Do you think there is strength in diversity and something that should be sought

[Grooveriding]

Define diversity, and then tell me where that diversity stems from. Do you find utility in hiring a few pedos to your company to get some diversity?

This is a silly statement. I'm pretty sure no one took my statement as meaning lets bring sexual predators in.

 

[UglyCasanova]

What makes you certain of these assertions?

Because people from different economic classes have radically different life experiences. People from similar economic classes have similar life experiences.

 

[Maxima1]

Of course not, what gave you such a ridiculous idea? It would be insane to think that sexism isn’t part of it though.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/amygut...-engineering-students-are-women/#53eb5f2444de

Wow, we must be so sexist. XD

 

[fskimospy]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/amygut...-engineering-students-are-women/#53eb5f2444de

Wow, we must be so sexist. XD

Wait, I thought women were secretaries and not engineers because they innately wanted to be secretaries?

Hmmm. The more you know.

 

[jackstar7]

Because people from different economic classes have radically different life experiences. People from similar economic classes have similar life experiences.

Cool. But what makes those experiences "more better" than those of different genders, skin colors, etc.?

 

[UglyCasanova]

Cool. But what makes those experiences "more better" than those of different genders, skin colors, etc.?

I’m not saying they are better or worse, only that they are more distinct. If what we are going for is diversity of thought to not fall into groupthink then socioeconomic differences would provide the greatest distinction.

 

[urvile]

I’m not saying they are better or worse, only that they are more distinct. If what we are going for is diversity of thought to not fall into groupthink then socioeconomic differences would provide the greatest distinction.

How does that help with employing poor white trash for example. If I want to employ a fitter they need to have done a 4 year apprenticeship. So even if the guy is white and from a different socioeconomic background how can I employ him if he doesn't have the right qualifications and a black guy does? Also it would make sense to grab some darkies out of the hood and give them jobs at fortune 500 companies. It would really disrupt the industry. Do you think everyone's position in society is defined at birth by the socioeconomic tier their parents reside on? Or is there more to it?

Seriously I need to know.

 

[pcgeek11]

No shit Sherlock.


My post in no way implied all white people are racist. My post implied that whites that feel like they are the great victims of society and yet despite all the oppression they experience they still come out as the master race are racist. If it made you feel guilty, that's your problem.

LOL no guilt here.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Not sure. Diversity of thought was implied to be the said goal and you’ll get a much greater diversity of thought by having people from different socioeconomic backgrounds than anything else. Let’s assume equally qualified people with the requisite training.

 

[urvile]

Not sure. Diversity of thought was implied to be the said goal and you’ll get a much greater diversity of thought by having people from different socioeconomic backgrounds than anything else. Let’s assume equally qualified people with the requisite training.

Cool dude. Works for me.

 

[pmv]

Japan is a special case, I think. They are an island nation and densely populated. That combination has conspired to prevent ethnic diversity, not an abhorence of foreigners. China, OTOH, has for thousands of years had a culture of isolation to some extent, I have heard, a mistrust of foreigners. Perhaps that is changing, I think it must be. Modernization has certainly changed things there, but there are probably undercurrents from all those centuries of mistrust.

I think you underestimate, massively, the degree to which cultural and social attitudes contribute to the lack of ethnic diversity in Japan. They don't really want immigration (though they might be starting to rethink given their current problem with an aging population). Heck, the country was completely barred to foreigners (and Japanese people banned from going overseas) for, what, over a century? Indeed you seem to have misattributed Japan's historical culture of extreme isolation to China. Of course China had it's own form of isolationism, but it was never as extreme as Japan's, and besides, China is so large as to be quite diverse in itself.

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

(Japan does have a Korean minority population, presumably a consequence of having at one point had a colonial relationship to Korea...I read somewhere that Korean-Japanese are now "more Korean than the Koreans", similar to what I've heard people sometimes say about Irish-Americans)

 

[pmv]

No, I'm not. Ill try and explain this further.

