[Kaveren]

> "does not seem all that healthy to just dismiss and ignore and totally negate compounding value of cross-generational achievements and accomplishments"

There is no compounding value of cross-generational achievements. You are not your ancestors. You are not responsible for anything they did, good or bad.

Yes, I want a world where your "humanity means nothing" in that I don't judge a prospective hire based on who their parents are.

That's not even the point though, personal information is disclosed in the job interview. I certainly hope I don't see anyone listing their ancestors' accomplishments on a resume.

What are you suggesting we judge a resume on if not merits? Should we be declining people for being the wrong race or having names we don't like instead?

[mLuby]

While it's true that you're not responsible for your ancestors' actions, you usually have similar nature and nurture to your ancestors, so it's useful to take them into account when attempting to predict your behavior.

[Kaveren]

No, that is wrong, and ironically enough considering the parent post I originally replied to, dehumanizing. It's important to treat an individual as an individual. No attempt should be made to discriminate based on someone's ancestors. Nepotism is also bad.

Edit: Changed "replied to" to "originally replied to".

[mLuby]

I'm making a statement about predicting behavior; you're making a statement about ethics.

Since we've moved into philosophy, why is it important that everyone be treated this indiscriminately? Veil of ignorance? Couldn't it be valid to protect the community from the risk that the bad behavior is heritable (genetically or socially)?