Discrimination is inevitable

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Discrimination is inevitable

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

When you go to the store, what did you buy? When you wake up in the morning, how did you dress? (if you dressed at all) Who are your friends? Who did you marry?

I can bring up numerous more examples. In every case, choice is made which we must do every day. We always discriminate towards and we discriminate against. It's inevitable and unavoidable.

PhilX
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by commonsense »

Discrimination is inevitable. It just isn’t universal. Those who discriminate are those who have discriminating tastes. Those who do not, have not.

Why is discrimination inevitable? How do discriminating tastes come to be? Is discrimination a feat of nature or of nurture? How useful is discrimination? Are there instances where discrimination is not possible? Is it right or wrong to apply discrimination to race? Creed? Color? Religion? National origin? Sexual orientation? Gender? Age? Or on the basis of other characteristics?

Aren’t these questions worthy of discussion?
User avatar
Vendetta
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:28 pm
Location: ehville

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by Vendetta »

Philosophy Explorer wrote:When you go to the store, what did you buy? When you wake up in the morning, how did you dress? (if you dressed at all) Who are your friends? Who did you marry?

I can bring up numerous more examples. In every case, choice is made which we must do every day. We always discriminate towards and we discriminate against. It's inevitable and unavoidable.

PhilX
Doesn't the term discrimination imply an unjust mistreatment of an individual or perhaps object? If one is making a choice simply because that is what must be done, they don't have any negative bias against that which they did not choose.
Discrimination is active and requires effort. Simply opting not to pick something isn't discriminating against it.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Vendetta wrote:
Philosophy Explorer wrote:When you go to the store, what did you buy? When you wake up in the morning, how did you dress? (if you dressed at all) Who are your friends? Who did you marry?

I can bring up numerous more examples. In every case, choice is made which we must do every day. We always discriminate towards and we discriminate against. It's inevitable and unavoidable.

PhilX
Doesn't the term discrimination imply an unjust mistreatment of an individual or perhaps object? If one is making a choice simply because that is what must be done, they don't have any negative bias against that which they did not choose.
Discrimination is active and requires effort. Simply opting not to pick something isn't discriminating against it.
Discrimination can have several meanings, but in every case, a choice has to be made. If you opt for something, then you choosing against something else or a variety of things.

Discrimination doesn't necessarily involve effort. Do you have examples of what you have in mind?

PhilX
User avatar
Vendetta
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:28 pm
Location: ehville

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by Vendetta »

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Vendetta wrote:
Philosophy Explorer wrote:When you go to the store, what did you buy? When you wake up in the morning, how did you dress? (if you dressed at all) Who are your friends? Who did you marry?

I can bring up numerous more examples. In every case, choice is made which we must do every day. We always discriminate towards and we discriminate against. It's inevitable and unavoidable.

PhilX
Doesn't the term discrimination imply an unjust mistreatment of an individual or perhaps object? If one is making a choice simply because that is what must be done, they don't have any negative bias against that which they did not choose.
Discrimination is active and requires effort. Simply opting not to pick something isn't discriminating against it.
Discrimination can have several meanings, but in every case, a choice has to be made. If you opt for something, then you choosing against something else or a variety of things.

Discrimination doesn't necessarily involve effort. Do you have examples of what you have in mind?

PhilX
An example might be intentionally choosing not to serve an individual at a restaurant because of their ethnicity. In this, you are actively choosing to act against this person because you have an issue with a trait they possess. You are not discriminating against a shirt by choosing another, as the choice is not based upon a negative view of the shirt. It is perhaps based upon feeling, or mood, or temperature. Discrimination is only present when the choice is made based upon an unjust disapproval of some aspect of the object/person not chosen.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Vendetta wrote:
Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Vendetta wrote:
Doesn't the term discrimination imply an unjust mistreatment of an individual or perhaps object? If one is making a choice simply because that is what must be done, they don't have any negative bias against that which they did not choose.
Discrimination is active and requires effort. Simply opting not to pick something isn't discriminating against it.
Discrimination can have several meanings, but in every case, a choice has to be made. If you opt for something, then you choosing against something else or a variety of things.

Discrimination doesn't necessarily involve effort. Do you have examples of what you have in mind?

