anarkhos

Our present time may be characterized by the predominance of flawed class based reasoning. This flawed mode of reasoning underlies many contemporary injustices. The chief proponents of this form of reason, surprisingly, are the intelligentsia of the American liberal left. What do we mean by class based reasoning?

For the purposes of this essay, we define class based reasoning as: Making inferences about individuals based upon the qualities they share. Given a set of qualities, all individuals sharing those qualities may be grouped, conceptually, into a class. When we give a name to a class, we create a shorthand for all individuals sharing the qualities denoted by the name of the class. For example, the class left handed humans denotes the collection of all individual humans sharing the common quality of being left handed. The knowledge that an individual is a member of this class imparts upon us the knowledge that the individual is a human and the individual is left handed. In the absence of any other knowledge, we can conclude nothing more. Class based reasoning provides a convenient shorthand in the process of logical inference. If we know that something is true of all members of a class, then we can represent this true something for each individual sharing that something as membership in the class. Thus, class based reasoning is a powerful mechanism of great utility in reasoning. Like most powerful mechanisms, its abuse leads to large consequences. This abuse and its consequence is the topic of this essay.

Class based reasoning is merely a conceptual shortcut. Without class based reasoning, we would need to affix attributive knowledge about each individual directly to our representation of that individual. By allowing us to abstract this knowledge and associate it with a class, our knowledge representation becomes much more compact. This facilitates faster reasoning. Inferences made on the basis of class membership can be attributed to every member of a class. Thus one inference over a class has as much power as an inference for every member of the class. If the class is large, then the leverage of a class based inference is large.

For example, if we know that left handed individuals eat with a fork in their left hand, then the knowledge that Mary is a member of the class of left handed humans carries with it the knowledge that marry eats with a fork in her left hand. If the class left handed humans contains 1 billion members, then we know this same fact for 1 billion individuals. This is a logically valid use of class based reasoning. We will now discuss the invalid cases.

Invalid cases often derive from the application of statistical analysis to the members of a class. The results of this statistical analysis are often affixed to the class itself. The attribution of statistical analysis to the class itself is always invalid and often equivocal. Once a property is affixed to a class, the mind applies the quality to its individuals. Statistical analyses are not applicable to individuals. Thus, the application of statistical analysis to the class leads to false inferences about the individuals comprising the class.

For example, let us suppose that we encounter an alien race known as the plutonians. An intelligence test is given to a randomly chosen and theoretically representative sample of individual plutonians. The test indicates that the average plutonian has an IQ of 150, based on a scale which when applied to humans results in an average IQ of 100. We now have two classes. The class of plutonians and the class of humans. We also have two studies. One study indicates that the average plutionian has an IQ of 150 and the other that the average human as an IQ of 100. Using false class based reasoning we make the following assertion: plutonians are more intelligent than humans. We open the door and a plutonian previously unknown to us enters the room. She introduces herself as Methana. Behind Methana a human enters. He introduces himself as Matt. We are aware of the intelligence studies. Additionally, we are practitioners of false class based reasoning. We conclude that Methana is more intelligent than Matt. But is this really so?

What do we actually know about Methana and Matt? Well, we know that Methana is a plutonian female and we know that Matt is a human male. Beyond that, we know nothing more about either of them. Clearly, we have no idea who is the most intelligent of the two. We don't even know if Methana is more likely to be more intelligent than Matt. This may seem surprising, but it is true. For all we know, all plutonians with the exception of one individual are no more intelligent than tree frogs. That one exceptional individual may be so highly intelligent that he or she brings the average of the whole race up to 150. The fact that Methana introduced herself does not imply that she is intelligent. Perhaps every unintelligent plutonian chirps what sounds like "my name is Methana" whenever they enter a room!

As we asserted earlier, false class based reasoning is a source of injustice. There are several categories of injustice derived from false class based reasoning:

• The injustice of denial based on false class attributions
• The injustice of reward based on false class attributions
• The injustice of abstract justice based on class membership
• The injustice to science based on belief in false class based reasoning

Let us consider each of these categories in turn.

