Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's because that is incomplete. If a black man beats someone and gets charged with assault and a white man beats someone gets a good lawyer and doesn't is the black crime rate higher?
I'm not really sure what you mean here? When I asked if it were possible to apply a general creative & critical thinking model to problem solving, he answered by identifying a statistical analysis that sounded like it may have come from Jared Taylor's book & web site:
Quote:
Founded by Jared Taylor in 1990, the New Century Foundation is a self-styled think tank that promotes pseudo-scientific studies and research that purport to show the inferiority of blacks to whites — although in hifalutin language that avoids open racial slurs and attempts to portray itself as serious scholarship. It is best known for its American Renaissance magazine and website, which regularly feature proponents of eugenics and blatant anti-black racists. The foundation also sponsors American Renaissance conferences every other year where racist "intellectuals" rub shoulders with Klansmen, neo-Nazis and other white supremacists. ...
I dunno if that's where he's getting his numbers however there's a CD member that often parrots his rhetoric (without citing him as a source) although her most recent 'blog' here includes a link to the above website.
From my perspective, there are several problems with the collection of data.
From my perspective, it is, to use your phrasing, 'incomplete' (incorrect) to identify the problem (if using the creative & critical thinking approach) to be black people.
It's unsurprising that Jared Taylor would take that approach. In other words, if black people are THE problem, what would be his solution? It is, as Shabazz accurately called it, disgusting.
Last edited by ChiGeekGuest; 08-23-2016 at 05:50 AM..
The only group that is "attempting" to deny there are still civil rights issues is the white conservative American. It's disgusting they are trying to do this with a straight face...
Basically I agree with you, although I'm sure there are some exceptions. Most likely, the exceptions keep their opinions to themselves because they don't want to be thrown out of the club, so to speak.
I think this definition of 'conservative' considers underlying reasons which is also helpful when using a critical thinking approach to problem solving:
"...For example, people with something to lose tend toward conservative choices politically as well as economically. Nothing wrong with that necessarily. Just an observation about the influence of Loss Aversion heuristic on actual decision making. We are more apt to endure the status quo, even as it slowly deteriorates, than we are to call for “radical” change. Regrettably, however, when the call for change comes, it often requires a far greater upheaval to make the necessary transformations, or, on occasion, the situation has deteriorated beyond the point of no return. In those situations we find ourselves wondering why we waited so long before doing something. ..."
~Facione, PA, “Critical Thinking: What It is and Why it Counts”
Although I agree with Dr. King's assessment, 'Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance & conscientious stupidity' it seems the outcome of both sincere ignorance & conscientious stupidity often tends to bring about the same result.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHABAZZ310 The only group that is "attempting" to deny there are still civil rights issues is the white conservative American. It's disgusting they are trying to do this with a straight face...
Basically I agree with you, although I'm sure there are some exceptions. Most likely, the exceptions keep their opinions to themselves because they don't want to be thrown out of the club, so to speak.
Good to see another one, who practices racism, out in the open. Always best to know what someone is about. Easier to deal with them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
I think this definition of 'conservative' considers underlying reasons which is also helpful when using a critical thinking approach to problem solving:
"...For example, people with something to lose tend toward conservative choices politically as well as economically. Nothing wrong with that necessarily. Just an observation about the influence of Loss Aversion heuristic on actual decision making. We are more apt to endure the status quo, even as it slowly deteriorates, than we are to call for “radical” change. Regrettably, however, when the call for change comes, it often requires a far greater upheaval to make the necessary transformations, or, on occasion, the situation has deteriorated beyond the point of no return. In those situations we find ourselves wondering why we waited so long before doing something. ..."
~Facione, PA, “Critical Thinking: What It is and Why it Counts”
Although I agree with Dr. King's assessment, 'Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance & conscientious stupidity' it seems the outcome of both sincere ignorance & conscientious stupidity often tends to bring about the same result.
You don't know what a conservative is so why comment? It's really easy to understand for those without a twisted agenda.
From the word conserve, use less of. That's it. Less government especially at the Federal level.
By your twisted definition the dems are conservative. All one has to do is look at the dems foreign policy of invade, occupy, and intervention in other nations civil wars. The only time they are against those policies is when a repub is in the White House. Once their liar in chief took office the spineless dems back tracked.
