The concept of 'color blindness' is a buzzword-distortion of the inherent ethical philosophy behind the term.
There seems to be a lot of equivocation (and I suspect this is the trap that the troublesome premise I identified above fell into) around the distinct principles of personal ethical behavior, good governmental policy, and the raw processing of data that happens in the brain. (Only humans could cook up THAT confusion.)
On the one hand, the general instruction: We should see each other as humans, regardless of other conditions makes for an excellent personal ethic. Under our current socio-economic/political climate, it is agreed upon by the majority that it makes for shitty gov't policy, however. And as you point out, it's impossible without a lot of brainwashing at the cognitive level insofar as we receive different sensory information based upon these differences.
The ideal is that, at a personal level, race/nationality/gender/orientation/ThisSpaceForRent is functionally irrelevant data. We receive it, we process it, but it does not impact our judgment of the quality of the other - they are part of "we." What you identify in your last paragraph are 'nonfunctional differences' which do not violate the "we are all humans" philosophy.
But a lengthy discussion of the nuances of this philosophy requires people to spend energy thinking about it, and thus isn't a convenient sound bite. "We should be colorblind," thus, prevails in the marketplace of ideas as a consumer-friendly knock-off.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
Re: Color Blindness
Date: 2011-04-21 01:28 pm (UTC)There seems to be a lot of equivocation (and I suspect this is the trap that the troublesome premise I identified above fell into) around the distinct principles of personal ethical behavior, good governmental policy, and the raw processing of data that happens in the brain. (Only humans could cook up THAT confusion.)
On the one hand, the general instruction: We should see each other as humans, regardless of other conditions makes for an excellent personal ethic. Under our current socio-economic/political climate, it is agreed upon by the majority that it makes for shitty gov't policy, however. And as you point out, it's impossible without a lot of brainwashing at the cognitive level insofar as we receive different sensory information based upon these differences.
The ideal is that, at a personal level, race/nationality/gender/orientation/ThisSpaceForRent is functionally irrelevant data. We receive it, we process it, but it does not impact our judgment of the quality of the other - they are part of "we." What you identify in your last paragraph are 'nonfunctional differences' which do not violate the "we are all humans" philosophy.
But a lengthy discussion of the nuances of this philosophy requires people to spend energy thinking about it, and thus isn't a convenient sound bite. "We should be colorblind," thus, prevails in the marketplace of ideas as a consumer-friendly knock-off.