I as many people here already know have read a few dozen books on psychology, neuroscience and related subjects since leaving Scientology.
I think a cornerstone of CRT(critical race theory) is A HASTY GENERALIZATION.
In fact it is DEBUNKED by the VERY EVIDENCE people in CRT use to support their claims!
One of the best pieces of scientific evidence that supports the claim that racism and racist attitudes are prevalent and subconscious racism is present in people, including people who are unaware of it consciously.
The Implicit Association Test is used to be the basis of many claims about race and subconscious attitudes.
I read several books on how psychology experiments and studies are constructed and carried out and how the results are evaluated.
The book Blindspot is specifically about the Implicit Association Test is used and its results. If you read a few books on psychological priming and cognitive dissonance theory in my opinion you can see that the research on implicit bias is consistent with a lot of other ideas about psychology research and the interpretation of results. It looks like genuinely good research.
I read Blindspot and realized there is a crucial shift that CRT proponents and some media and academics are making that is dishonest and similar to a shift used by Ronald Hubbard in Scientology.
If you don't actually read the results of the studies and discipline yourself to look for accuracy and precision you might miss it. Fortunately I read Blindspot. The entire book cover to cover.
I am going to quote an excerpt from an article quoting the same research used in the book Blindspot and contrast that with a quote from an article in the media. It could be from dozens of newspapers or online news sites. It certainly could be from an academic source or expert. I have seen the same claim over and over from many different sources.
"Research on “implicit bias” suggests that people can act on the basis of prejudice and stereotypes without intending to do so. While psychologists in the field of “implicit social cognition” study consumer products, self-esteem, food, alcohol, political values, and more, the most striking and well-known research has focused on implicit biases toward members of socially stigmatized groups, such as African-Americans, women, and the LGBTQ community.[1] For example, imagine Frank, who explicitly believes that women and men are equally suited for careers outside the home. Despite his explicitly egalitarian belief, Frank might nevertheless behave in any number of biased ways, from distrusting feedback from female co-workers to hiring equally qualified men over women. Part of the reason for Frank’s discriminatory behavior might be an implicit gender bias. Psychological research on implicit bias has grown steadily (§1), raising metaphysical (§2), epistemological (§3), and ethical questions (§4).[2]
One review (Nosek et al. 2007), which tested over 700,000 subjects on the race-evaluation IAT, found that over 70% of white participants more easily associated black faces with negative words (e.g., war, bad) and white faces with positive words (e.g., peace, good). The researchers consider this an implicit preference for white faces over black faces.[5]"
From
I think a cornerstone of CRT(critical race theory) is A HASTY GENERALIZATION.
In fact it is DEBUNKED by the VERY EVIDENCE people in CRT use to support their claims!
One of the best pieces of scientific evidence that supports the claim that racism and racist attitudes are prevalent and subconscious racism is present in people, including people who are unaware of it consciously.
The Implicit Association Test is used to be the basis of many claims about race and subconscious attitudes.
I read several books on how psychology experiments and studies are constructed and carried out and how the results are evaluated.
The book Blindspot is specifically about the Implicit Association Test is used and its results. If you read a few books on psychological priming and cognitive dissonance theory in my opinion you can see that the research on implicit bias is consistent with a lot of other ideas about psychology research and the interpretation of results. It looks like genuinely good research.
I read Blindspot and realized there is a crucial shift that CRT proponents and some media and academics are making that is dishonest and similar to a shift used by Ronald Hubbard in Scientology.
If you don't actually read the results of the studies and discipline yourself to look for accuracy and precision you might miss it. Fortunately I read Blindspot. The entire book cover to cover.
I am going to quote an excerpt from an article quoting the same research used in the book Blindspot and contrast that with a quote from an article in the media. It could be from dozens of newspapers or online news sites. It certainly could be from an academic source or expert. I have seen the same claim over and over from many different sources.
