ITT I ask libfags questions

1) Is it wrong to discriminate against certain groups, on the sole basis of skin colour (and not race), by cognitive ability? Please explain why your position position is backed by science. Refrain from answering unless you have a minimal understanding of statistics, please.

Moar questions to follow later, because I feel I'm going to have to deal with a lot of morons with this simple one.

>>18
The fact is quite simply that the words "true/false" and "ethical/unethical" and "good/bad" are not interchangeable. The words "right/wrong" can mean either of the three things, and what they mean is designated by what they describe. They can describe three things. If it is any phenomenon, then it would be disambiguated as being "ethical/unethical" or "good/bad." If it is a proposition, then it is "correct/incorrect."

You claim that "9/11 troof thesis" is not a proposition. Theses are propositions. There are many other words that mean propositions and perhaps you may not have realized that "thesis" is just another kind of proposition, as are "theory," "idea," and many other words.

Since "discrimination against persons" is not a proposition, you must mean either "good/bad" and "ethical/unethical." You affirmed this when you said, "[a]s for what I said, this has NOTHING to do with 'true/false' in the way I phrased it." This implies that right/wrong does not mean true/false, but rather something else.

Right/wrong automatically implies that ethical/unethical. Claiming that you asked a question on ethics and then denying it is automatically FAIL. Try asking a question properly next time rather than being illogical.

You have several ambiguous propositions in your question. Is it
1. Is it true or false that it is unethical to discriminate against groups of people?
2. Is it true or false that discrimination against groups of people is a bad thing?

You seem to be asking the latter question. However, you should be aware that value statements like good/bad depend on the purpose and perspective. There is most likely no universal value, so attempts to make value statements like good/bad without first specifying a perspective is going to result in FAIL.

FURTHERMORE, there are various value systems. You seem to be asking a question evaluating the value of discrimination. However, you should realize that there are many value systems and perspectives. I shall give you some examples. This is taken from some stupid website which attempts to philosophize (but I doubt that this person knows any philosophy at all). However, in this website is a convenient list of value systems: http://humanknowledge.net/Thoughts.html

1. PIETISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is devotion to supernatural agency.
2. COLLECTIVISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is the good of persons in groups.
3. INDIVIDUALISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is the good of persons as individuals.
4. EUDAIMONISM is the thesis that ultimate value lies in individual happiness.
5. UTILITARIANISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
6. HEDONISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is pleasure.
7. ASCETICISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is serenity.
8. EGOISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is one's own happiness.
9. STOICISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is virtue.
10. EXISTENTIALISM is the thesis that ultimate values are created only by individual choices.
11. SURVIVALISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is inclusive reproductive fitness.
12. PESSIMISM is the thesis that values are irrelevant.
13. NIHILISM is the thesis that everything is irrelevant.
14. DEONTOLOGISM is the thesis that ultimate value derives from rational imperative.
15. ALTRUISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is the happiness of others.
16. EXTROPIANISM is the thesis that the ultimate value is extropy.

Take your pick. What do you mean by "wrong"? Is it wrong for pietism, collectivism, individualism, eudaimonism, utilitarianism, hedonism, asceticism, egoism, stoicism, existentialism, survivalism, pessimism, nihilism, deontologism, altruism, extropianism, or any other value system not here named? If you are asking for nihilism, then my answer is that it is not relevant. Obviously the world is meaningless so why would it matter if people were discriminated or not.

You say that your question is precise. This is obviously WRONG.

There are several ambiguities to your question.
It is a question about ETHICS (which you denied). OR
It is a question about VALUE (however, you have not specified a value system).

If it is a question about VALUE, there are several value systems. I still do not know what value system you speak of.
It is a question about whether it is EASY to do or not (HEDONISM). OR
It is a question about whether it results in higher intelligence/extropy (EXTROPIANISM). OR
It is a question about whether it is good for people's feelings or not (EUDAIMONISM). OR
It is a question about whether it is good for the survival of society (SURVIVALISM). OR
It is a question about whether it is effective or not for choosing people of higher intelligence (UTILITARIANISM).

OR ANY OTHER VALUE SYSTEM. I still do not know which one.