Racism

[ written by friend. posted anonymously ]

First, even in science, the role of science is to inform not to decide. This is the empirical method. We do science to prove something, and then we use that to inform our next steps. This is and always has been the appropriate role of science. The fact is, science is merely data, in this context. Data can't make decisions. It definitely cannot make value judgements. Politics is all about value judgements. Data is really good at providing context for value judgements, but it can't make those judgements. What does science say about racism? It exists. The distrust of people who are different is an evolutionary trait, evolved because it was useful for improving odds of survival. It is no longer strictly necessary for that purpose among humans, because we have developed civilized cultures where we don't go around murdering each other all the time. Is racism evil? This is an opinion, not data. Science does not have opinions. Science cannot make that value judgement. If we add a value judgement, science can answer the factual parts.

For example, if we decide that all people deserve to be treated well, science can be used to conclude that racism that results in poor treatment of people is bad. Note, however, that given that axiom, it doesn't support the conclusion that being racist is evil, only that mistreating people (out of racism or not) is evil. In addition, the same axiom can be used to conclude that treating racists poorly is just as bad as racists treating people they are racist against poorly. Of course, this isn't the SJW axiom. The SJW axiom is that merely being racist is evil, even if it doesn't result in bad or harmful behavior. They've cut science out the problem entirely, which is just a little ironic, I think.