4 ms·

> Do you think it's somehow more altruistic to provide subjectively uglier individuals the same wage? Bias based on attractiveness is no worse than bias based o

> Do you think it's somehow more altruistic to provide subjectively uglier individuals the same wage? Bias based on attractiveness is no worse than bias based on personality or any other trait. Your point is moot anyway, in a capitalistic society people can just choose to visit another business where the staff has the traits they desire. Your point seems to be that there is no inherent moral good in distributing resources equally among people as opposed to allowing inequality to naturally emerge and/or optimizing for total value across all people. I don't necessarily disagree: it is hard to argue from first principles that each individual should be given the same weight, as opposed to any other arbitrary system like giving each family the same weight, or taking intelligence into account. However, it is also wrong to pretend that there isn't significant precedent in society for assigning each individual equal moral weight — for example, by allowing everyone an equal vote in elections, which has clearly been a useful practice. And I consider it obvious that "Bias based on attractiveness is no worse than bias based on personality or any other trait" isn't something that would be widely agreed upon.

DrThunder 4y ago
You are correct. In fact, I'd call it a moral BAD to forcefully redistribute resources according to someone's weird dystopian fantasy that everyone can be equal through some ridiculous idea of UN-achievable utopian equity. The ONLY way that is possible is to bring down the higher achieving people to the lowest common denominator. You cannot bring people UP past a certain level. "And I consider it obvious that "Bias based on attractiveness is no worse than bias based on personality or any other trait" isn't something that would be widely agreed upon." - This completely case dependent there are careers where intelligence is sought and there are careers where attractiveness may be advantageous. The only reason this is "obvious" to you is because you've been tainted by recent modern thought that believes there's no value in physical attractiveness.The fact your bias towards certain physical traits is fine while other physical traits are off limits should tell you something about the cognitive dissonance of this though pattern. Maybe you ought to ask yourself why it's ok to be biased against physical attractiveness but not physical skin color????

DrThunder 4y ago

You are correct. In fact, I'd call it a moral BAD to forcefully redistribute resources according to someone's weird dystopian fantasy that everyone can be equal through some ridiculous idea of UN-achievable utopian equity. The ONLY way that is possible is to bring down the higher achieving people to the lowest common denominator. You cannot bring people UP past a certain level. "And I consider it obvious that "Bias based on attractiveness is no worse than bias based on personality or any other trait" isn't something that would be widely agreed upon." - This completely case dependent there are careers where intelligence is sought and there are careers where attractiveness may be advantageous. The only reason this is "obvious" to you is because you've been tainted by recent modern thought that believes there's no value in physical attractiveness.The fact your bias towards certain physical traits is fine while other physical traits are off limits should tell you something about the cognitive dissonance of this though pattern. Maybe you ought to ask yourself why it's ok to be biased against physical attractiveness but not physical skin color????