"Research on “implicit bias” suggests that people can act on the basis of prejudice and stereotypes without intending to do so. While psychologists in the field of “implicit social cognition” study consumer products, self-esteem, food, alcohol, political values, and more, the most striking and well-known research has focused on implicit biases toward members of socially stigmatized groups, such as African-Americans, women, and the LGBTQ community.[1] For example, imagine Frank, who explicitly believes that women and men are equally suited for careers outside the home. Despite his explicitly egalitarian belief, Frank might nevertheless behave in any number of biased ways, from distrusting feedback from female co-workers to hiring equally qualified men over women. Part of the reason for Frank’s discriminatory behavior might be an implicit gender bias. Psychological research on implicit bias has grown steadily (§1), raising metaphysical (§2), epistemological (§3), and ethical questions (§4).[2]
One review (Nosek et al. 2007), which tested over 700,000 subjects on the race-evaluation IAT, found that over 70% of white participants more easily associated black faces with negative words (e.g., war, bad) and white faces with positive words (e.g., peace, good). The researchers consider this an implicit preference for white faces over black faces.[5]"
From
Mockingbird
Well-known member
Here are a few quotes on implicit bias from a Vox article:
"Implicit biases are pervasive. Researchers say everyone possesses them, even people like judges, who have avowed commitments to impartiality.
And they don't just stay tucked away in our unconscious until they're revealed by a computer game. They determine how we behave. There is increasing evidence that implicit bias — including implicit racial bias, which the IAT measures — predicts behavior in the real world. This behavior, of course, harms the people who are members of groups that are the subjects of negative implicit bias."
Here is the title of the article:
Implicit bias means we're all probably at least a little bit racist
The kicker is the article interprets the book Blindspot
From
www.vox.com
"Implicit biases are pervasive. Researchers say everyone possesses them, even people like judges, who have avowed commitments to impartiality.
And they don't just stay tucked away in our unconscious until they're revealed by a computer game. They determine how we behave. There is increasing evidence that implicit bias — including implicit racial bias, which the IAT measures — predicts behavior in the real world. This behavior, of course, harms the people who are members of groups that are the subjects of negative implicit bias."
Here is the title of the article:
Implicit bias means we're all probably at least a little bit racist
The kicker is the article interprets the book Blindspot
From
Implicit bias means we're all probably at least a little bit racist
Think of it as "thoughts about people you didn't know you had."
www.vox.comMockingbird
Well-known member
See my point - the IAT found that 70% of white people had negative associations with black people. 70% is not 100%. That point is crucial.
The media and academics are using a test that found evidence that is interpreted as supporting the claim that 70% of white respondents show a negative bias against black people.
Then the media and academics move the goalposts and change the claim to "everyone is racist" and they say the IAT results are the evidence for the claim!
The claim everyone is racist and has implicit biases is NOT SUPPORTED BY THE VERY EVIDENCE THAT IS USED TO SUPPORT THE CLAIM!!!
But you have to read the studies and understand the results to point out the bullshit that Vox and everyone who wants to say "white fragility", "internalized racism" are real and omnipresent in EVERYONE needs to support their claims.
They need the result of the IAT to ALWAYS show that EVERYONE ALWAYS has implicit biases that are racist. CRT is based on this assumption.
The simple fact is it is similar to the claim in Scientology that ALL DIFFICULTIES ALWAYS stem from "misunderstood words" in studying Scientology, which I hope anyone reading this can understand is not a true statement.
Some difficulties in studying Scientology come from other sources like contradictions in Scientology doctrine or logical fallacies or unsupported claims.
In Scientology the best example is probably when Hubbard gives us the definition and characteristics of the social and antisocial personality then shifts it when defining the suppressive person.
The media and academics are using a test that found evidence that is interpreted as supporting the claim that 70% of white respondents show a negative bias against black people.
Then the media and academics move the goalposts and change the claim to "everyone is racist" and they say the IAT results are the evidence for the claim!