PhilX
An example might be intentionally choosing not to serve an individual at a restaurant because of their ethnicity. In this, you are actively choosing to act against this person because you have an issue with a trait they possess. You are not discriminating against a shirt by choosing another, as the choice is not based upon a negative view of the shirt. It is perhaps based upon feeling, or mood, or temperature. Discrimination is only present when the choice is made based upon an unjust disapproval of some aspect of the object/person not chosen.
"Unjust" implies that, for whatever reason, you have no right to choose who you want to serve or not serve in this case, that you must serve whoever is sitting at that table by what you're claiming. Let's say the ethnicity is Muslim and you have concerns for your safety. According to a business rule, you may deal with whoever you please - you can sell to whoever you like. You can also avoid anyone you feel is a threat to your safety. So you can discriminate under the law. You have the freedom to choose under the law.

PhilX
User avatar
Vendetta
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:28 pm
Location: ehville

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by Vendetta »

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Vendetta wrote:
Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Discrimination can have several meanings, but in every case, a choice has to be made. If you opt for something, then you choosing against something else or a variety of things.

Discrimination doesn't necessarily involve effort. Do you have examples of what you have in mind?

PhilX
An example might be intentionally choosing not to serve an individual at a restaurant because of their ethnicity. In this, you are actively choosing to act against this person because you have an issue with a trait they possess. You are not discriminating against a shirt by choosing another, as the choice is not based upon a negative view of the shirt. It is perhaps based upon feeling, or mood, or temperature. Discrimination is only present when the choice is made based upon an unjust disapproval of some aspect of the object/person not chosen.
"Unjust" implies that, for whatever reason, you have no right to choose who you want to serve or not serve in this case, that you must serve whoever is sitting at that table by what you're claiming. Let's say the ethnicity is Muslim and you have concerns for your safety. According to a business rule, you may deal with whoever you please - you can sell to whoever you like. You can also avoid anyone you feel is a threat to your safety. So you can discriminate under the law. You have the freedom to choose under the law.

PhilX
Perhaps not unjust but rather unfair. This is more about whether or not you have rational logic for disapproving of the person. It is fair to not choose to serve that individual if they provide you with reason to fear them, however not simply because they are Muslim. Given that situation, if one were to not serve a Muslim individual simply because they were Muslim and there is stigma associated with that, they would not be allowed to get away with it. That is a generalization based upon few individuals.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Vendetta wrote:
Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Vendetta wrote:
An example might be intentionally choosing not to serve an individual at a restaurant because of their ethnicity. In this, you are actively choosing to act against this person because you have an issue with a trait they possess. You are not discriminating against a shirt by choosing another, as the choice is not based upon a negative view of the shirt. It is perhaps based upon feeling, or mood, or temperature. Discrimination is only present when the choice is made based upon an unjust disapproval of some aspect of the object/person not chosen.
"Unjust" implies that, for whatever reason, you have no right to choose who you want to serve or not serve in this case, that you must serve whoever is sitting at that table by what you're claiming. Let's say the ethnicity is Muslim and you have concerns for your safety. According to a business rule, you may deal with whoever you please - you can sell to whoever you like. You can also avoid anyone you feel is a threat to your safety. So you can discriminate under the law. You have the freedom to choose under the law.

PhilX
Perhaps not unjust but rather unfair. This is more about whether or not you have rational logic for disapproving of the person. It is fair to not choose to serve that individual if they provide you with reason to fear them, however not simply because they are Muslim. Given that situation, if one were to not serve a Muslim individual simply because they were Muslim and there is stigma associated with that, they would not be allowed to get away with it. That is a generalization based upon few individuals.
What if someone wanted to kill him from a drive-by car?That would raise the odds of you getting killed too from violence.

PhilX
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by commonsense »

I agree that the essence of discrimination is to treat someone as a generalization rather than as an individual. I believe there can be, but does not have to be, mistreatment involved. There also can be a stigma involved, but I don’t think there has to be that either. There is always an element of fear, whether it is real or imaginary. The fear can be regarding bodily harm or it can be regarding things/people that are different, especially if accepting the difference means accepting a change.

It may be worthwhile to look at discrimination through a mirror, so to speak. Let me characterize discrimination in that fashion to see what we can see. Maybe, instead of thinking about discrimination against shirt #1, we might consider discrimination in favor of shirt #2, at least for the sake of argument. Effort would certainly be required in order to engage in the positive action of the selection (of shirt #2). If effort is required for a positive action in a mirrored point of view, then effort is required for a passive action (not selecting shirt #1) in a straightforward point of view.