Good to see another one, who practices racism, out in the open. Always best to know what someone is about. Easier to deal with them.
You don't know what a conservative is so why comment? It's really easy to understand for those without a twisted agenda.
From the word conserve, use less of. That's it. Less government especially at the Federal level.
By your twisted definition the dems are conservative. All one has to do is look at the dems foreign policy of invade, occupy, and intervention in other nations civil wars. The only time they are against those policies is when a repub is in the White House. Once their liar in chief took office the spineless dems back tracked.
Whatever man.
There are many definitions related to the word 'conserve.' I stated which one I was using in an effort to clarify my position.
I think it makes sense to use a creative/critical thinking approach when attempting to solve, resolve or troubleshoot problems. Different strokes for different folks & all that. Even so, I'm very sure you & I, personally, could find many or at least several, shared perspectives which could potentially be used to pragmatically provide solutions. Peace.
There are many definitions related to the word 'conserve.' I stated which one I was using in an effort to clarify my position.
In a twisted agenda, falsely testifying sort of way. yea that clarifies it. No different than those in this thread, and others, who falsely label blacks because a minute segment of the population does something wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
I think it makes sense to use a creative/critical thinking approach when attempting to solve, resolve or troubleshoot problems. Different strokes for different folks & all that. Even so, I'm very sure you & I, personally, could find many or at least several, shared perspectives which could potentially be used to pragmatically provide solutions. Peace.
Agreeing that the cause of the problem needs to be addressed in order to be solved is a start. But going about it in a way that steps on the rights of the individual isn't the way to do it. I agree with many dems on "civil rights' but disagree with them on governments roll in solving the issue.
We the people solve problems. Just as we did during the Civil Rights era. Government makes problems.
In a twisted agenda, falsely testifying sort of way. yea that clarifies it. No different than those in this thread, and others, who falsely label blacks because a minute segment of the population does something wrong.
If I'm not mistaken, you just did the same thing.
Quote:
Agreeing that the cause of the problem needs to be addressed in order to be solved is a start. But going about it in a way that steps on the rights of the individual isn't the way to do it. I agree with many dems on "civil rights' but disagree with them on governments roll in solving the issue.
We the people solve problems. Just as we did during the Civil Rights era. Government makes problems.
See that, we're making progress! Now, tell me your ideas.
See that, we're making progress! Now, tell me your ideas.
It's not the idea it's how one goes about it.
example - I'm sure we can all agree that education in America has gone downhill and needs to be fixed. Throw money at it, the big government believers way. Get rid of the Dept of Education and all it's red tape and let the states handle problems. Options are best. The conservative way.
A small federal government. Basically what the founders believed in, except for that little problem with slavery which went against their core values. As good as the founders were that's just more proof that power corrupts.
It's not the idea it's how one goes about it.
example - I'm sure we can all agree that education in America has gone downhill and needs to be fixed. Throw money at it, the big government believers way. Get rid of the Dept of Education and all it's red tape and let the states handle problems. Options are best. The conservative way.
A small federal government. Basically what the founders believed in, except for that little problem with slavery which went against their core values. As good as the founders were that's just more proof that power corrupts.
How about a 2nd Constitutional Convention? After all the 1st one created a new government rather than fix the existing one. It would've made much sense to have a 2nd one after the American Civil War however President Lincoln's assassination put a very large kibosh on that idea.
How about a 2nd Constitutional Convention? After all the 1st one created a new government rather than fix the existing one. It would've made much sense to have a 2nd one after the American Civil War however President Lincoln's assassination put a very large kibosh on that idea.
This post. Your post, and my previous post will get deleted as off topic. So I'm going to let it go.
Another case of a Cop shooting a Black man, and then a riot breaks out afterwards. And from what I heard, the man shot got shot was armed with a stolen weapon. Can't people wait until all the facts come out?
Hey hipcat, I'm sorry for being disrespected to you & your OP.
G'night & have a pleasant tomorrow! Peace.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No different than those in this thread, and others, who falsely label blacks because a minute segment of the population does something wrong.