The claim everyone is racist and has implicit biases is NOT SUPPORTED BY THE VERY EVIDENCE THAT IS USED TO SUPPORT THE CLAIM!!!
But you have to read the studies and understand the results to point out the bullshit that Vox and everyone who wants to say "white fragility", "internalized racism" are real and omnipresent in EVERYONE needs to support their claims.
They need the result of the IAT to ALWAYS show that EVERYONE ALWAYS has implicit biases that are racist. CRT is based on this assumption.
The simple fact is it is similar to the claim in Scientology that ALL DIFFICULTIES ALWAYS stem from "misunderstood words" in studying Scientology, which I hope anyone reading this can understand is not a true statement.
Some difficulties in studying Scientology come from other sources like contradictions in Scientology doctrine or logical fallacies or unsupported claims.
In Scientology the best example is probably when Hubbard gives us the definition and characteristics of the social and antisocial personality then shifts it when defining the suppressive person.
Mockingbird
Well-known member
Here is an excerpt on the antisocial personality from the Scientology Handbook:
Attributes
The antisocial personality has the following attributes:
1. He or she speaks only in very broad generalities. “They say...” “Everybody thinks...” “Everyone knows...” and such expressions are in continual use, particularly when imparting rumor. When asked, “Who is everybody...” it normally turns out to be one source and from this source the antisocial person has manufactured what he or she pretends is the whole opinion of the whole society.
This is natural to them since to them all society is a large hostile generality, against the antisocial in particular.
2. Such a person deals mainly in bad news, critical or hostile remarks, invalidation and general suppression.
“Gossip” or “bearer of evil tidings” or “rumormonger” once described such persons.
It is notable that there is no good news or complimentary remark passed on by such a person.
3. The antisocial personality alters, to worsen, communication when he or she relays a message or news. Good news is stopped and only bad news, often embellished, is passed along.
Such a person also pretends to pass on “bad news” which is in actual fact invented.
4. A characteristic, and one of the sad things about an antisocial personality, is that it does not respond to treatment or reform.
5. Surrounding such a personality we find cowed or ill associates or friends who, when not driven actually insane, are yet behaving in a crippled manner in life, failing, not succeeding.
Such people make trouble for others.
When treated or educated, the near associate of the antisocial personality has no stability of gain but promptly relapses or loses his advantages of knowledge, being under the suppressive influence of the other.
Physically treated, such associates commonly do not recover in the expected time but worsen and have poor convalescences.
It is quite useless to treat or help or train such persons so long as they remain under the influence of the antisocial connection.
The largest number of insane are insane because of such antisocial connections and do not recover easily for the same reason.
Unjustly we seldom see the antisocial personality actually in an institution. Only his “friends” and family are there.
6. The antisocial personality habitually selects the wrong target.
If a tire is flat from driving over nails, he or she curses a companion or a noncausative source of the trouble. If the radio next door is too loud, he or she kicks the cat.
If A is the obvious cause, the antisocial personality inevitably blames B or C or D.
7. The antisocial cannot finish a cycle of action. Any action goes through a sequence wherein the action is begun, is continued for as long as is required and is completed as planned. In Scientology, this is called a cycle of action.
The antisocial becomes surrounded with incomplete projects.
8. Many antisocial persons will freely confess to the most alarming crimes when forced to do so, but will have no faintest sense of responsibility for them.
Their actions have little or nothing to do with their own volition. Things “just happened.”
They have no sense of correct causation and particularly cannot feel any sense of remorse or shame therefore.
9. The antisocial personality supports only destructive groups and rages against and attacks any constructive or betterment group.
10. This type of personality approves only of destructive actions and fights against constructive or helpful actions or activities.
The artist in particular is often found as a magnet for persons with antisocial personalities who see in his art something which must be destroyed and covertly, “as a friend,” proceed to try.
11. Helping others is an activity which drives the antisocial personality nearly berserk. Activities, however, which destroy in the name of help are closely supported.