The Injustice of Denial Based on False Class Attributions

When we use false class reasoning, we may disregard the properties of an individual based upon our beliefs about the class of which the individual is a member. Using our earlier example, if Methana and Matt were candidates for a job in the Interplanetary Research Institute, false class based reasoning would lead us to believe that Methana is more intelligent than Matt. This might play a large role in our hiring decision. If Methana were chosen over Matt based upon this determination, Matt would become a victim of denied opportunity based on faulty reasoning.

The Injustice of Reward Based on False Class Attributions

In our previous example, we see that Methana was unjustly rewarded as a consequence of false reasoning. Methana may be as qualified for the position as a tree frog, yet, despite this, she was given the job. More complex examples of this same phenomenon exist. Let us consider the process of hiring police officers. Police officer candidates are often given psychological tests before they are permitted to be a police officer. These tests are often correlated with later job success, where job success is measured by length of time as a police officer or successful attainment of higher positions within a police department. These tests have shown a strong correlation between average intelligence and success as a police officer. Based on this observation, members of the class highly intelligent individual may be discriminated against in hiring for positions within a police department. Correspondingly, members of the class average individual are rewarded with jobs based upon this false class based reasoning. Having made no attempt to understand why it is that intelligent individuals are less "successful" as police officers, the reward given to members of the class average individual is unjust. This injustice has two roots. The first root is that it may not take into account that the most successful police officer is more intelligent. Such a fact would be hidden if most successful police officers were less than average in intelligence. The second root of this injustice is that the practice of giving police jobs more frequently to unintelligent individuals may create an environment in which intelligent individuals cannot succeed.

Perhaps the most pernicious injustices created by belief in false class reasoning are committed by the justice and court systems in American society. We begin with the justice system.

Race and economic class play a large role in the application of charges against individuals for crimes. Police, who consistently apply false class based reasoning, are more likely to ignore crimes committed by members of groups that they believe are on the average more likely to commit the crime. For example, since African Americans are perceived by the police to be more violent than European of Asian Americans, the police are more likely not to bring charges against individual African Americans who are observed participating in or accused of violent behavior. The author has encountered this phenomenon personally. After being threatened with a knife in a post office by an African American male, the police declined to bring charges against the assailant, telling me that, "If I lived in his neighborhood, " (which I did), "I too would carry a knife." The individual was charged, however, with parking in a handicapped parking spot. Apparently, the issue of challenging authority was more important to the officers involved than the assault with a knife.

This form of injustice is practiced within the court system as well. Judges, perceiving that members of a class "ought to know better", are more likely to punish, as an example, individuals whose class is believed to be more responsible than individuals whose class is perceived to be less responsible. Likewise, because of perceptions about the motivations of women verses the motivations of men, ignoring the actual individuals, judges routinely apply tougher sentences to males than to females.

The Injustice to Science Based on Belief in False Class Based Reasoning

One of the most pathetic results of belief in false class based reason is the stigmatization of scientists who study human demographics. Any individual who collects statistical data on intelligence based on membership in some class, whether the class be defined by race, sex, or economics, is routinely accused of being a racist, sexist, or elitist. Individuals making such accusations are themselves committing the mental equivocation that results in bigoted beliefs. These critics assume that statistical data applies to all individuals within a group, and therefore, any study showing differences in aptitude between classes must be evidence of a difference in the value of the individuals who comprise those classes. As we have shown above, this is false class based reasoning. The statistically analysis of a class does not attribute any qualities to the individuals of that class nor does it prove any causal relationship between the properties of the class and the individuals that comprise it. Science should be guided only by empiricism and never by the ideology of the time.

The first step towards eliminating false class based reasoning is to refrain from using it in your own reasoning process. The next step is to point out instances of its false application whenever they are encountered. Perhaps the most powerful step is to refuse to be used as a source in class based reasoning when you know that the reasoning process will be invalidly applied. The best mechanism for accomplishing this task is to refuse to give information that would identify your class membership. For example, when given a form that asks for your race, refuse to answer or simply write "human." When asked for you sex, do not give it. When asked for income, refuse this as well. In general, a wise tactic in the battle against false class based reasoning is to refuse to give any demographic information at all.