Government is a 3rd party that is influencing the transactions they are not directly involved in. Your premise was this...

"How well do markets work in countries that are in chaos or run by fascist or communist regimes?"

So, your definition was a government that is in chaos, fascist, or communist. There is no reason a market would fail given your premise other than the government influence. Markets work all the time outside of regulation by a government. That is not to say that markets work without regulation, because, the whole point of markets is self regulation. Its just that the regulation is emergent and not done by a government. There are many 1st and 2nd parties that can have enough power to disrupt a market and they would not be government.

All said though, the very premise you presented was one where outside actors could influence markets. There is no need for regulation in that case except to prevent others influencing. So, going back to the context of all this, I still see no reason to place rules on ideas and to simply let an unregulated market form.

But you are just presuming you can neatly label the involved and 'third parties' to transactions. You can't, that's the problem. Transactions take place in a context of a society full of different groups. Who is to say who is the 'third party'? Before you can have such a transaction you have to say who owns what in the first place. To do that involves third parties.

In any case we were talking about the 'marketplace of ideas'. That marketplace absolutely involves 'third parties', unavoidably so.

You just have this very particular view of human society, as a collection of individuals in a vaccuum, bouncing off each other one at a time, like particles. That's an idea, but its not one that you can demand everyone else has to share. That's the problem. It's why 'diversity' always has its limits, why you will only get diversity within a certain range, after the ground rules have been set, which by definition prioritise some ideas over others.

 

[pmv]

I work at a community college and they did something different one year. They put posters of people with tattoos up all over campus. I felt ashamed to even work here. It sickened me to have to see that up on the wall. If you want a Tattoo go get one. However, it is just a stupid Idea and I think it makes people look gross and scary. My advice is dont get a tattoo. I feel we received a beautiful body at birth and we should just accept that, not use it like a coloring book. Maybe I am just a traditionalist.

Nah, you are just an amusingly random forum poster. But, er, thanks for the advice.

I wouldn't want a tatoo myself, because I don't need a reminder that life is just the steady accumulation of irrevocable consequences of innumerable regrettable decisions. I mean, not having a tattoo doesn't make that any less the case, but it makes it easier to avoid admitting it to oneself. So I'm with you on that much at least.

 

[fskimospy]

Not sure. Diversity of thought was implied to be the said goal and you’ll get a much greater diversity of thought by having people from different socioeconomic backgrounds than anything else. Let’s assume equally qualified people with the requisite training.

1) What is the basis for this?

2) There’s no reason you can’t pursue both cultural and economic diversity.

 

[realibrad]

This is a silly statement. I'm pretty sure no one took my statement as meaning lets bring sexual predators in.

So then expand on your statement to exclude that, but further your point.

 

[brycejones]

LOL no guilt here.

or self reflection, empathy, etc, etc,

 

[UglyCasanova]

1) What is the basis for this?

2) There’s no reason you can’t pursue both cultural and economic diversity.

Not sure what you mean what the basis is, are you saying people from different socioeconomic backgrounds don’t have radically different life experiences?

 

[fskimospy]

Not sure what you mean what the basis is, are you saying people from different socioeconomic backgrounds don’t have radically different life experiences?

No, I’m saying what is the basis for the idea that economic differences create larger perspective shifts than other differences? That might be true, but I’m not aware of strong evidence for it or even how you would measure it.

Regardless, it’s not an either/or proposition. There’s no need to choose one or the other, let’s do both!

 

[realibrad]

This is a silly statement. I'm pretty sure no one took my statement as meaning lets bring sexual predators in.

Its what you call a softball, allowing you to easily hit it. Also, in the 2 sentence post I wrong, there was a question in there. I see that you responded to the softball, but you did not respond to the question. I can understand if you just wanted to signal that you like "diversity" but its actually quite a complex conversation. So if you dont mind, can you expand upon the question that I asked you in the first of only two sentences?