12. The antisocial personality has a bad sense of property and conceives that the idea that anyone owns anything is a pretense, made up to fool people. Nothing is ever really owned.
Attributes
The antisocial personality has the following attributes:
1. He or she speaks only in very broad generalities. “They say...” “Everybody thinks...” “Everyone knows...” and such expressions are in continual use, particularly when imparting rumor. When asked, “Who is everybody...” it normally turns out to be one source and from this source the antisocial person has manufactured what he or she pretends is the whole opinion of the whole society.
This is natural to them since to them all society is a large hostile generality, against the antisocial in particular.
2. Such a person deals mainly in bad news, critical or hostile remarks, invalidation and general suppression.
“Gossip” or “bearer of evil tidings” or “rumormonger” once described such persons.
It is notable that there is no good news or complimentary remark passed on by such a person.
3. The antisocial personality alters, to worsen, communication when he or she relays a message or news. Good news is stopped and only bad news, often embellished, is passed along.
Such a person also pretends to pass on “bad news” which is in actual fact invented.
4. A characteristic, and one of the sad things about an antisocial personality, is that it does not respond to treatment or reform.
5. Surrounding such a personality we find cowed or ill associates or friends who, when not driven actually insane, are yet behaving in a crippled manner in life, failing, not succeeding.
Such people make trouble for others.
When treated or educated, the near associate of the antisocial personality has no stability of gain but promptly relapses or loses his advantages of knowledge, being under the suppressive influence of the other.
Physically treated, such associates commonly do not recover in the expected time but worsen and have poor convalescences.
It is quite useless to treat or help or train such persons so long as they remain under the influence of the antisocial connection.
The largest number of insane are insane because of such antisocial connections and do not recover easily for the same reason.
Unjustly we seldom see the antisocial personality actually in an institution. Only his “friends” and family are there.
6. The antisocial personality habitually selects the wrong target.
If a tire is flat from driving over nails, he or she curses a companion or a noncausative source of the trouble. If the radio next door is too loud, he or she kicks the cat.
If A is the obvious cause, the antisocial personality inevitably blames B or C or D.
7. The antisocial cannot finish a cycle of action. Any action goes through a sequence wherein the action is begun, is continued for as long as is required and is completed as planned. In Scientology, this is called a cycle of action.
The antisocial becomes surrounded with incomplete projects.
8. Many antisocial persons will freely confess to the most alarming crimes when forced to do so, but will have no faintest sense of responsibility for them.
Their actions have little or nothing to do with their own volition. Things “just happened.”
They have no sense of correct causation and particularly cannot feel any sense of remorse or shame therefore.
9. The antisocial personality supports only destructive groups and rages against and attacks any constructive or betterment group.
10. This type of personality approves only of destructive actions and fights against constructive or helpful actions or activities.
The artist in particular is often found as a magnet for persons with antisocial personalities who see in his art something which must be destroyed and covertly, “as a friend,” proceed to try.
11. Helping others is an activity which drives the antisocial personality nearly berserk. Activities, however, which destroy in the name of help are closely supported.
12. The antisocial personality has a bad sense of property and conceives that the idea that anyone owns anything is a pretense, made up to fool people. Nothing is ever really owned.
Mockingbird
Well-known member
In HCOPL, 23 Dec 65RB, Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists, LRH wrote that, “A SUPPRESSIVE PERSON or GROUP is one that actively seeks to suppress or damage Scientology or a Scientologist by suppressive acts. SUPPRESSIVE ACTS are acts calculated to impede or destroy Scientology or a Scientologist and which are listed at length in this policy letter.”
Contrast this against two characteristics of the antisocial personality:
9. The antisocial personality supports only destructive groups and rages against and attacks any constructive or betterment group.
10. This type of personality approves only of destructive actions and fights against constructive or helpful actions or activities.
Hubbard equates the suppressive person and antisocial personality as the same 20% of the population.
He shifted from the antisocial personality opposing beneficial groups all of the time to the suppressive person always opposing Scientology.
