Main Page Contact Register Log In

They are believing the right thing for the wrong reasons.

This does not explain to me why correct thoughts should be suppressed. Even if someone happens to believe the right things for the wrong reasons, why should we avoid the same thoughts?
Though I understand that emotionally it feels tempting to maximally distance ourselves from people we consider to be evil (“colorists”/”racists”/…).
racist is someone that thinks that race is an essential component for arranging the relationships of people.

This is slightly vague. Is someone who believes that there is a difference in average characteristics (such as criminality) of different ethnicities a racist?

We should not avoid the conclusions but we should avoid the reasons. Evilness shouldn't be a relevant factor. Drawing the correct conclusions from irrepresentative sample is proper so adopting the methodology of someone that beliefs the wrong thing for the right reasons isn't that problematic as we can argue about the representativeness.

I am using it in a technical sense that shouldn't carry negative connotations in itself. If the differences of the statistics are thought to be essential or central that would fit the bill. Someone who says that the differences exist but are not important or only a detail in the grand scheme of things would not be. Someone who beliefs that races are exactly equal in their statistics and that is essential factor to take into account in decision making would also be racist (I am guessing this is the relevant other alternative you would want to compare to). This kind of belief is very comparable in the problems that it causes than vanilla racism. However it is kinda harder to see how two wrongs don't make a right.
Replies (1)