When NOT to talk about implicit bias

Folks here know that I (like many of our bloggers) am very interested in implicit bias. But I get really angry when I seeing it invoked where it’s really not what we should be talking about.  Like the Terence Crutcher murder.

In the wake of yet another killing of an unarmed black person by a police officer, we are once again hearing about the importance of fighting implicit bias. Now, I am completely on board with the thought that it’s important to fight implicit bias: I just published two co-edited volumes on it. It’s important, and it explains a lot. But it does not explain this murder, and it is the wrong place to look for a solution to the problem of police shootings of unarmed black people.

Read the rest.

3 thoughts on “When NOT to talk about implicit bias

  1. The problem is, there hasn’t been much explanation (including in the volumes cited) of where and to what extent “we” should be talking about anti-black implicit bias — namely, as compared to anti-black bias simpliciter. Optimistic assumptions do not constitute such an explanation. This is a “be nice” way of putting the point.

Comments are closed.