site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 15, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

13
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I am skeptical of any claim that African-American (or female, or gay, or whatever) pilots are categorically different in skill. Especially in the modern day, the Damoreish arguments don't apply: no one falls into commercial aviation

Nobody falls into being a doctor either, yet you'd probably prefer to be treated in a majority-white hospital to a majority-black hospital.

https://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-kdday1dec05-story.html

If the administration of airlines, air traffic control, pilot training and so on was ruthlessly meritocratic, then I'd agree with you that there'd be no difference in skill between black or female pilots and white male pilots, since they would all have passed the same tests and be above a certain benchmark. But this isn't so, not informally and now not even formally. If it were meritocratic, then we wouldn't see DEI rules and so on.

And the only reason we'd depart from formal meritocracy is because influential decisionmakers don't want meritocracy. Presumably they've already been informally advising on hiring decisions and making their expectations known. I have a friend who did anti-plagiarism work at a university. There are strict de jure rules against plagiarism, academic integrity is supposedly very important. De facto students=money and so they were told to slow down, don't be too efficient, make sure to let them appeal (and so be it if we can only do one or two such appeals per day, the other 90% of cases will be deferred into the never-never). Hence the anti-plagiarism unit has been churning through staff for some time, nobody seems to want to half-do their jobs.

The RAF and USAF seem eager to lower the number of white male pilots via an informal hiring freeze and 'aspirational' diversity goals, respectively. Informal methods already do a lot of work.

Nobody falls into being a doctor either, yet you'd probably prefer to be treated in a majority-white hospital to a majority-black hospital.

Are you making the HBD-IQ('skill')ish argument, or the Damore difference-in-interest one? I think the latter is non-applicable and readily shown to be non-applicable, at least for current numbers of pilots. The former... I could be more persuaded for doctors, though I'll caution that places like King/Drew or individual cases like Patrick Chavis run into trouble isolating or controlling other variables, and the data may simply not exist.

((In turn, though, one of the other variables for King/Drew and Chavis was/is lack of willpower to enforce against bad actors when such enforcement would bring accusations of racism. Which leads to problems even presuming equal capability on average.))

But I think airline pilots run into, or at least close to, the same issues as I listed for the continent-level scale question:

My main problem is that it's easy to come up with an X-factor broad enough to explain the wide berth of problems and disparity present, or closely-defined enough to match the traits we see in the real world, but that trying to achieve a reasonable synthesis gets rough. These traits will necessarily be motioning around the shadow of the thing rather than the true borders, but I'm hard-pressed to believe you'd get the same borders when starting from American test scores, Haitian test scores, Brooklyn politics, or Haitian politics.

Are airline memory items closer to free recall or serial rote learning? Reading landing charts closer to symbolic manipulation or to reading symbols? Reading an weather radar as pic-vocab or inspection time? Not getting overwhelmed by alerts or alarms closer to odd-man-out or reaction time? You can come up with a hundred combinations, and there's certainly some number that will have a racial component in some studies simply by chance, but it's easier to come up with ones that are either nonsensical or wrong or both.

If the administration of airlines, air traffic control, pilot training and so on was ruthlessly meritocratic, then I'd agree with you that there'd be no difference in skill between black or female pilots and white male pilots, since they would all have passed the same tests and be above a certain benchmark.

You can have a pass-fail test and still some subgroups that are more skilled than others, even if they're all above a certain benchmark, though as long as that benchmark is set reasonably it is less concerning, as others have already gone deeper into the math. And while aviation has (thankfully!) moved away from the sort of heroics that saved part of UA232, there are still a lot of incidents and near-misses with current (and I'd argue pretty aggressive!) benchmarks.

But I don't find any of that nearly as disturbing as people who believe, enough to say publicly, that ability won't make a difference.

If the administration of airlines, air traffic control, pilot training and so on was ruthlessly meritocratic, then I'd agree with you that there'd be no difference in skill between black or female pilots and white male pilots, since they would all have passed the same tests and be above a certain benchmark

Actually, even with the same minimum standard for each race you would expect the white to be better on average.

If X is N(100,15) and Y is N(85,15) then E(X|X > 120) > E(Y|Y>120)

If the administration of airlines, air traffic control, pilot training and so on was ruthlessly meritocratic, then I'd agree with you that there'd be no difference in skill between black or female pilots and white male pilots, since they would all have passed the same tests and be above a certain benchmark.

Nitpick - this still won't be true as long as there is noise in the tests or variability in skill above the bar. The groups with higher average performance before the cutoff will also dominate the top percentiles after the cutoff, and be less likely to be a false positive under noisy tests.