Ethnic stereotypes in American media and Talk:Belief: Difference between pages

Revision as of 13:03, 23 October 2005

Revision as of 18:19, 22 July 2007

Line 1:

{{talkheader}}

The name '''"White Media"''' is a term given to the mainstream media's (particularly in North America) constant use of White people in important roles within storylines for films, fashion, commercials, computer games, comic books, porn, theatre, etc. while limiting the involvement of Non-Whites to secondary backdrop roles. Such a term may also pertain to the news industry as well, but not so much in the sports and music industries even though those fields are considered to be major aspects of the media as well. It is a term that has been generated throughout many decades of social movements fueled by the increasing amount of public awareness into the affairs of the mainstream media's repetitive tactics of downcasting Non-Whites onscreen while simultaneously elevating Whites through protagonist roles. The effects of the repetitive nature of the media may have had a profound impact on how past, present, and perhaps even future generations subconsciously perceive Non-Whites as being secondary to Whites in society. Henceforth, White normalcy or "Whiteness" (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiteness_studies Whiteness]) would be considered long established and deeply rooted in western culture.

{{philosophy|class=start|importance=}}

{{WikiProject Psychology|class=start|importance=Mid}}

{{WP1.0|class=Start|category=category|VA=yes}}

Hmm. Im wondering, how come Hume and Kant seem to be quoted so often here in WP.

Certainly they are [[pillar]]s of western thought, but they do have some [[holes]] in their ideas, and besides, I thought we had long ago begun the process of [[weening]] ourselves off of our [[sacred cow]]s of [[westernism]].

----

"Westernism"? What's that? If you mean Western culture generally, um, no, I'm not aware that anyone other than some "postmodern" and extremely politically correct types are making a move to "weaning ourselves" off of this material. We've got to have a huge amount of such material on Wikipedia if it's going to be complete. But this doesn't stop you from adding as much "non-Western" (whatever that means) type material as you like. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]]

----

Not again... More silly resentment towards "postmodernism" and "politically correct types".... they're not out to kill you. So you disagree with them, get over it. I'd be willing to bet that you (yes, you, Larry Sanger) will be dwelling on this absurd cynicism for a very long time. Postmodernism is just a catch-all phrase for something easy to criticise; the fact is that there is no such thing as a postmodern "movement" or "school of thought" or "belief system"... The obsession with postmodernism is simply a phenomenon among critics who are desperate for a board to throw darts at.

----

There is a significant amount of information throughout the internet that may indicate that White people are continually being cast as protagonists in the majority of storylines in every film genre, while Non-White people continue to be limited to the supporting roles (even when those films' storylines are centered around Non-White characters). A group of professors from the University of Florida have conducted a report on this observation by stating that even though Non-Whites are gaining more leading roles in films, Whites still continue to play the central and most progressive elements in most storylines: [http://news.ufl.edu/2003/01/14/movie-types/ News.ufl.edu]

Would it be relevant (or interesting) to mention the logical convolutions of [[Raymond Smullyan]], eg characters who believe one thing, but consistently lie, so say the opposite, etc?

----

I'm not sure--why would it (on this page)? Wouldn't that belong on [[lying]] or something like that? --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]]

There is speculation that such an ongoing behavior by the media for limiting the roles of Non-Whites in films is directly (or indirectly) influenced by many early social ideologies and attitudes derived from [[Colonialism]] in the early history of Western society such as the concept of "Whiteness":[http://academic.udayton.edu/race/01race/white11.htm], [[Whiteness_studies]], and the Eugenics Movement [http://www.upress.umn.edu/Books/O/ordover_american.html],[http://www.emmerich1.com/EUGENICS.htm]-- w/ quote stated by I. I. Gottesman, a director of the American Eugenics Society (1970): ''"The essence of evolution is natural selection; the essence of eugenics is the replacement of 'natural' selection by conscious, premeditated, or artificial selection in the hope of speeding up the evolution of 'desirable' characteristics and the elimination of undesirable ones.".'' For the chronology on the history of slavery and racism in America go to: [http://www.innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html]

: Just a thought (I'll crib what I've typed here to pad out the stub on Smulllyan, at any rate). At one point he introduces characters who only believe only false things, yet lie: hence all their statements are true. -- [[User:Tarquin|Tarquin]]

I wonder what point he was making with that. Sounds interesting...

