Screening for Canadian Values

[dialamah]

Here's an interesting article on personality tests, their pitfalls and the ethics of using them.   Could the points in this article also be true for values screening?   

Quote

Research spanning more than 80 years has shown attempts to predict management performance from personality tests have been a spectacular failure.

 

Quote

Personality testers cannot agree on a definition of personality or of a personality trait. They cannot agree on which traits should be measured because the number of traits in a test is determined by statistical techniques about which psychometricians disagree.

 

Quote

Because trait psychology is philosophically primitive, personality testers ignore or cannot recognise the problem of circularity of argument which haunts their enterprise. For example, they assume that personality traits are enduring, pervasive and affect all aspects of behaviour.

 

[Hal 9000]

6 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Here's an interesting article on personality tests, their pitfalls and the ethics of using them.   Could the points in this article also be true for values screening?   

I don't really see that article or what they're conveying as being equivalent to screening out immigrants..

[WestCoastRunner]

This thread just seems to me to feed into the mass hysteria of hatred towards immigrants and in the end, won't possibly work.  Canada is made up of many cultures and are values are constantly changing and evolving over time.  Do we really want to open the door to having the government dictate our personal beliefs.

[dialamah]

5 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

I don't really see that article or what they're conveying as being equivalent to screening out immigrants..

Perhaps not, but I thought some of the ideas there might be similar enough for discussion.  

[DogOnPorch]

13 minutes ago, WestCoastRunner said:

This thread just seems to me to feed into the mass hysteria of hatred towards immigrants and in the end, won't possibly work.  Canada is made up of many cultures and are values are constantly changing and evolving over time.  Do we really want to open the door to having the government dictate our personal beliefs.

Gee...who here is against immigration?

[Argus]

31 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Here's an interesting article on personality tests, their pitfalls and the ethics of using them.   Could the points in this article also be true for values screening?  

I note the author said nothing about why large organizations are willing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on personality traits if they don't work. His position seems to be there are no personality traits and even if there they can't be tested for. He also seems to believe these traits rely on honest answers.

It is unsurprising that test questions which invite testees to describe themselves as conscientious produce answers which correlate with managers’ subjective ratings of their personalities. It is a different story, however, when self-reports are correlated with the achievement of actual results.

But they clearly do not, as I've already posted and cited.

[Omni]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

This is simply blatant, in your face lying. You know very well that NO screening occurs for values. Or are you too lazy to even read the topic title.

Because the idea of screening for values is stupid. Get it?

[Argus]

24 minutes ago, WestCoastRunner said:

This thread just seems to me to feed into the mass hysteria of hatred towards immigrants and in the end, won't possibly work.  Canada is made up of many cultures and are values are constantly changing and evolving over time.  Do we really want to open the door to having the government dictate our personal beliefs.

They're not dictating beliefs they're dictating what is required of foreigners if they want to immigrate here. I have no problem at all with that. Maybe you have no standards but most of us do.

[Argus]

Just now, Omni said:

Because the idea of screening for values is stupid. Get it?

Most Canadians disagree. Get it?

[Omni]

6 minutes ago, Argus said:

Most Canadians disagree. Get it?

I don't care, it isn't going to work. Do you expect a potential immigrant to sit in front of a visa officer or a UNHCR screener and say "I want to kill all Canadians who are not Muslim". I don't think so. The screening that occurs currently seems to be working just fine. Let Kellie Leitch go and continue her support for Trump. Birds of a feather.....

[Argus]

3 minutes ago, Omni said:

I don't care, it isn't going to work. Do you expect a potential immigrant to sit in front of a visa officer or a UNHCR screener and say "I want to kill all Canadians who are not Muslim". I don't think so. The screening that occurs currently seems to be working just fine. Let Kellie Leitch go and continue her support for Trump. Birds of a feather.....

Nobody is proposing simplistic interviews or interview questions. Perhaps it is simply your profound lack of imagination which keeps you coming back to the belief that we'll simpl y ask people if they hate Jews, gays and women and then check off a box on a form.

[Omni]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

Nobody is proposing simplistic interviews or interview questions. Perhaps it is simply your profound lack of imagination which keeps you coming back to the belief that we'll simpl y ask people if they hate Jews, gays and women and then check off a box on a form.

Perhaps it is your profound xenophobia which would which would create the very type of simple question period you have just described, and derail the whole immigration system for no valid reason and people who are fleeing a war zone would spend even more time in a refugee camp. That's not the Canadian way.

 

[H10]

7 hours ago, dialamah said:

I do agree that people would try to hack the test if they could; Impact could probably become quite wealthy.  

Why do you not think it would withstand any challenge, or that we can't make immigrants take a test that Canadians don't have to?   We already make applicants for citizenship take a test that many Canadians would fail if they had to take it.   

Because the courts have already ruled on things like this.  You cannot just make special set of laws like that just for immigrants.  There are test these laws have to pass, they can't be arbitrary, there are issues with free speech and freedom of thought, etc.

7

[Argus]

3 minutes ago, Omni said:

Perhaps it is your profound xenophobia which would which would create the very type of simple question period you have just described, and derail the whole immigration system for no valid reason and people who are fleeing a war zone would spend even more time in a refugee camp. That's not the Canadian way.

And you feel the incredible arrogance to dictate to Canadians what the Canadian way is when they've clearly indicated they believe otherwise. I understand. That's the mentality of the social justice warrior. Nothing anyone else believe matters. They're all morally deficient and must be brought to heel by any means necessary.

And oddly, they consider that to be the Canadian way too...

There's an awful lot of the autocratic dictator in every social justice warrior.

[Omni]

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

And you feel the incredible arrogance to dictate to Canadians what the Canadian way is when they've clearly indicated they believe otherwise. I understand. That's the mentality of the social justice warrior. Nothing anyone else believe matters. They're all morally deficient and must be brought to heel by any means necessary.

