507 views
Overcoming prejudices: George Floyd, cops killing Blacks, and my journey
When George Floyd was murdered in 2020, I assumed, like many people, that there was a serious problem with cops killing Blacks simply for being Black. . . . .
/1
Given this country’s long history of racism & humans’ innate tribal nature, conscious biases, unconscious biases & tendency to abuse power, to me it was simply a given that this narrative was true. I’m a good, aware, left-leaning liberal & that's what we're supposed to believe./2
I had believed this narrative since Rodney King, probably before. Perhaps since childhood. I’d seen the statistics: Blacks 14% of the population, Blacks 24% of people killed by cops. I’d seen the footage of King, George Floyd, Eric Garner and others.
/3
But I’m a scientist/engineer. I know statistics can be abused—both on purpose & by the ignorant, even the well-meaning. I know about Mark Twain’s three types of lies: lies, damned lies & statistics. I know a bit about logical fallacies & the conflation of correlation/ causation.
I also know that anecdotes—selectively chosen by the media or by our own prejudices when searching YouTube—are worthless for proving a hypothesis.
/5
I also know Blacks have a higher rate of crime & disproportionately live in more heavily policed neighborhoods. It’s safe to assume that they have more interactions with police. Any conclusion drawn from this 14%/24% statistic needs to consider these factors (and many more).
/6
If it doesn’t consider these factors, there's a good chance that conclusion will be a lie. Or, more gently put, that conclusion bill be an untruth based on poor interpretation of statistics.
I didn’t want my conclusion based on such an important issue to be rooted in prejudice.
So, I did some reading.
First, Harvard professor Roland Fryer’s detailed study. (Fryer is Black, not that it should matter. Facts are facts & truth is truth regardless of the skin-hue of the person holding that truth.) I then read numerous other studies, articles, books, etc.
/8
And my conclusion? I was wrong. I was biased. Prejudiced. The facts—along with some basic application of science and statistics—indicated that there is simply no solid, scientific evidence that cops are killing Blacks for being Black……
/9
……Or at least on any statistically significant level. In fact, for a given situation, cops appeared to be slightly less likely to kill a person if that person was Black.
I had believed an untruth.
/10
I won’t go into all the statistical factors that are necessary to arrive at this conclusion. That would take pages and pages. And, sadly, many people don’t have the tools to understand it. Many people do believe that correlation equals causation, that anecdotes are truths.
/11
Many people believe the statement “Men, on average, are taller than women” is refuted by “But my Aunt Jane is taller than my Uncle Joe.”
I have realized from reading Twitter & YouTube comments about this issue that a large portion of our population is scientifically illiterate.
Harsh, but true.
But I will say this: If you believe that the 14%/24% number is enough evidence to conclude that cops are killing Blacks for being Black, then consider the 50%/95% number:
/13
Men are 50% of the population, but 95% of people killed by cops. Shall we conclude that cops are killing men just for being men? You can’t have it both ways.
Or could there be other factors involved?
/14
Science demands we do statistics thoroughly & correctly, or not at all. Using the 14%/24% statistic to conclude that cops are killing Blacks because they’re black is using statistics—and using them poorly.
/15
Using the 50%/95% statistic to conclude that cops are killing men because they’re men is using statistics—and using them poorly.
/16
No, these arguments are not “making excuses” or “aversive racism” or “rationalizing away”. They’re the application of science & logic to a complex, multivariate issue, applied without prejudice as science demands us to do.
/17
If you go with the 14%/24% number but reject the 50%/95% number, then you’re not “following the science”. You’re following your biases. Believe both or believe neither.
/18
So, my conclusion: We as a society have been led to believe an untruth. And that untruth is:
Cops are frequently killing Blacks simply for being Black.
There is no scientific evidence to support that claim.
/19
No, this untruth was not spread by a cabal of schemers out to destroy society. Rather, this untruth was spread by people who mean well, who want to do the right thing, and who care about injustice—but who refuse to look at the situation objectively, or lack the tools to do so.
Yes, there is another option: There are people who have the tools of science and logic and have read the same studies and statistics that I have—and have arrived at different conclusions. I welcome a discussion with you with open arms.
/21
But if you’re going to point to YouTube videos and shout out your narrative, then No. I reject your approach. That’s not science. That’s confirmation bias.
/22
I could do the same. I could find videos of white guys getting killed by cops (they’re out there) & point and shout.
George Floyd’s & Eric Garner cried out “I can’t breathe”. White-guy Tony Timpa cried out “You’re gonna kill me!” (and the cops did).
/23
One narrative made the news, the other didn’t.
To understand the situation—independent of media bias—we must go to the data. And then process it with extreme care. And the data indicates (it seems) that cops-killing-Blacks-for-being-Black is an untruth.
