Domain changed to archive.palanq.win . Feb 14-25 still awaits import.
[3 / 2 / ?]

Rigorosity when addressing social issues

ID:BORFD87W No.9337373 View ViewReplyOriginalReport
Why in the hell there are some people who claim to care about a social issue and don't spend five seconds to choose a decent definition of the problem they are trying to address? Like, I just came across the term 'wmaf' relationships, which stands for 'White male asian female'. If you look up this definition on urban dictionary, you'll find out it is infested with hate. Now, you might ask why that is and you'll find out that they are talking about toxic relationships involving these two races, which is a SUBSET of the definition. Even if it is statistically more likely for these relationships to be toxic, you cannot assume that the entire set of people are like that. It is as saying that in the interval [0,1], the 'striking majority' of these numbers are not natural and assume therefore that the interval itself doesn't intersect the naturals. It is as if they think social sciences are about 'arguing with emotions' and they are fucking wrong. Graph theory, for example, started off with social scientists. This is brain-dead mentality.