And oddly, they consider that to be the Canadian way too...

There's an awful lot of the autocratic dictator in every social justice warrior.

I certainly don't dictate to Canadians, but I think in this issue the process that is already is in place is fulfilling what Canadians want with regard to the immigration process. And if we do need to upgrade it, it should not be done in some simplistic way that Leitch, or her followers would propose. Especially those who are obviously xenophobes.

[Argus]

22 minutes ago, Omni said:

I certainly don't dictate to Canadians, but I think in this issue the process that is already is in place is fulfilling what Canadians want with regard to the immigration process. And if we do need to upgrade it, it should not be done in some simplistic way that Leitch, or her followers would propose. Especially those who are obviously xenophobes.

I think that once people read how our immigration system works all but the seriously and pathetically stupid realize just how inefficient it is at selecting the best immigrants and screening out those who are fundamentally unsuited to life in Canada. I doubt many Canadians realize that almost none of our immigrants ever even meet an immigration officer for an interview, as one example. I didn't realize it myself until fairly recently.

[Omni]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

I think that once people read how our immigration system works all but the seriously and pathetically stupid realize just how inefficient it is at selecting the best immigrants and screening out those who are fundamentally unsuited to life in Canada. I doubt many Canadians realize that almost none of our immigrants ever even meet an immigration officer for an interview, as one example. I didn't realize it myself until fairly recently.

Apparently you didn't bother to read the article I posted which explained to you how our screening system works. What form of bliss are you seeking I wonder?

[kimmy]

2 hours ago, hernanday said:

Because the courts have already ruled on things like this.  You cannot just make special set of laws like that just for immigrants.  There are test these laws have to pass, they can't be arbitrary, there are issues with free speech and freedom of thought, etc.

We can be as arbitrary as we like in choosing who to let into our country.  We can choose how many, who we let in, and who we keep out.

 -k

 

[kimmy]

On 1/2/2017 at 3:40 PM, dialamah said:

  I know there are a variety of opinions on what Canadian Values are, but for the purposes of this thread, let’s agree to focus on these four:

• Religious freedom
• Equality of women
• Equal rights for LGBT people
• Separation of religion and government.

This list pretty much highlights the problem with trying to "screen for Canadian values".

My town (and probably yours too) is full of Canadian-born dumb-ass old white people whose views are a lot closer to the Muslims' on some or all of these four issues than to yours and mine.

 -k

[dre]

7 minutes ago, kimmy said:

This list pretty much highlights the problem with trying to "screen for Canadian values".

My town (and probably yours too) is full of Canadian-born dumb-ass old white people whose views are a lot closer to the Muslims' on some or all of these four issues than to yours and mine.

 -k

Yeah I wonder if Argus could pass one of his little tests  Hating on fags and treating women as second class citizens is as Canadian as beer, maple syrup, and hockey unfortunately.

How about we ALL take the test and even the "old stock canadians" that fail get deported  I hear Antarctica is nice this time of  year.

Edited January 4, 2017 by dre

[Hal 9000]

6 minutes ago, kimmy said:

This list pretty much highlights the problem with trying to "screen for Canadian values".

My town (and probably yours too) is full of Canadian-born dumb-ass old white people whose views are a lot closer to the Muslims' on some or all of these four issues than to yours and mine.

 -k

what do you mean by that
 

[kimmy]

Following last year's terror attacks in Paris, there was a call for values screening in France... the intriguing part is that it came from France's Muslim community.

"The time for action has come. The Muslims of France will play their part," said Anouar Kbibech, the president of the French Council for the Muslim Religion, according to the website. Specifically, they want to screen foreign (meaning Saudi, no doubt) imams who come to France before allowing them to preach.

Quote

 

The council said it would begin handing out permits after testing imams on adherence to French principles and theological knowledge. It would make religious leaders sign a charter that requires they “respect the laws of the republic.”

...

Mohammed Mraiziki, the secretary general of the Union of French Mosques, has called for even more action. He endorsed demands on the French government to expel "preachers of hate" and shut down their mosques.

 

If French Muslims are willing to point out the problem, why are so many non-Muslims so desperate to deny it exists?

Similarly, in the aftermath of the New Years Eve sexual assaults last year in Cologne (and elsewhere in Germany and other European nations as well) many Muslims were willing to speak out and acknowledge that yes, there is a major problem in the Muslim community regarding western women, while many non-Muslims were desperate to find any other factor they could blame the assaults on.

 -k

[Hal 9000]

Here's a question I'd start with; So, do you think that a 16 YO girl should be stoned to death for the crime of being gang raped?

[dre]

Just now, Hal 9000 said:

Here's a question I'd start with; So, do you think that a 16 YO girl should be stoned to death for the crime of being gang raped?

Riiiiiiiight... And a potential immigrant is going to say "Yes!". Dear god.

[kimmy]

3 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

what do you mean by that
 

I mean that if I want to hear a bunch of bigoted, ignorant, hateful crap being said, I can go out to breakfast at a family restaurant on any Sunday morning and sit near a table full of elderly "old stock Canadians."

1 minute ago, Hal 9000 said:

Here's a question I'd start with; So, do you think that a 16 YO girl should be stoned to death for the crime of being gang raped?

This is an example of the kind of think ?Impact was talking about earlier: even if a guy does passionately believe in stoning rape victims to death for participating in adultery, he's not going to tell you so.

I recall seeing some of the tapes from the British "Undercover Mosque" documentary series, seeing some of the scumbag imams talking about western values, mocking the idea of tolerance for gay people, mocking the idea that women are equal. It's not that they don't understand western values, it's just that they have utter contempt for western values.

 -k