==Is belief voluntary?==

Actually, there is something interestingly relevant we could add from the literature in epistemology: it's widely held that most people have no control over most of what they believe... --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]]

: I made a stub section on this matter. Please expand and improve. [[User:Andries|Andries]] 11:03, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

If I may add my own experience (and I am quite sure many people would recognize a pattern here)...

I have a firm belief that reincarnation exists because instinctively I can't imagine I could stop being conscious after death, but I also admit I can't live forever. But by rational thinking I also know that nothing to my knowledge can justify reincarnation. This is only one example among others where belief seems to oppose knowledge. I think there are many other such examples, essentially about concepts difficult or impossible to prove, for example involving the existence or non-existance of God.

[[User:Fafner|Fafner]] 09:47, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

---

If I find the time... I'll try to add sometime here. Hume (amongst others) noted that we acquire beliefs passively, that the aquisition of them is not subject to the will. Bernard Williams' paper 'Deciding to Believe' investigated this and tries to show that the coneptual relations between belief, truth and evidence rule out voluntary believing. While some have shown that his argument for the incoherence of 'believing at will' is not quite right, most philsophers do believe that decision and belief can't be linked in the same way as, for instance, decision and imagination : I can successfully decide to imagine a scene, but I can't successfullly decide to belief that scene represents truely. However, as Williams noted, this doesn't rule out deciding and influencing our belief by more "roundabout routes". One could embark on a course of action, hypnosis or drugs were his suggestions, such that afterwards you would have brought it about that you belive some proposition or other. Williams remarks that this would make the person "deeply irrational". Some have questioned this but it reamins to be seen whether any convincing account of belief at will can be found. ([[User:Fabulist|Fabulist]] 18:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC))

=== Media being ran by White Men ===

==Degree of certainty==

A survey during the 1990's which was conducted by FAIR reported that 80% of ABC's Nightline guests were professionals, while 89% of those professionals were male, and 92% of those males were White. Fair continued to find consistent numbers done for other shows as well. For example, 90% of the guests in PBS's Macneil and Lehrer NewsHour were White, while 87 % of those guests were male, 67 % of those men were from the government. In 1996, there was a survey that reflected the numbers of the subjects interviewed in American network news to be around 86% for White men.

Why is there no mention of degree of certainty? If I believe something then it means that I think that the chance that something is true is >50%. I can believe something with 51% or 99% certainty. Quite a big difference [[User:Andries|Andries]] 20:35, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Such statistics are consistent with the argument that White men seem to be the leading force behind the structures of the mainstream media -- quote: ''"white journalists dominate the mainstream media; and white people hold most creative positions in the entertainment media as actors, writers and directors. All these factors contribute to the prevalence of whiteness in media, and help to reinforce white privilege as the norm....Most mainstream media content also reinforces white privilege by featuring white characters and addressing white interests and experiences. When programming does feature non-white characters, they usually appear in supporting roles." Source: [http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/stereotyping/whiteness_and_privilege/whiteness_authority.cfm Media Awareness]

---

''Attempted anwer'': Certainty looks like an absolute, and it may be hard to see how something can be 'a bit certain', or 'fairly certain'. Perhaps it can only be 'absolutely certain'. Sceptics seem to have a similar problem over ‘knowledge’ and conclude, rigorously, that it cannot be truly achieved. Anyway, if belief is accepted as ‘a strong feeling’ this confusion as to whether it must entail any particular degree of certainty seems to go away[[User:Yanx|Yanx]] 19:48, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

=== Non-White People and the Mainstream Media ===

==Belief system==

Other reports concerning the mainstream media's attempts to limit the roles of Non-Whites in films may be found at:[http://www.modelminority.com/article385.html]. A quote from the source states: ''"Hollywood typically restricts its portrayals of Asians to a limited range of clichéd stock characters. And this has affected how Asian Americans are perceived and treated in the broader society."''. Such an argument reports that the media's repetitive actions for limiting the roles of Non-Whites have directly affected the public's perception of Non-Whites in general, which in turn have created highly contagious negative stereotypes in modern society. Unfortunately of course, the fall-off of such a mainstream impact could eventually affect and influence the consensus of future generations as well.