/24
Am I 100% certain in this conclusion? Absolutely not. But I’m more confident in that conclusion than a media narrative based entirely on cherry-picked anecdotes. And I’m open to having my mind changed—if you come with careful analysis.
/25
Also, if you invalidate my conclusion based on my race (I’m white), I reject that too. No, I don’t know what it’s like to be Black in America. In fact, I don’t know what it’s like to be one of any of the other thousands of identity groups I don’t belong to.
/26
It doesn’t matter. Truth is truth regardless of the race of the person who holds that truth. Statistics are statistics, data is data, analysis is analysis. And thoughtful, intelligent, scientifically-minded people can analyze that data objectively—independent of our race.
/27
I don’t expect to convince anybody with this essay. In our society and culture—perhaps in all societies & cultures—narrative matters more than facts. Once a narrative has taken hold, it’s notoriously difficult to overturn. That’s the human condition.
/28
I’m stating the conclusion I’ve arrived at using the best tools I have available. I think it’s the correct conclusion. It could be the wrong conclusion. But it’s a conclusion rooted, to the best of my ability, in logic and science. I trust it more than any media narrative.
/29
So, that’s where I’m at now. We’ve accepted an untruth as truth. And what a tragedy it would be if America tears itself apart, cities burn and people die—all over an untruth.
/30
Even worse, what a tragedy it would be to tell young Black kids that the cops are out to kill them—kids who already have enough challenges to deal with—when it’s just not true. Kids in rough neighborhoods that need cops.
/31
What a tragedy to tell kids that our society is set against them. Especially when it's just not true.
It’s not just wrong, it’s sadistic. A life-damaging lie told to children—all because of the grownups’ inability to do science.
/32
I’ll receive a lot of hate for this thread. I accept that. I’ll get called a “racist”. I won’t like it, but I’ll survive. I simply can’t sit idle and not speak out against what I see as an untruth that is hurting people. Most of all, hurting Black people.
/33
An untruth spread by our media. An untruth that hurts a group of people that society has already spent 400 years hurting. An untruth rooted in our scientific illiteracy.
/34
It’s a tragedy. A sick, twisted tragedy.
That’s where I’m at now. I’m open to discussion.
Jeff
Founder of The Woke Temple
/35,end
The Woke Temple
Mar 25 • 36 tweets • 6 min readOvercoming prejudices: George Floyd, cops killing Blacks, and my journey
When George Floyd was murdered in 2020, I assumed, like many people, that there was a serious problem with cops killing Blacks simply for being Black. . . . .
/1
Given this country’s long history of racism & humans’ innate tribal nature, conscious biases, unconscious biases & tendency to abuse power, to me it was simply a given that this narrative was true. I’m a good, aware, left-leaning liberal & that's what we're supposed to believe./2
I had believed this narrative since Rodney King, probably before. Perhaps since childhood. I’d seen the statistics: Blacks 14% of the population, Blacks 24% of people killed by cops. I’d seen the footage of King, George Floyd, Eric Garner and others.
/3
But I’m a scientist/engineer. I know statistics can be abused—both on purpose & by the ignorant, even the well-meaning. I know about Mark Twain’s three types of lies: lies, damned lies & statistics. I know a bit about logical fallacies & the conflation of correlation/ causation.
I also know that anecdotes—selectively chosen by the media or by our own prejudices when searching YouTube—are worthless for proving a hypothesis.
/5
I also know Blacks have a higher rate of crime & disproportionately live in more heavily policed neighborhoods. It’s safe to assume that they have more interactions with police. Any conclusion drawn from this 14%/24% statistic needs to consider these factors (and many more).
/6
If it doesn’t consider these factors, there's a good chance that conclusion will be a lie. Or, more gently put, that conclusion bill be an untruth based on poor interpretation of statistics.
I didn’t want my conclusion based on such an important issue to be rooted in prejudice.
So, I did some reading.
First, Harvard professor Roland Fryer’s detailed study. (Fryer is Black, not that it should matter. Facts are facts & truth is truth regardless of the skin-hue of the person holding that truth.) I then read numerous other studies, articles, books, etc.
/8
And my conclusion? I was wrong. I was biased. Prejudiced. The facts—along with some basic application of science and statistics—indicated that there is simply no solid, scientific evidence that cops are killing Blacks for being Black……
/9
……Or at least on any statistically significant level. In fact, for a given situation, cops appeared to be slightly less likely to kill a person if that person was Black.
I had believed an untruth.
/10
I won’t go into all the statistical factors that are necessary to arrive at this conclusion. That would take pages and pages. And, sadly, many people don’t have the tools to understand it. Many people do believe that correlation equals causation, that anecdotes are truths.
