There Is a Black Man in the White House and He Isn't Pushing a Broom or Carrying a Tray.

[Nice Squirrel]

Obama isn't black. Bill Clinton is.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

AA, do you see moral equivalence between the following actions, or is one of the actors worse than the other?

A white magistrate, whose pattern of sentencing indicates she consistently gives harsher penalties to black defendants when relevant factors are taken into account

A black magistrate, whose pattern of sentencing indicates she consistently gives harsher penalties to white defendants when relevant factors are taken into account

Do all of the White defendants have 1 year to live?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

AA, do you see moral equivalence between the following actions, or is one of the actors worse than the other?

A white magistrate, whose pattern of sentencing indicates she consistently gives harsher penalties to black defendants when relevant factors are taken into account

A black magistrate, whose pattern of sentencing indicates she consistently gives harsher penalties to white defendants when relevant factors are taken into account

they may both be discriminatory. but only one is racist.

Keep 'em coming. You may get me yet.

 

[Metaphor]

AA, do you see moral equivalence between the following actions, or is one of the actors worse than the other?

A white magistrate, whose pattern of sentencing indicates she consistently gives harsher penalties to black defendants when relevant factors are taken into account

A black magistrate, whose pattern of sentencing indicates she consistently gives harsher penalties to white defendants when relevant factors are taken into account

they may both be discriminatory. but only one is racist.

Keep 'em coming. You may get me yet.

I did not expect you to say they were both racist. It's clear your beliefs about the word 'racist' would prevent that. But answer my question, please.

Are the two magistrates doing something equivalently morally abhorrent, or is one worse than the other?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

they may both be discriminatory. but only one is racist.

Keep 'em coming. You may get me yet.

I did not expect you to say they were both racist. It's clear your beliefs about the word 'racist' would prevent that. But answer my question, please.

Are the two magistrates doing something equivalently morally abhorrent, or is one worse than the other?

Do the White defendants all have a year left to live?

 

[Metaphor]

The white defendants have similar circumstances to the black defendants in each scenario, but the scenario is a hypothetical, so there is no answer to your question. But, let's say no. None of the defendants in my scenario have only a year to live.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

they may both be discriminatory. but only one is racist.

Keep 'em coming. You may get me yet.

I did not expect you to say they were both racist. It's clear your beliefs about the word 'racist' would prevent that. But answer my question, please.

Are the two magistrates doing something equivalently morally abhorrent, or is one worse than the other?

If they are engaging in discriminatory practices, then they are both morally wrong. I am not sure how you make evils equal, I don't know how to measure units of evil. I think I know the answer you are looking for but it will take longer explain than I have right now. I have to run an errand in a few minutes, but I will be back a little later, if you can wait.

 

[Trausti]

AA, do you see moral equivalence between the following actions, or is one of the actors worse than the other?

A white magistrate, whose pattern of sentencing indicates she consistently gives harsher penalties to black defendants when relevant factors are taken into account

A black magistrate, whose pattern of sentencing indicates she consistently gives harsher penalties to white defendants when relevant factors are taken into account

they may both be discriminatory. but only one is racist.

Keep 'em coming. You may get me yet.

Isn't hypocrisy wonderful.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

they may both be discriminatory. but only one is racist.

Keep 'em coming. You may get me yet.

Isn't hypocrisy wonderful.

when you make sense, let us know.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

The white defendants have similar circumstances to the black defendants in each scenario, but the scenario is a hypothetical, so there is no answer to your question. But, let's say no. None of the defendants in my scenario have only a year to live.

If you had not added an additional criterion that circumstances are equivalent, then there could be another variable that could explain differences without the need for labeling one or other magistrate less moral. But if their circumstances in the hypothetical are equivalent then the hypothetical is not equivalent to real life. In real life, circumstances are different for black and white defendants.

 

[Metaphor]

The white defendants have similar circumstances to the black defendants in each scenario, but the scenario is a hypothetical, so there is no answer to your question. But, let's say no. None of the defendants in my scenario have only a year to live.

If you had not added an additional criterion that circumstances are equivalent, then there could be another variable that could explain differences without the need for labeling one or other magistrate less moral. But if their circumstances in the hypothetical are equivalent then the hypothetical is not equivalent to real life. In real life, circumstances are different for black and white defendants.

If you don't want to answer the question, don't. I didn't even ask you. Neither did I state that everything was equivalent in 'real life'.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

If you had not added an additional criterion that circumstances are equivalent, then there could be another variable that could explain differences without the need for labeling one or other magistrate less moral. But if their circumstances in the hypothetical are equivalent then the hypothetical is not equivalent to real life. In real life, circumstances are different for black and white defendants.

If you don't want to answer the question, don't. I didn't even ask you.

and I was not trying to answer it, just pointing out a problem. I will add that in real life, magistrates do take into account how long a defendant has to live as well as other circumstances.

Neither did I state that everything was equivalent in 'real life'.