The unspoken corollary you are supposed to conclude is that the antisocial personality and suppressive person are identical and always oppose good groups and since the SP/AP always opposes Scientology then Scientology must always be a beneficial group.
By being indoctrinated in the doctrine of Scientology this subtle shift is presented and never pointed out.
Scientologists come to equate Scientology with a beneficial group. And rarely question this idea.
Similarly the proponents of CRT take the claim in the book Blindspot that "the researchers interpret the results of over 700,000 implicit association tests as showing that 70% of white respondents show the implicit racial bias against black people" and shift the claim to "everyone is racist, science proved it!"
And a lot of media and academics are using this evidence against 100% of white people being racist to "prove" that 100% of white people are racist!
They are doing this because it is far easier to promote the CRT doctrine if every single person fits every stereotype they embrace.
If anyone says that CRT or the implicit association test shows that people are racist, especially ALL people or all white people are racist you can say let's look at the evidence!
Right here it shows the researchers found that they interpreted the results as supporting the claim that 70% of white people are racist. Fascinating, what if I am in the other 30%?
If they say it is unlikely simply say how do you KNOW?
You can point out that if 30% of the black people in prison are innocent that is a terrible injustice!
It needs the entire system to go through major reform and for thousands of people to get released and have their records expunged and for them to be compensated for the persecution they suffered.
So, if 30% of white people are labeled racist because 70% have results that are interpreted demonstrating subconscious bias then isn't it wrong to describe 100% of white people as always racist?
This information is the foundation of the scientific evidence that the CRT hangs on. It is used to support "white fragility", "internalized privilege" , "internalized racism" and other mind reading claims rely on this "scientific" "evidence" that everyone is racist on a subconscious level.
I hope this helps some people.
Contrast this against two characteristics of the antisocial personality:
9. The antisocial personality supports only destructive groups and rages against and attacks any constructive or betterment group.
10. This type of personality approves only of destructive actions and fights against constructive or helpful actions or activities.
Hubbard equates the suppressive person and antisocial personality as the same 20% of the population.
He shifted from the antisocial personality opposing beneficial groups all of the time to the suppressive person always opposing Scientology.
The unspoken corollary you are supposed to conclude is that the antisocial personality and suppressive person are identical and always oppose good groups and since the SP/AP always opposes Scientology then Scientology must always be a beneficial group.
By being indoctrinated in the doctrine of Scientology this subtle shift is presented and never pointed out.
Scientologists come to equate Scientology with a beneficial group. And rarely question this idea.
Similarly the proponents of CRT take the claim in the book Blindspot that "the researchers interpret the results of over 700,000 implicit association tests as showing that 70% of white respondents show the implicit racial bias against black people" and shift the claim to "everyone is racist, science proved it!"
And a lot of media and academics are using this evidence against 100% of white people being racist to "prove" that 100% of white people are racist!
They are doing this because it is far easier to promote the CRT doctrine if every single person fits every stereotype they embrace.
If anyone says that CRT or the implicit association test shows that people are racist, especially ALL people or all white people are racist you can say let's look at the evidence!
Right here it shows the researchers found that they interpreted the results as supporting the claim that 70% of white people are racist. Fascinating, what if I am in the other 30%?
If they say it is unlikely simply say how do you KNOW?
You can point out that if 30% of the black people in prison are innocent that is a terrible injustice!
It needs the entire system to go through major reform and for thousands of people to get released and have their records expunged and for them to be compensated for the persecution they suffered.
So, if 30% of white people are labeled racist because 70% have results that are interpreted demonstrating subconscious bias then isn't it wrong to describe 100% of white people as always racist?
This information is the foundation of the scientific evidence that the CRT hangs on. It is used to support "white fragility", "internalized privilege" , "internalized racism" and other mind reading claims rely on this "scientific" "evidence" that everyone is racist on a subconscious level.
I hope this helps some people.
Last edited:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.