What is true on the individual level is not (necessarily) so on the level of the aggregate. Therein lies the problem. A black or white or any other person of any race or ethnicity can be pretty much anything. Black, white, and other racial/ethnic groups, in statistical aggregate, are each singularly and significantly different. Choices are: treat every person as a unique individual; treat individuals as representative of their racial/ethnic group; or ignore individuals entirely and deal with matters of race/ethnicity only at the group level. Pick your poison, people.
And as an individual would we not (each one of us) always prefer to be seen as uniquely ourselves and not some stereotypical vessel filled with tribal category preconceptions held by others?
If I am the fastest runner on the field, I'm fastest -- it doesn't matter if my 'Category' is, in the aggregate, statistically the slowest. If I'm the smartest in the room, again, it doesn't matter if my 'Category' has average SAT's in the lowest quartile. Regardless, I'm still the fastest & smartest and who cares what my demographic category is or is not.
What is disturbing in the Pew Survey is the fact that 95% of Black Adults say a shared demographic marker is important to how they see themselves. I can't imagine anything more sadly pathetic, actually. Demographics are simply demographics. Why on earth would I want to tie my self-perception to something over which I have absolutely Zero Control. Like saying how I see myself is 'extremely dependent' upon how the Bears do when they play Green Bay. (a sad situation indeed!)
In the end I think we come back to your point about the distinction between the aggregate and the individual. And since none of us has ever met an 'aggregate' or hired an aggregate, or dated an aggregate or married or lived next to one...I'd say we should deal always and exclusively with individuals....who are and should be recognized NOT as representatives of the aggregate but as just simply themselves
What is true on the individual level is not (necessarily) so on the level of the aggregate. Therein lies the problem. A black or white or any other person of any race or ethnicity can be pretty much anything. Black, white, and other racial/ethnic groups, in statistical aggregate, are each singularly and significantly different. Choices are: treat every person as a unique individual; treat individuals as representative of their racial/ethnic group; or ignore individuals entirely and deal with matters of race/ethnicity only at the group level. Pick your poison, people.
Very true.
And as an individual would we not (each one of us) always prefer to be seen as uniquely ourselves and not some stereotypical vessel filled with tribal category preconceptions held by others?
If I am the fastest runner on the field, I'm fastest -- it doesn't matter if my 'Category' is, in the aggregate, statistically the slowest. If I'm the smartest in the room, again, it doesn't matter if my 'Category' has average SAT's in the lowest quartile. Regardless, I'm still the fastest & smartest and who cares what my demographic category is or is not.
What is disturbing in the Pew Survey is the fact that 95% of Black Adults say a shared demographic marker is important to how they see themselves. I can't imagine anything more sadly pathetic, actually. Demographics are simply demographics. Why on earth would I want to tie my self-perception to something over which I have absolutely Zero Control. Like saying how I see myself is 'extremely dependent' upon how the Bears do when they play Green Bay. (a sad situation indeed!)
In the end I think we come back to your point about the distinction between the aggregate and the individual. And since none of us has ever met an 'aggregate' or hired an aggregate, or dated an aggregate or married or lived next to one...I'd say we should deal always and exclusively with individuals....who are and should be recognized NOT as representatives of the aggregate but as just simply themselves