taboosRecently, a question was asked that referred to racial inequalities, and generated a response of “you are scum”, which is currently the highest-voted answer for that question. Such responses attempt to divert attention away from the question being asked by placing the questioner under attack. This has led me to wonder if any questions or topics really should be treated as taboo and we are right in diverting attention away, or if we should be open to all questions. This applies to this forum, but more generally, to all of society.
In “Breaking the Spell”, Daniel Dennett considers the possibility that certain beleifs, such as religion, might have benefits to the believer even if they are false, but only as long as the believer doesn’t examine those beliefs too closely. As he puts it, it is plausible that by asking too many questions and breaking the spell of those beliefs, we will end up rendering them ineffective (similar to telling a patient that they’re really taking a placebo) and thereby doing real harm. All things considered, though, Dennett comes down on the side that even though this risk exists, we should still examine the history, natural causes, benefits, and downsides of religion because the potential benefits of understanding these things outweigh the risks of breaking their spell.
Should similar reasoning apply to all areas of life, or are there some things that should rightfully be considered taboo? For example, is it wrong to ask questions, with scientific rigor, about whether there might be racial inequalities when it comes to intelligence and/or physical strength? Would it be acceptable to ask whether a family of 4 that is starving would be justified in abandoning their weakest member so that the rest of them have a hope of surviving? Should we consider the question of whether feeding the hungry in Africa hurts us all by exacerbating the population explosion that will take us all down if left unchecked?
Please note that I do not intend to make this a discussion about the points just raised. They are merely examples of controversial questions on topics that have “obvious”, socially acceptable answers - of course racism is wrong, and of course all human life is sacred and no one should be intentionally sacrificed for the benefit of others. Would society be harmed by being forced to really consider those questions and risk coming down on the “wrong side”? Or should we be open to all questions, and feel secure that whatever answer is derived from the facts will be the “right” one?
Obviously some questions will be off topic and should be closed. Some will be asked in a way that is antagonistic and should be at least edited. No new rules needed.
Otherwise, I don't know how to address this question without addressing the racism/intelligence question referenced. First, the question was not asked very well. Some background was supplied that didn’t support the actual question asked and the question as phrased at the end of the OP didn’t match up to the question in the title.
You might note that I commented on the “scum” post and said we should give the guy a chance. I then read one of the links he supplied and immediately understood James Cape’s answer. There are times when rather than diverting attention away from the question, a post like this that focuses on the questioner is perfectly valid. Equating race with intelligence is beyond simply being politically incorrect. If someone wishes to discuss it, they need to supply some valid science, not the confused ramblings in the articles linked. One need only read those links to understand that I am addressing the topic.
You can find some additional comments in my answer and you might note that he/she was here for 2 days and has not returned, leaving many feedback questions unanswered. All of this indicates that it is not worth our time to address this particular question. As much as I would like to give everyone in the world complete respect and listen carefully to everything they have to say, sometimes you have to filter out the scum.
score: 0
I suspect Taboos like this change with the times. Knocking someone for their religion is semi-taboo in the US today. Proposing any sort of non-cultural cause for gender differences in professional outcomes is almost taboo in present day academia, i.e. it can be career damaging or career ending. And as you mentioned race.
I think this is related to recent cultural struggles, that are either incomplete , ongoing or very recent, and that have created extreme sensitivities among some parts of the population [psycholigcal scarring even] (but only subpopulations we have some sympathy for count). A hundred years ago, interracial marraige could have been classified as taboo (heck I remember growing during the 60’s civil rights era, and the notion was massivley shocking! [And this was the liberal pro rights northeast]), but now is taken for granted. Pedophilia was taken for granted during Roman times, but is absolutely taboo today.
I am a big track and field fan and I cannot remember when was the last time I’ve seen an athlete who was not black in the finals of the olympic games, world championship or major meetings 100m dash race. Over the last 20 years I watched at least 50 of these finals and the finalists were almost exclusively black. Using inductive reasoning I conclude that when it comes to running speed, black athletes are superior to athletes of other races.
Further more, when I look at other professional sports like NBA and NFL where pure athleticism is of high importance I also notice that black athletes heavily dominate these sports and conclude that black athletes are just physically superior to athletes of other races even though I do realize that this is not a scientific study but a simple observation.
Does this simple observation make me racist? Does it make me scum?
I don’t think so, and I don’t think that any topic should be off the table or a taboo.
If I was stranded in a fire, unable to move, and a fire fighter had to come and rescue me I would certainly hope that this fire fighter would be able to lift 220 pounds and there are very few elite female athletes in the world who could accomplish this while most male fire fighters who spend time in the gym would not have a problem with this weight. Therefore I would hope that the fire fighter coming to my rescue would be a male fire fighter.
Does this make me sexist?
I don’t think so as it is quite obviouse to any observer that is not extremely politically correct that on the average a male human being is physically stronger than a female human being. Does this mean that men are superiror to women? Absolutely, when it comes to strength there is no doubt in my mind that men are superior to women. Obviously, there are other human qualities where woman would be superior to men and there is nothing wrong with that, men and women are just different no matter how much our politically correct society tries to convince us the opposite.
When it comes to intelligence however, it is not possible to rely on simple observations and a series of very serious scientific studies would be required to establish if there is any varicance of average IQ by race. I see no reason such studies should not be conducted, and I’m pretty sure that even if any variance was established it would not be significant enough to label any race as less intelligent but to oppose any such a study or studies or label it as racist is just plain stupid. There should be no taboo areas for scientific research as long as it is ethical and causes no physicall or psychological damage.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.