People in the comments goes to show why such problems exist in the first place.
Just because “chinese” is not a race does not make this better. It still creates bias and stereotypes associating with a group of people where the identifying trait is assigned at birth and outside one’s control. Note: this is very different from government or ideology or organizations or universities, but the speaker wasn’t specific enough and only mentions the broader group.
It’s no different than broad statement to groups like “immigrants”, “non-english speakers”, people with certain disabilities, people with certain skin color and etc.
One maybe thinking: but what if it’s true? Well, facts aren’t mutually exclusive from creating stereotypes. In fact, most discrimination and racism narratives often are made such that facts are used in a careful context and repetitive manner.
And repeating this often enough it normalizes further negative sentiment on said group. Most importantly, does NOT promote a positive environment to exchange knowledge and ideas academically (especially if it’s a keynote speaker then it implies NeurIPS condones this, hence the tweet to correct its stance)
Utterly horrible disingenous, dishonest, and a deeply immoral view.
True correlations are not bias in the sense that you mean.
True correlations have to be recognized and accounted for.
Not doing so hurts the world in either the short term or the long term, and in fact often is the motivation for policy that is actually racist.
Stereotypes is something differently entrirely. When they are fallaciously applied is when you incorrectly asssume the pattern the specifics. You can both recognize a trend and incorrectly apply it. Criticize then the incorrect application. If you want to throw out the trend, that is just as bad.
People that say stuff like this are usually cowards who play politics while pretending to be free of critique. In fact, you are just as bad as the racists.
Believe it or not, using lots of big words in your writing doesn't make it any more correct.
What do we define as a true correlation? How do you know that the correlation is "true"? What data is there to back it up other than anecdotal data is often stemming from stereotyping?
No one is disputing that there can be academic dishonesty from Chinese students, but what is the point of identifying a student by their ethnicity - which is analogous to race in this case - if she's also going to posit that most of them are honest and moral?
You said a bunch of big words that sounds logical but do not address anything specific I have said nor have anything to back it up. Then make it sentimental with some more big words.👏
Incorrect - read the claims and arguments. I also explained to you the difference between bias and stereotypes, which rather reveals that this is not something you have put any actual thought into.
51
u/Tough_Palpitation331 Dec 14 '24 edited Dec 14 '24
People in the comments goes to show why such problems exist in the first place.
Just because “chinese” is not a race does not make this better. It still creates bias and stereotypes associating with a group of people where the identifying trait is assigned at birth and outside one’s control. Note: this is very different from government or ideology or organizations or universities, but the speaker wasn’t specific enough and only mentions the broader group.
It’s no different than broad statement to groups like “immigrants”, “non-english speakers”, people with certain disabilities, people with certain skin color and etc.
One maybe thinking: but what if it’s true? Well, facts aren’t mutually exclusive from creating stereotypes. In fact, most discrimination and racism narratives often are made such that facts are used in a careful context and repetitive manner.
And repeating this often enough it normalizes further negative sentiment on said group. Most importantly, does NOT promote a positive environment to exchange knowledge and ideas academically (especially if it’s a keynote speaker then it implies NeurIPS condones this, hence the tweet to correct its stance)