Making a choice is intentional, but would it be an effortless choice if the discrimination were unintentional? Athletes often make unintentional choices, as a result of their effort during their repetitive practice sessions. Their unintentional choices—e.g. leap now, go forward, retreat—,then, are not without effort. I would say that discrimination always requires effort, regardless of whether the discrimination is against or in favor of something/someone, and regardless of whether the discrimination is intended or not.

(I am unable to locate a standard definition of "discrimination" that includes "unjust" or “unfair”. Vendetta, are you able to reference a source for that meaning? Suffice it to say that I was using a different meaning in an earlier post.)
thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by thedoc »

I have dealt with this first hand, I taught in a mixed school and on my first day, before I had said or done anything I was labeled as a bigot and a racist by some of the black kids because I was white. It was assumed that I would discriminate in favor of the white students before I had done anything. That was about the first that I realized just how prejudiced a black person could be against a white person, I later found out that students often come to school with the attitudes of their parents.
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by commonsense »

thedoc wrote: Mon May 15, 2017 10:08 pm I have dealt with this first hand, I taught in a mixed school and on my first day, before I had said or done anything I was labeled as a bigot and a racist by some of the black kids because I was white. It was assumed that I would discriminate in favor of the white students before I had done anything. That was about the first that I realized just how prejudiced a black person could be against a white person, I later found out that students often come to school with the attitudes of their parents.
Discrimination, no matter if it's the against kind or the in-favor-of kind, is nothing but bigotry, irrational bias and unfounded prejudice. Discrimination is contagious, thus explaining its infection of children from parents. Discrimination is global, thus explaining its appearance in unanticipated places. Discrimination is emotional, based on a fear of differences such as a race that’s different, regardless of whether it's white/black or black/white or any other pairing of races. Discrimination subsists on fear and irrational thinking disguised as logical justification of perfectly normal behavior. Fortunately, the disguise often fails. Unfortunately, not often enough.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

commonsense wrote: Wed May 17, 2017 12:07 am
thedoc wrote: Mon May 15, 2017 10:08 pm I have dealt with this first hand, I taught in a mixed school and on my first day, before I had said or done anything I was labeled as a bigot and a racist by some of the black kids because I was white. It was assumed that I would discriminate in favor of the white students before I had done anything. That was about the first that I realized just how prejudiced a black person could be against a white person, I later found out that students often come to school with the attitudes of their parents.
Discrimination, no matter if it's the against kind or the in-favor-of kind, is nothing but bigotry, irrational bias and unfounded prejudice. Discrimination is contagious, thus explaining its infection of children from parents. Discrimination is global, thus explaining its appearance in unanticipated places. Discrimination is emotional, based on a fear of differences such as a race that’s different, regardless of whether it's white/black or black/white or any other pairing of races. Discrimination subsists on fear and irrational thinking disguised as logical justification of perfectly normal behavior. Fortunately, the disguise often fails. Unfortunately, not often enough.
What makes discrimination for or against people so special as opposed to other kinds of discrimination? You mention emotion and I can say I get emotional when it comes to eating e.g. If I like what I'm eating, I'll have more and if I don't like it, I may throw it up. I don't consider discrimination to be irrational, in fact I think it's very rational. As far as fear goes, I consider psychological explanations to be based on pseudoscience.

PhilX
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Philosophy Explorer wrote: Thu May 11, 2017 11:25 am When you go to the store, what did you buy? When you wake up in the morning, how did you dress? (if you dressed at all) Who are your friends? Who did you marry?

I can bring up numerous more examples. In every case, choice is made which we must do every day. We always discriminate towards and we discriminate against. It's inevitable and unavoidable.

PhilX
The term has several meanings, It would seem that your thread attempts to fuse them all into one.

discrimination [dih-skrim-uh-ney-shuh n]
noun
1. an act or instance of discriminating, or of making a distinction.
2. treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.
3. the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment: She chose the colors with great discrimination.
4. Archaic. something that serves to differentiate.


