Comment

That makes zero sense. Were the people fighting against slavery also trying to enslave the people arguing for it and deny their status as free people?

100 years ago social sciences supported segregation as a matter of science. So support for integration was a position of obstination. It would be anti-science.

The rest I’m not going to go into.

“Your honor I’m not going to address it because it’s devastating to my case.” 😆

Something is objective if it can be confirmed independent of a mind

Bigotry cannot be confirmed absent of a mind.

source

Sort:hotnew top

fr0g@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

“Your honor I’m not going to address it because it’s devastating to my case.” 😆

You’re a fucking child. I’ve made my point why your positions do nothing to assess any potential objectivity seveal times, you completely refuse to even go into that point.or acknowledge it in any way and when I say I’m not gonna engage with that any more because you don’t muster any kind of response you proceed to wear that as a badge of honor. There’s no point in arguing with people like you.

source
- fr0g@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Like, I don’t even understand what point you think you are making in the first part. A position being endorsed by Academia at the time, or people saying they are using science as a reason, doesn’t suddenly make discriminatory or hateful behaviour not that. (Especially when we are talking about social sciences where both the basis for it at that time was shoddy as fuck and where the goals you want to implent with that knowledge obviously are highly subjective).
  
  source