> Instead he advocates the use of such scores when choosing between candidates for a job.
I'm struggling to understand how this doesn't wind up being a proxy for racism/sexism and the other things we abhor when considering equal opportunity.
I'm struggling to understand how this doesn't wind up being a proxy for racism/sexism and the other things we abhor when considering equal opportunity.
Genetic variation inside races is much larger than between them. I don't think that that genetic screening is a good idea, but if it would be rigorously and blindly applied, it would probably break up many race and gender barriers.
We already do ad hoc screening based on phenotypes determined by genes.
* taller men have higher wages than shorter men.
* beautiful women get jobs more easily than ugly women.
* facial asymmetries and other small deviations from the norm affect the prospects of many people.
Do you have a source for this? It sounds suspiciously like feel good propaganda.
Here is good article that explains it more clearly: Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/
>The proportion of human genetic variation due to differences between populations is modest, and individuals from different populations can be genetically more similar than individuals from the same population. Yet sufficient genetic data can permit accurate classification of individuals into populations. Both findings can be obtained from the same data set, using the same number of polymorphic loci. This article explains why.
....
>The fact that, given enough genetic data, individuals can be correctly assigned to their populations of origin is compatible with the observation that most human genetic variation is found within populations, not between them. It is also compatible with our finding that, even when the most distinct populations are considered and hundreds of loci are used, individuals are frequently more similar to members of other populations than to members of their own population. Thus, caution should be used when using geographic or genetic ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-...
https://www.americanscientist.org/article/is-race-real
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/genetics-history...
Those are literally the first three results from the google search "is race real from science point of view".
Having said so, may I remind you that the biggest predictor for your own personal wealth is the wealth of your parents, so you know.
Here's the gist: Human bad. Capital good.
I personally believe we should strive to create a better world for 100% of the population, not justify the shortfallings of the current mixed-capi-soci system.
The alternative is giving out jobs by guesswork. It could be argued that by not checking for aptitude, we are doing quite a bit of that now.