CreateDebate


Debate Info

4
20
Good Bad
Debate Score:24
Arguments:28
Total Votes:24
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Good (3)
 
 Bad (12)

Debate Creator

xMathFanx(671) pic



Check Your Privilege: Good or Bad?


Good

Side Score: 4
VS.

Bad

Side Score: 20
2 points

Hello x:

It's good.. I'm white.

excon

Side: Good
AlofRI(1831) Clarified
1 point

....but Jewish, if I remember right. That makes you "not so good" to some of those "really good people on [the other] side."

Then again, you're a liberal (like me), sooooo .... this isn't really your lucky day, but, one outa' three ain't bad. To the "really good people on [the other, other] side" ... you STILL got good privilege!

Side: Good
excon(4253) Clarified
1 point

Hello Al,

Yup. That’s how I introduce myself, white but Jewish.

excon

Side: Good
1 point

I'm really not sure what the sides of this debate mean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD5f8GuNuGQ

This is in no way strictly definitive, but it really helps to understand what is meant by 'privilege' - it's all about what advantages and disadvantages you have in life. In no way do I like the concept of legislating to simply give advantages to the disadvantaged - that's way too much of a minefield - but I do believe in working toward equal rights, and as egalitarian a society as is reasonable. This video makes it easier to grasp the concept, and hopefully engenders a little empathy.

Side: Good
5 points

I wouldn’t deny that some people will have more opportunities in life than other people due to a host of environmental and genetic variable. Neither will I deny that, depending on where you are and who you’re dealing with, race and socio-economic factors can affect the interactions you have with others or even the opportunities others are willing to grant. But the statement “check your privilege” is thrown out by people who arrogantly assume the life experience of another so as to discount their current point of view or argument. Most often, someone uses that term when making broad assumptions about an individual based on their race and itself a racially prejudiced comment. Not only is it presumptuous and prejudiced to assume what someone else’s privileges may have been in life, but it’s also fallacious as it is used to shut down arguments when it’s user has no counterpoint.

Side: Bad
4 points

Currently people are told to "check their privilege" based on skin color, gender and sexual preference among others. Even if we assume that these "privileges" exist with no disadvantages (which they don't), we still haven't achieved a holistic view of the relative advantages and disadvantages that the person has. The person should also check their height, weight, age, attractiveness, intelligence, personality/temperament, health, family, financial and other privileges. Otherwise, for no apparent reason, we are categorizing people as advantaged and disadvantaged relative to each other strictly on arbitrary criteria, rather than viewing their situation as a whole.

Side: Bad
Amarel(2349) Clarified
1 point

People will claim to be viewing the situation as a whole when they find combinations of multiple perceived disadvantaged classes in one person. It becomes a contest of “whose more oppressed” wherein oppression equals virtue

Side: Good
1 point

I agree with your point, intersectionality (the progressive stack) can be criticized on just about every level of analysis.

Side: Bad
1 point

@WinstonC.

The person should also check their height, weight, age, attractiveness, intelligence, personality/temperament, health, family, financial and other privileges

This is a good point here WinstonC. How attractive a person is a clear privilege in a superficial society as people will have very different views of the world based on this single criteria. Also, height is another good example because relatively tall men have a natural advantage over short men in many areas of life, including likeliness to be or not be bullied, finding a mate (female), levels of respect ones commands of others, ect.

There are an incredible number of factors that would go into "who has led/leads a more 'privileged' life than another person" that cannot accurately be distilled down into a few categories and then generalized. If a person points a finger at a white man and claims that they have a more "privileged" life than most, it really depends on that persons particular circumstances. For instance, consider the cases of two heterosexual white men:

(A). Is tall, big/muscular (strong Mesomorph), handsome, middle-upper/middle class, loving parents that did not abuse him and properly prepared him for life, healthy (no major medical issues), inherited higher base IQ than average, ect. ect.

(B). Is short, naturally physically weak/frail (strong Ectomorph), unattractive/ugly, from lower-working class background, had abusive parents, divorced parents, lived in a trailer or otherwise poor community, range of medical issues, inherited lower base IQ than average, ect. ect.

Now, does this mean that the level of ones "privilege" should not be considered at all (because it can be a complex issue), is more or less irrelevant since everyone has advantages and disadvantages, or that it can be considered but on a much more "case-by-case" basis in order to evaluate more credibly?

Side: Bad
Nomenclature(1131) Disputed Banned
1 point

How attractive a person is a clear privilege in a superficial society as people will have very different views of the world based on this single criteria.

Your English is literally incoherent.

Side: Good
1 point

"Now, does this mean that the level of ones "privilege" should not be considered at all"

Not at all, though I do find it hard to think of a useful reason to need to measure one individual's "privilege" relative to another, if such a thing were even feasible.

Side: Bad
EldonG(469) Clarified
1 point

What do you mean by 'considered', here? Legally, I'd side with no, but I do have issues with the failing to understand that we don't all start on an equal footing, and issues with actually fighting any real attempts at working toward a more egalitarian society.

Side: Good