| ▲ | chimpanzee 11 hours ago | |||||||
you missed this relevant (albeit, unspecific) fragment when you extracted the quote: > with a millennia of discredited science to back it up | ||||||||
| ▲ | scarmig 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
The third prong is a bit badly posed: descriptively, white kids test better than black kids, and each of the three prongs offers an explanation. The third prong points to a discredited belief of genetic inferiority; by positioning the three prongs as exhaustive, the author structures the argument such that if you don't accept either of the first two prongs, then you must be a racist. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | surgical_fire 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
But you mentioned that a test was taken. Is the test somehow unscientific? Is it rigged to favor white kids? Are you speaking of a hypothetical test that doesn't exist and was never applied? If a test was actually taken, and it is not rigged, how can it not be a sort of scientific evidence? | ||||||||
| ||||||||