Quote:
Originally Posted by Willen
Maybe yes, maybe no.
Like ALL analyses of groups, it tells you nothing about the next person in that category you encounter.
|
How about a different sort of "yes and no?"
It is true
in general that analysis of a group tells you nothing about an individual. This is particularly true of groups in which a person has no choice about belonging -- such as "men," "women," or "white people." Any analysis of such a group tells you nothing of value that can be applied to a given individual, especially pertaining to personality or character traits.
However, once you get to groups in which membership is voluntary, you can be more accurate, at least within the realms of attributes that define the group.
For example, I bet you can draw some generalizations about members of the Nazi party. Though I will grant you that there may be some members to whom your generalizations will not apply, the odds of those generalizations being accurate for any individual member of that group are far higher for groups in which membership is voluntary.
I'm a member of the NRA. I bet you can predict with a higher-than-average level of certainty how I feel about the right to keep and bear arms.
Corporate ladder climbers are a self-selected group who voluntarily inhabit a certain environment and voluntarily adhere to a value system intended to advance them on that ladder. So though you WILL find exceptions to any generalization, such a pattern is far more predictive of a given individual than would be the case for a broader group in which membership is an accident of birth.