As I've already implicitly challenged, without equivalency, how is your point being demonstrated?

And if you add equivalency, then it is not a real life scenario. So then what could possibly be the point of the question?

 

[Metaphor]

and I was not trying to answer it, just pointing out a problem. I will add that in real life, magistrates do take into account how long a defendant has to live as well as other circumstances..

You did not point out a problem. You tried to create a problem. Despite my explicit parameter that all other relevant considerations were equivalent, you asked me if they were somehow not equivalent.

As I've already implicitly challenged, without equivalency, how is your point being demonstrated?

Oh my stars. If I offer a thought experiment, like 'imagine that first names were not gendered so that you couldn't identify gender merely from a name' and you came back with 'well the world isn't like that, so your thought experiment is worthless' I would say you've missed the point of a thought experiment.

And if you add equivalency, then it is not a real life scenario. So then what could possibly be the point of the question?

I've already told you that the thought experiment assumes equivalence in the relevant factors to do with crimes. If that is beyond your comprehension, then don't answer the question.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I've already told you that the thought experiment assumes equivalence in the relevant factors to do with crimes.

That a defendant is going to die in a year is not a "relevant factor to do with crimes."

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Metaphor, let's say there is a guy on the ground with a broken jaw and his eyes are bleeding. There is another healthy-looking guy standing up. Someone forces you to choose between kicking the guy in the head that is down or drop-kicking the standing up guy in the head. Your kicking-someone-when-he's-down, bo staff, and drop-kicking skills are all equivalent. Which guy do you kick in the head? Which is your moral choice and why?

 

[Metaphor]

I've already told you that the thought experiment assumes equivalence in the relevant factors to do with crimes.

That a defendant is going to die in a year is not a "relevant factor to do with crimes."

And I already said, assume the white and black defendants are in similar positions with regards to whether they're going to die within a year or not.

If you can't answer the question, don't. But don't keep responding as if you're going to.

- - - Updated - - -

Metaphor, let's say there is a guy on the ground with a broken jaw and his eyes are bleeding. There is another healthy-looking guy standing up. Someone forces you to choose between kicking the guy in the head that is down or drop-kicking the standing up guy in the head. Your kicking-someone-when-he's-down, bo staff, and drop-kicking skills are all equivalent. Which guy do you kick in the head? Which is your moral choice and why?

So, you're going to complain about my thought experiment, not answer, and then ask me to answer one of yours?

 

[Metaphor]

Metaphor, let's say there is a guy on the ground with a broken jaw and his eyes are bleeding. There is another healthy-looking guy standing up. Someone forces you to choose between kicking the guy in the head that is down or drop-kicking the standing up guy in the head. Your kicking-someone-when-he's-down, bo staff, and drop-kicking skills are all equivalent. Which guy do you kick in the head? Which is your moral choice and why?

In this scenario, who is forcing me to kick one of them, and what will happen to me, in the scenario, if I don't?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

That a defendant is going to die in a year is not a "relevant factor to do with crimes."

And I already said, assume the white and black defendants are in similar positions with regards to whether they're going to die within a year or not.

If you can't answer the question, don't. But don't keep responding as if you're going to.

I was never intending to answer your question and I already told you that, only to point out the problems with it.

Metaphor, let's say there is a guy on the ground with a broken jaw and his eyes are bleeding. There is another healthy-looking guy standing up. Someone forces you to choose between kicking the guy in the head that is down or drop-kicking the standing up guy in the head. Your kicking-someone-when-he's-down, bo staff, and drop-kicking skills are all equivalent. Which guy do you kick in the head? Which is your moral choice and why?

So, you're going to complain about my thought experiment, not answer, and then ask me to answer one of yours?

I was never intending to answer your question and I already told you that, only to point out the problems with it.

Even so, my thought experiment is allegedly designed to teach you about yours at another level, just like how your thought experiment was allegedly intended to teach something to Athena.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Metaphor, let's say there is a guy on the ground with a broken jaw and his eyes are bleeding. There is another healthy-looking guy standing up. Someone forces you to choose between kicking the guy in the head that is down or drop-kicking the standing up guy in the head. Your kicking-someone-when-he's-down, bo staff, and drop-kicking skills are all equivalent. Which guy do you kick in the head? Which is your moral choice and why?

In this scenario, who is forcing me to kick one of them,

President Obama, 11 Black jurors and 1 Hispanic.

...and what will happen to me, in the scenario, if I don't?

They will kill you and both of the guys in question with secret guns that look just like wallets.

 

[Metaphor]

I was never intending to answer your question and I already told you that, only to point out the problems with it.

You didn't point out a problem. You claimed there was one.

Even so, my thought experiment is allegedly designed to teach you about yours at another level, just like how your thought experiment was allegedly intended to teach something to Athena.

Since you don't know what my thought experiment was designed to 'teach' and you've got no desire to participate, how about you let AA answer?

As for your own thought experiment, I can hazard a guess at what your message was, but I'm not a mind reader. Unlike you.