From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Tue May 28 2002 - 17:26:10 MDT
On Tuesday, May 28, 2002, at 04:14 pm, CurtAdams@aol.com wrote:
> Assuming group identity is informative, most people will be treated more
> accurately most of the time if others use group identity to inform
> actions.
Assuming group identity is not informative, most people will be treated
less accurately most of the time if others use group identity to inform
actions. Or in other words, using group identity to inform actions only
works if it is proven that group identity is directly and consistently
informative for the trait being questioned.
> "People who have been nice to you in the past", after all, is
> just another group.
Incorrect. "People who have been nice to you in the past" is a group
derived from specific measurements of individuals. Only individuals who
were nice are in the group. Any individuals who were not nice are
excluded. Group membership derives from the judgment. The group is an
accurate demarkation of the determinate trait.
Using group membership to inform actions is the exact opposite of this
approach. People are assigned to groups first without specific
measurements being made of the individuals. Individuals who don't have
the assumed trait are included in the group sometimes. Individuals who
do have the assumed trait are excluded from the group sometimes.
Judgment derives from group membership. The group is NOT an accurate
demarkation of the determinate trait.
These are not the same thing at all, but are in fact polar opposites!
One way works and is a mathematically valid according to set theory.
One way does NOT work and is mathematically INVALID according to set
theory.
-- Harvey Newstrom, CISSP <www.HarveyNewstrom.com> Principal Security Consultant <www.Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:27 MST