Hacker News Reader

Comment by exolymph | Hacker News Reader

I think it's fair to discriminate (in the literal sense) based on factors people can affect or change, like political affiliation, but not based on factors that people can't change, like race. [1]

That said, if you're touting your commitment to diversity, you really should be seeking out, y'know, diversity. Including lots of different kinds of people is a multifaceted endeavor.

[1] I know it's not legal to discriminate based on religion, which is kind of similar to political affiliation, but I'm talking about my personal ethical framework, not the law.

View on HN

Imagine if the keys to academic success were that you needed to believe that blue is the best color. There is nothing intrinsic about blue being the best color, and a good argument could be made that green is the best color. But, everyone who holds the keys to the kingdom of academic success think that blue is the best color, and won't let anyone in who thinks green is the best color.

Do you think that system is "fair"? Or a good one?

This is a false equivalency because no intelligent adult believes that any color is inherently superior, whereas many intelligent adults do believe that certain political beliefs are inherently superior.

Blue is obviously superior because of its wider variety of uses. Blue is a much more popular color for cars than green. Blues are much more rare in nature than greens, because blues are harder to recreate due to their superior qualities.

Perhaps these intelligence adults aren't that intelligent after all. If you think you are so smart think that you and 50% of other people have figured it all out, and the 50% of other people are just idiots, then maybe you aren't that intelligent after all.

And your refute is an appeal to the masses or an appeal to authority depending on your tastes. Many intelligent people believe in conservative/libertarian ideals.

When considering solutions to tough problems, why exclude any class of thought?

I wonder how much political inclinations are malleable though. I can't dig up the work now, but I know psychologists like Jonathan Haidt show that things like a persons openness to experience influence their political beliefs. If we can't control our ideological basis any more than an accountant can their inclination to numbers, then we're losing out on a lot.

I once worked for a company where it was mandatory (highly encourage and if you did not you might find yourself being fired) to read Alas Shrugged ... with the boss asking you questions as you read it to try understand your political ideology.

No, it is not ok to force someone to adopt a political ideology, religion or any other thought process.

It was a terrible job, a terrible work environment and I quit as soon as I found a new job.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com