Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Statistical discrimination can be epistemically rational: Phelps (1972) shows group data is legitimate evidence when individual signals are noisy or costly.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Individual signals are often obtainable at modest cost; relying on group data reflects preference rather than true unavoidability.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Group statistics reflect historical inequalities and compound discrimination; using them perpetuates rather than merely responds to noise.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Rational epistemology requires interrogating whether group proxies measure what's relevant or merely encode proxy discrimination.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
When individual-level information is expensive or unavailable, using group statistics is a rational Bayesian update given available evidence.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Excluding predictive group data artificially constrains decision-making and can lead to worse outcomes for both groups and individuals.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Epistemic rationality (using best available evidence) is distinct from ethical permissibility; rational beliefs need not justify all actions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.