...with examples, then one can only assume that you are arguing from a position of dogma.

I have not seen yet a cogent argument as to how the test was baised in favor of white candidates. I'm not a dim guy, I am sure someone must be able to explain it?

that having the public know the questions would only make things less clear. He is under the impression that the less the public knows, the more objective it is...

And he thinks he is a "progressive".

My view is - light is best disinfectant - and I have a feeling this is the real reason why degsme and the liberals don't want this test to be seen by the public.

NickBanglo:

...with examples, then one can only assume that you are arguing from a position of dogma.

I have not seen yet a cogent argument as to how the test was baised in favor of white candidates. I'm not a dim guy, I am sure someone must be able to explain it?

Bad assumption. Dogma implies belief absent supporting evidence something akin to the act of faith that transubstantiation is in fact a holy rite. OTOH the existance of Quantum Teleportation is hardly something you have the skills to discuss, yet there are at least 14,000 Scholarly papers online discussing it and who knows how many more not online. Simlarly there are over 18,000 Scholarly papers on Racial bias in aptitude Testing

Where do you get off making the claim that you are qualified to evaluate EITHER set of scholarly works?

A PhD in Theoretical Physics? maybe even a Masters in Social Work?

Yeah I didn't think so. Your biases are showing.

Nice attempt at a strawman. More data is not the same as more information. So if I give you the equation for Quantum teleportation ,

I assume you can tell me which of the four Bell States this is?

After all, the more "the public knows" about quantum teleportation, the more disinfected the magic is right???

Yeah I didn't think you had a clue

Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

My biases? What, pray, do you think they are?

Since you insist on going there, I am a professor of medicine who happens to specialise in epidemiology (that includes statistics, since you probably don't know that). My career includes a substantive period of research in the social and biological determinants of depression. I also happen to have a post-grad degree in computer science, with a special focus on mathematical logic.

So, I ask again - what are some examples of questions that are biased? I ask not to simply second guess someone's statements, but because I want to see what the argument is. Since you seem to be adopting the characteristic stance of the dogma-crippled, and engaging in presumptive attack, you seem to have missed my point yet again. So I will try it again ever more slowly.

I'm not making any claim that I'm qualified to evaluate any and every scholarly work. However, I do claim to be able to make a reasonable judgement as to whether the evidenciary basis and the "logic chain" that is purported to support a claim actually makes sense to me.

You are making assertions. Responding to questions with "its just too complicated for you; don't even ask..." is at best arrogant, at worst dangerous.

My suspicion is that the explanation is far simpler - that you have no friggin' idea what you are talking about.

I have enough math to understand that stuff. And if not - hey, I can always call for my PhD physics friends.

Dude, you have no f. idea who you f-ing with.

And more importantly, your claims that the stuff is too complex to understand - how do you know this if you haven't read the test?! Are you a psysic now?

Who are you talking to here? I did a search, and the term "biased questions" was not found in Ford's article. Or, the one before this one. The only use of "bias" applies to discrimination suffered by gays. The article argues:

Until this Monday, lawyers and judges thought of disparate impact law as a logical extension of the law against intentional discrimination: The premise of the discriminatory impact prohibition is that an employment practice that unnecessarily screens underrepresented groups from the work force is, in effect, just as discriminatory as a "whites only" sign.

Disparate impact was shown here. The majority argued however that the test was justified by business necessity and there was no better alternative shown. OTOH, the dissent and respondents both provided imho "cogent" (if open to debate) reasons to reject both arguments. And, to my knowledge, the test itself was never released publicly, so I unsure how Ford could point to specific "biased questions."

I need more proof that all he relies on is "dogma" here.

-j

Hmm post grad CompSci degree? Weren't you claiming to be a Med School Prof in another thread?

...yes. And I repeat that assertion here. You can choose not to believe me, that's fine. It's easier than actually tackling the question I pose to you, I guess.

So you also have a degree in astrophysics? Toss in an MFA?

Yah right.

Nope. Just medicine, and post-grad computer science emphasizing math & logic. I never claimed any quals in physics. I've been consistent about my educational background any time I've cited it. And I only brought it up since you seemed to be going on about how the tests would be too complicated for me to intepret.

But I am sure I can't possibly be smart enough to follow your arguments.

Oh, my posting was more directed to some of the postings here, not directly to the author of the originally published piece. I thougth the article was good and well reasoned, and not based on dogma but on law and the author's perspectiveson how the new ruling will affect civil rights.

I might disagree with his assessment of how "disastrous" the ruling is, though. I am inclined to believe that, at face value, the firefighters were indeed disrciminated against racially when the test results were thrown out.

-j

The point is that since you don't know what to look for, your ability to assess bias is at best limited to overt bias. Its a bit akin to trying to decipher Bush's invocation of Dredd Scott in his speaches if you don't know that Dred Scott invocation for conservative christians and anti-choice activists is code for the repeal of Roe

Absent an understanding of how bias creeps into testing, neither you nor I are in a position to judge its presence anymore than I am qualified to diagnose simply by reading a diagnostics manual or the average person is qualified to assess proofs of the 4 color problem (yes grad work in Comp sci here as well - particularly in denotational semantics).

And even less qualified are folks like Gringo who's biases are more than a touch evident.

degsme:

The point is that since you don't know what to look for, your ability to assess bias is at best limited to overt bias. Its a bit akin to trying to decipher Bush's invocation of Dredd Scott in his speaches if you don't know that Dred Scott invocation for conservative christians and anti-choice activists is code for the repeal of Roe

This makes no sense. It's quite clear to anyone that Dredd Scott would be used as an antiabortion message - denying humanity to one group is the same as another. That's *obvious* to all. How does that relate to bias in THIS case where the city bent over backwards to try and NOT be biased? Answer: it doesn't.