If someone states something that is a statistic(one that has been studied and proven) do you hold it against them as a generalization or do you take it into serious consideration?
For instance the majority of rich people happen to be white. I agree that saying something like"Only white people are rich" would be racist and an incorrect generalization ,but where is the line that separates ignorance and evaluated statistics?
2006-09-16 05:35:45 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Statistics are generalizations. Counts of all those who work in a building that wear open toed shoes would be legitimate - or would it? If you wore open toes because of toe surgery - does that count? Does it change the statistic. Likewise, if the count was of open toed shoe wearers but the counter only counted those whose shoes they liked, that would be a biased answer.
The TV ratings are biased. How else do the good shows get cancelled and the losers stay on the air? If you limit the count to a specific, then when it gets applied it also needs to only be applied to a specific.
Going back to my example, if you count open toe shoe wearers in a law firm in Atlanta, but use the statistic to cite women in Georgia as always wearing Open Toes, it is invalid.
2006-09-16 05:41:31 · answer #1 · answered by Doris B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That would be racial profiling to generalize someone's probable economic status based upon race, even with statistics to back you up.
2006-09-16 12:44:22 · answer #2 · answered by Wait a Minute 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The line is very fine, so yes, stats are generalized.
2006-09-16 12:37:17 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
they're rigged to make it look like it 49-51 in either case.
2006-09-16 12:37:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
True and honest surveys, if you ran into it!
Ciao..John-John.
2006-09-16 12:39:33 · answer #5 · answered by John-John 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