No badges yet
This user hasn't setup their profile yet. What a shame!
TokoyamiSenshi joined on Aug 18th, 2010, since that has made 371 posts that are still accessible today, 3 of which are threads. Helping shape the community, TokoyamiSenshi has given 380 upvotes, and was last online on Nov 17th, 2012.
@eterno: That is where you're wrong. Average is not a generalization because you know exactly what it is. "Americans are fat." is a stupid generalization. "On average, Americans are more likely to be fat than the rest of the world." is a statistical observation. Can you see the difference? If not, it is in the fact that you're stating what you did. When you say 'on average', it's an explicit statement of what you did with the data, and anyone who knows what average is, knows that not even a single person has to fit it for it to be the way it is.
There's this silly joke about a physicist, a chemist and a mathematician at a shooting range. The physicist shoots and goes 'oh no, I missed 20cm to the left'. Then comes the chemist, shoots and says 'aww, I missed 20cm to the right' and the mathematician goes 'fuck yeah guys, it's spot on!'
Here comes the supporting data, then. I've been to Japan with 65 other people from 65 other countries. That's right, 65. That's, like, entire world, more-less. We went all over the place, from Osaka, Nara, Kyoto to Hiroshima and Nagasaki and needless to say, I've met a lot of Japanese people. None, I repeat, none fit in those stereotypes. Again, not a single one. And we've met all kinds of people, from university professors which taught us Japanese to random people from the neighbourhood to nationalist party protesters(that's right!) to kindergarten kids. Kindergarten kids rock wherever you go.
I hope that was enough empirical data to point a flaw in "Japanese are all secluded conformists and they kind of don't like you."
It may have to do with the fact that I'm actually able to comunicate with them, but still, that's how it is.
Even if the people who posted here did research, and even if it was good research, the way they presented results made me sad. Empirical data, my bro, is everything when it comes to people. You don't need a general assessment of 130 million people. It's not like you're gonna meet them all. You need empirical data on those you meet. And you won't get it if you carry your prejudice in. About the 10% again, bad wording. The point I tried to make was different.
@bleachedsnow: It's deep if you care to notice what semantics we're debating here :)
@eterno: No, nazi Germany is no special case and no, Schindler was not the only good German. On average, people are idiots.
I am well aware that our knowledge is based on generalizations. Not only that, I am well aware that historians deny many possibilities in the face of evidence simply because it would change the way we view history. History is, on average, bullshit. I kinda don't like it, but still, there are some morals to draw from it.
My bad with your point about the 10%, bad wording. It doesn't matter what they think about you, it still doesn't change the fact that by generalizing, you're wrong about those people.
There are exactly 0 generalizations in my stance on why generalization is stupid and insensitive. What I used is called statistics(percentages were exemplary, of course).
As for the part about one's own nation, yeah, you're right. It was a generalization. A bad one, at that. You have my apologies.
And finally, if wars are smart, yeah, great generalizations they got there.
As a side note, I grew up in a war-torn country and people, even my family, they still carry the ethnic generalizations left behind. It's done nothing but hurt us all, no matter how trivial, and when shit hits the fan, it will spark the hate again. That is why I really, really can't stand stereotypes.
@eterno: Every generalization(as in, a lossy compression of the real state) is stupid and insensitive in social context. We're talking people here, and if 90% of the people do fall into a category which you're generalizing, that still makes you a dickhead in the eyes of the remaining 10% which is millions when talking about nations. My humble engineering opinion, backed by elementary school math.
There is no point in rebuking generalized opinions on a case-to-case basis because they contain an error by mathematical definition, unless you can find a property of a nation which all of it's citizens obey, other than 'they're all humans'.
My point here is, if you had bad experiences, don't blame them on the nation as a whole, shit happens anywhere. Hell, I'm sure you've all had plenty of bad experiences at home but it still doesn't make you go all bananas over how your nation sucks. You just shoved your hand in a bag of apples and pulled out a rotten one. Tough luck, but it doesn't mean all of them are rotten.
I hope this clarifies why generalizations are bad and what I meant by stupid.
It's obviously fiction. That doesn't change the fact that continuation is due.
This thread is now full of stupid generalizations and I don't like it.
I await the next part with eager anticipation and bated breath.
edit: @Rune: People who understand the concept of tastes are still superior to those who don't.
It seems to be something along the lines of
What worries me the most, as a human, is the crowd's extatic reaction.
I want that scythe.
What if we trained a neural network to read people's posts and do all the critique for us(from a predetermined set of critiques, of course)? We could call her server-tan and given enough computation power, she could become a really good asshole replacement.
She'd beat steam help service employees in a Turing test any day.
I'd like it more if her boobs were covered and not shiny.