/11
Many people believe the statement “Men, on average, are taller than women” is refuted by “But my Aunt Jane is taller than my Uncle Joe.”
I have realized from reading Twitter & YouTube comments about this issue that a large portion of our population is scientifically illiterate.
Harsh, but true.
But I will say this: If you believe that the 14%/24% number is enough evidence to conclude that cops are killing Blacks for being Black, then consider the 50%/95% number:
/13
Men are 50% of the population, but 95% of people killed by cops. Shall we conclude that cops are killing men just for being men? You can’t have it both ways.
Or could there be other factors involved?
/14
Science demands we do statistics thoroughly & correctly, or not at all. Using the 14%/24% statistic to conclude that cops are killing Blacks because they’re black is using statistics—and using them poorly.
/15
Using the 50%/95% statistic to conclude that cops are killing men because they’re men is using statistics—and using them poorly.
/16
No, these arguments are not “making excuses” or “aversive racism” or “rationalizing away”. They’re the application of science & logic to a complex, multivariate issue, applied without prejudice as science demands us to do.
/17
If you go with the 14%/24% number but reject the 50%/95% number, then you’re not “following the science”. You’re following your biases. Believe both or believe neither.
/18
So, my conclusion: We as a society have been led to believe an untruth. And that untruth is:
Cops are frequently killing Blacks simply for being Black.
There is no scientific evidence to support that claim.
/19
No, this untruth was not spread by a cabal of schemers out to destroy society. Rather, this untruth was spread by people who mean well, who want to do the right thing, and who care about injustice—but who refuse to look at the situation objectively, or lack the tools to do so.
Yes, there is another option: There are people who have the tools of science and logic and have read the same studies and statistics that I have—and have arrived at different conclusions. I welcome a discussion with you with open arms.
/21
But if you’re going to point to YouTube videos and shout out your narrative, then No. I reject your approach. That’s not science. That’s confirmation bias.
/22
I could do the same. I could find videos of white guys getting killed by cops (they’re out there) & point and shout.
George Floyd’s & Eric Garner cried out “I can’t breathe”. White-guy Tony Timpa cried out “You’re gonna kill me!” (and the cops did).
/23
One narrative made the news, the other didn’t.
To understand the situation—independent of media bias—we must go to the data. And then process it with extreme care. And the data indicates (it seems) that cops-killing-Blacks-for-being-Black is an untruth.
/24
Am I 100% certain in this conclusion? Absolutely not. But I’m more confident in that conclusion than a media narrative based entirely on cherry-picked anecdotes. And I’m open to having my mind changed—if you come with careful analysis.
/25
Also, if you invalidate my conclusion based on my race (I’m white), I reject that too. No, I don’t know what it’s like to be Black in America. In fact, I don’t know what it’s like to be one of any of the other thousands of identity groups I don’t belong to.
/26
It doesn’t matter. Truth is truth regardless of the race of the person who holds that truth. Statistics are statistics, data is data, analysis is analysis. And thoughtful, intelligent, scientifically-minded people can analyze that data objectively—independent of our race.
/27
I don’t expect to convince anybody with this essay. In our society and culture—perhaps in all societies & cultures—narrative matters more than facts. Once a narrative has taken hold, it’s notoriously difficult to overturn. That’s the human condition.
/28
I’m stating the conclusion I’ve arrived at using the best tools I have available. I think it’s the correct conclusion. It could be the wrong conclusion. But it’s a conclusion rooted, to the best of my ability, in logic and science. I trust it more than any media narrative.
/29
So, that’s where I’m at now. We’ve accepted an untruth as truth. And what a tragedy it would be if America tears itself apart, cities burn and people die—all over an untruth.
/30
Even worse, what a tragedy it would be to tell young Black kids that the cops are out to kill them—kids who already have enough challenges to deal with—when it’s just not true. Kids in rough neighborhoods that need cops.
/31
What a tragedy to tell kids that our society is set against them. Especially when it's just not true.
It’s not just wrong, it’s sadistic. A life-damaging lie told to children—all because of the grownups’ inability to do science.
/32
I’ll receive a lot of hate for this thread. I accept that. I’ll get called a “racist”. I won’t like it, but I’ll survive. I simply can’t sit idle and not speak out against what I see as an untruth that is hurting people. Most of all, hurting Black people.
/33
An untruth spread by our media. An untruth that hurts a group of people that society has already spent 400 years hurting. An untruth rooted in our scientific illiteracy.
/34
It’s a tragedy. A sick, twisted tragedy.
That’s where I’m at now. I’m open to discussion.
Jeff
Founder of The Woke Temple
/35,end
