances or luck, trust me even though they lost they are equal! If we had everyone in the country…

Einstein's point isn't that the Greeks didn't win, it's that Greek militarily superiority doesn't justify slavery.

Re: Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)

#79

Post by vidarh » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 7:12 PM UTC

swatow wrote: post #21

rogerallen wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you haven't seen this, there's even some math to explain how "today" came to be. http://ncase.me/polygons/

Mathematical models can be used to argue for a wide range of viewpoints. You could also write a model where people have different innate preferences over the lifestyle they want to lead, and so self-sorting is an unambiguously good thing. I understand that everyone wants "math" to be on their side, but it's not really mathematics that is doing the work here, it's your assumptions.

The maths does not favour a "side" here. The maths demonstrates the consequences of different distribution of attitudes. Dependent on your views, different parameters will lead to good or bad results.

What the model does demonstrate is that the set and distribution of viewpoints that will lead to desegrated neighbourhoods is far smaller than people tend to think. It is much easier to end up with segregation than most people would expect, even with predominantly mostly benign views in most of the population.

Re: Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)

#80

Post by lotsofmangos » Sat, Dec 13, 2014, 7:16 PM UTC

lnanek2 wrote: post #71

mariodiana wrote: post #4

The thing I like is the reference to Aristotle. Today, there are some people who are too quick to brand anyone who disagrees with their enlightened views as a "moron" or worse. There's no winning hearts and minds that way. It's better to gently point out the mistakes of those who are otherwise worthy of respect, in the hopes that this will spur others towards self-reflection, than to castigate and put people on the d…

I think the Aristotle point is a very bad one. People captured in war are flat out inferior to people who won the war or battle. They lost and were enslaved after all. It immediately makes the person arguing for equality have to start falling back on, well, they are really equal in ability it is just they had poor circumstances or luck, trust me even though they lost they are equal! If we had everyone in the country…

funnily enough, Aristotle said people captured in war as slaves were not true slaves, had the legal right to sue for freedom and that slaves were born slaves. He was completely against might makes right.

edit - also, his views on slavery somewhat stretch the definition of what we and most of his contemporaries would necessarily regard as slavery. This being Aristotle.

He is still really just excusing the slavery of his time however.

He states: "all are not either slaves by nature or freemen by nature, and also that there is in some cases a marked distinction between the two classes, rendering it expedient and right for the one to be slaves and the others to be masters: the one practicing obedience, the others exercising the authority and lordship which nature intended them to have. The abuse of this authority is injurious to both; for the interests of part and whole, of body and soul, are the same, and the slave is a part of the master, a living but separated part of his bodily frame. Hence, where the relation of master and slave between them is natural they are friends and have a common interest, but where it rests merely on law and force the reverse is true."

and also:

"And again, no one would ever say he is a slave who is unworthy to be a slave."

This would suggest that the easiest way to not be Aristotle's slave would be to tell him to sod off and do his own cleaning, though I suspect the reality may have been different.