@xandrachurch@mas.to Thats a topic I've discussed many times. It was racist times no doubt, many of them were very strong supporters of abolition though and spent much of their career fighting for it. Others very much supported and encouraged slavery. views were also fairly backwards back then.

Its important to view it within the context of the time and some of the subtle details that are easy to overlook.

With that said its just not that simple

@xandrachurch@mas.to In fact I'd say you will have a very hard time finding anyone from that time period anywhere who didnt have some messed up views on race, even if they were pro-abolition (as many founding fathers were).

the best you could probably do is find someone who has some nice philosophies where you just dont know a damn thing about their opinions on race or know of it very minimally at best. Things that are clearly racist today back then could be seen as science and as almost undeniable truth even for the best of meaning people and it clouded a lot of opinions in a way that may appear racist even if the individually generally cared about and wanted to uplift minorities.

@freemo some of these have swung the other way now where if the stat sheets show any difference across racial lines they whine the test must be biased. i still ask from time to time what would be necessary to tell the difference between a genuine difference and a "biased" test @xandrachurch
Follow

@icedquinn yea thats true too. obviously sometimes we have examples of real pseudo-science bias, but we also have plenty examples as you describe where some difference along racial or sex lines is assumed to be bias and not possibly intrinsic. In reality the truth is rarely ever at an ideological extreme.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.