In no instance could any of your examples consider all the possibilities. And of course any discrimination is subject to ignorance as much, or probably more so, than knowledge. In the end, it doesn't really matter what choices one has made for themselves. RIP! That which levels the playing field!
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by commonsense »

Philosophy Explorer wrote: Wed May 17, 2017 5:26 am
commonsense wrote: Wed May 17, 2017 12:07 am
thedoc wrote: Mon May 15, 2017 10:08 pm I have dealt with this first hand, I taught in a mixed school and on my first day, before I had said or done anything I was labeled as a bigot and a racist by some of the black kids because I was white. It was assumed that I would discriminate in favor of the white students before I had done anything. That was about the first that I realized just how prejudiced a black person could be against a white person, I later found out that students often come to school with the attitudes of their parents.
Discrimination, no matter if it's the against kind or the in-favor-of kind, is nothing but bigotry, irrational bias and unfounded prejudice. Discrimination is contagious, thus explaining its infection of children from parents. Discrimination is global, thus explaining its appearance in unanticipated places. Discrimination is emotional, based on a fear of differences such as a race that’s different, regardless of whether it's white/black or black/white or any other pairing of races. Discrimination subsists on fear and irrational thinking disguised as logical justification of perfectly normal behavior. Fortunately, the disguise often fails. Unfortunately, not often enough.
What makes discrimination for or against people so special as opposed to other kinds of discrimination? You mention emotion and I can say I get emotional when it comes to eating e.g. If I like what I'm eating, I'll have more and if I don't like it, I may throw it up. I don't consider discrimination to be irrational, in fact I think it's very rational. As far as fear goes, I consider psychological explanations to be based on pseudoscience.

PhilX
Thanks for your post. You make a strong argument.
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Discrimination is inevitable

Post by commonsense »

commonsense wrote: Wed May 17, 2017 4:49 pm
Philosophy Explorer wrote: Wed May 17, 2017 5:26 am
commonsense wrote: Wed May 17, 2017 12:07 am
Discrimination, no matter if it's the against kind or the in-favor-of kind, is nothing but bigotry, irrational bias and unfounded prejudice. Discrimination is contagious, thus explaining its infection of children from parents. Discrimination is global, thus explaining its appearance in unanticipated places. Discrimination is emotional, based on a fear of differences such as a race that’s different, regardless of whether it's white/black or black/white or any other pairing of races. Discrimination subsists on fear and irrational thinking disguised as logical justification of perfectly normal behavior. Fortunately, the disguise often fails. Unfortunately, not often enough.
What makes discrimination for or against people so special as opposed to other kinds of discrimination? You mention emotion and I can say I get emotional when it comes to eating e.g. If I like what I'm eating, I'll have more and if I don't like it, I may throw it up. I don't consider discrimination to be irrational, in fact I think it's very rational. As far as fear goes, I consider psychological explanations to be based on pseudoscience.

PhilX
Thanks for your post. You make a strong argument.
Your points concerning discrimination of every kind, the rationality of discrimination and the weakness of psychological explanations have prodded me to write a few more lines here. I could have done a better job of characterising my position if only I had chosen my words more wisely. Instead of "emotional" and "irrational" I should have used "instinctive". In place of "fear" I should have referenced the pleasure principle, Lustprinzip.

Discrimination is instinctive and irrational in so far as it does not require thinking. Although thought can be applied to garner some control over instinctive actions, thought is unnecessary for those actions to take place. I can think of one example that anyone should be able to see for themselves: breathing. If you think about it, you can hold your breath. If you don't, you'll breathe anyway.

People seek pleasure. If there were a delicious culinary treat, your favorite food, just waiting on the dining table for you to enjoy it, of course you would want it. More importantly, people avoid pain. If the dining table and its surroundings were engulfed in flames, you'd likely forego the cake and avoid the fire.

Lustprinzip has been put forth by psychologists and discussed by philosophers. Fortunately, love of thought does not claim to be more than an interest in thinking. The study of the psyche, on the other hand, claims to draw conclusions from scientific observations, but without any objective evidence for its validity. Lustprinzip, as a product of psychology, is a trivial thing. However, as a product of philosophy, is a topic worthy of review.

BTW, I have long considered psychology to be a soft science, but I think "pseudoscience" is a better term.

Also, I think you were just trying to get one past me to see if I would blink and miss it. I'd bet you know that just because you say you can get emotional when it comes to eating, doesn't mean that discrimination of people is unemotional.
Post Reply