 

[Starbuck1975]

No, I’m saying what is the basis for the idea that economic differences create larger perspective shifts than other differences? That might be true, but I’m not aware of strong evidence for it or even how you would measure it.

Regardless, it’s not an either/or proposition. There’s no need to choose one or the other, let’s do both!

There is also a compelling case to do neither. The whole field of systems engineering and process mapping characterized variation and diversity as a source of inefficiency and waste.

Diversity sometimes make sense to enhance certain systems, but it can also equally be a source of friction.

There is no absolute answer.

 

[realibrad]

But you are just presuming you can neatly label the involved and 'third parties' to transactions. You can't, that's the problem. Transactions take place in a context of a society full of different groups. Who is to say who is the 'third party'? Before you can have such a transaction you have to say who owns what in the first place. To do that involves third parties.

So what in your opinion does the government need to do here? In my opinion your original context was to say that the governments were breaking the market, so more government would not fix that problem.

In the broader context, I still see no reason to have government involved in people exchanging and debating ideas. In this case ownership is whomever has the belief or idea. It does not require the government establishing ownership as this is beliefs and ideas.

In any case we were talking about the 'marketplace of ideas'. That marketplace absolutely involves 'third parties', unavoidably so.

Yes, but ideas are not damaging, actions are. So the 3rd party here would simply be people learning about other ideas and beliefs. No regulation needed. I already addressed the children thing, but Ill do it again here, kids are not part of this and should be excluded.

You just have this very particular view of human society, as a collection of individuals in a vaccuum, bouncing off each other one at a time, like particles. That's an idea, but its not one that you can demand everyone else has to share. That's the problem. It's why 'diversity' always has its limits, why you will only get diversity within a certain range, after the ground rules have been set, which by definition prioritize* (the British spell this wrong so I fixed it) some ideas over others.

First I am not demanding anything, so please choose your words more accurately so as to not cause any confusion.

I am confused as the the purpose of your explanation of my stance, because you did not explain how it was wrong. So until I can better understand it, I don't know if I agree or disagree with what you think my position is.

That said, people do interact as individuals. Even in group settings, people can only express things from their own mouth. Unless you are telling me that the Borg Collective has come to earth, and if that is the case then I need to find 7 of 9 right now and will not have any further time for this.

 

[realibrad]

Hey, this thread is fun for the most part.

 

[Atreus21]

Down here in aus we have a huge resources industry. Women work on mine sites in various roles. From driving Cat mining trucks* to cleaning. It pays really well regardless of role because it is fly in fly out work on remote sites.

Also mine sites run 24/7 so it's 12 hour shifts and depending on the length of the swing it can be 7 days followed by 7 nights with a shift change in between. None of the female employees ever come home pregnant. I am not really sure what you are getting at. Because they are attractive they are sluts? All women are sluts? A woman's place is to give birth and rear children? I don't get it.

I'm saying that women and men attract. And in areas that are dominated by one sex, the sudden introduction of a single attractive member of the opposite sex will lead inevitably to trouble.

 

[fskimospy]

There is also a compelling case to do neither. The whole field of systems engineering and process mapping characterized variation and diversity as a source of inefficiency and waste.

Diversity sometimes make sense to enhance certain systems, but it can also equally be a source of friction.

There is no absolute answer.

Process mapping has exactly zero to do with ethnic diversity. Wtf.

By the way I don’t think that you ever acknowledged that you didn’t read and/or understand my initial cited empirical evidence for the benefits of ethnic diversity. Do you have a cogent rebuttal yet?

 

[fskimospy]

I'm saying that women and men attract. And in areas that are dominated by one sex, the sudden introduction of a single attractive member of the opposite sex will lead inevitably to trouble.

And so the best way to mitigate that trouble is not to discipline employees violating company standards or committing crimes, it is to deny employment to the victims.