Please help with the [[belief system]] entry at [[Talk:belief system]]. Thanks. [[User:Adraeus|Adraeus]] 02:06, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Many critics have consistently pointed out that the mainstream media has very rarely considered Asian male actors in romantic leads in movies and has portrayed their sexuality as non-existent and even as far as being negative: [http://www.modelminority.com/article385.html]. A quote from that link states: ''"Asian male sexuality as negative or non-existent. Although Asian women are frequently portrayed as positive romantic partners for white men'' ("Sayonara"-[[Sayonara]], "The World of Suzie Wong"-[[The_World_of_Suzie_Wong]], ad infinitum), ''Asian men are almost never positively paired with women of any race. Western society still seems to view Asian male sexuality as a problem. Consequently, Asian men are usually presented either as threatening corrupters of white women or as eunuchs lacking any romantic feelings. For example, in the action movie'' "Showdown in Little Tokyo" -[[Showdown_in_Little_Tokyo]], ''the Asian villain forces himself upon a white woman and murders her before threatening the Asian female love interest. Predictably, the white hero kills the Asian villain and "wins" the Asian woman--while the hero's Amerasian sidekick is given no love life at all."''

:Because that article is on VfD and looks to be deleted due to no content, I am moving the associated talk page, which does have content to here:

=== Moved content from [[Talk:Belief system]], currently on [[WP:VfD|VfD]] ===

On the subject of Non-Whites being limited by the media in films, a report was published by Ka Leo Staff Columnist Andrew Ma on February 26, 2004 which observes that anyone who was not of European heritage during the early stages of western film production was considered to be inferior. A quote from the report states ''"At the dawn of American cinema, Asians, Blacks and anyone else of Non-European descent were not allowed on-camera. Instead, Whites came up with the blatantly offensive practices of "yellow-face" and "black-face", using white actors to play Minorities. That wonderful idea continued for over half a century; as you can see in "[[Breakfast_At_Tiffany's]]." Or for an even more laughable example, watch John Wayne playing Genghis Khan in "[[The_Conqueror]]."''

'''Note:''' This entry needs work. [[User:Adraeus|Adraeus]] 02:10, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)<br>

A '''belief system''' (also ''system of beliefs'') is...<br>

Here is my small contribution. It will probably need lots of works,

but after all we have to start from somewhere ;-)

I don't know if the comparison has been used somewhere, but a belief

system really looks like a mathematical logical system with a set of

axioms (unproved beliefs) and inferring rules (reasonnings).

Axioms (beliefs) are very debatable since it usually involves beliefs

in God(s), supernatural, or even science after all (how many people

among you has ever ''seen'' and ''verified'' an experiment in quantum

mechanics? probably not the majority, certainly not my case but I

''believe'' in quantum mechanics) ;-)

Inferring rules (reasonnings) are usually common to most people.

Deduction is the most reliable, induction is used to assert probable

conclusions (although I met someone acknowledging ''only'' induction

as reliable and rejecting deduction).

[[User:Fafner|Fafner]] 08:05, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)<br>

See also

[[belief]],

[[worldview]],

[[paradigm]],

[[model]]<br>

External links

[http://www.general-semantics.org/library/conf-papers/eddy.pdf On Belief and Belief Systems] by the late [[Bob Eddy]] (Institute of [[General Semantics]])<br />

[http://www.cognitivebehavior.com/theory/beliefsystems.html Belief Systems] by [http://www.cognitivebehavior.com/ CognitiveBehavior.com]

[[User:Eric Herboso|Eric]] [[User_talk:Eric_Herboso|Herboso ]] 04:16, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

== Self-consistent sets of beliefs ==

Another quote from the link states, ''"American portrayals of Asians have historically been designed with a very specific agenda in mind: to alienate, ostracize and otherwise paint a picture of Asians as rejects, outsiders and foreigners - in short, as less than human and less than truly American. In the eyes of mainstream media, Asians have been universally reduced to one-dimensional caricatures whose sole purpose is to serve as an "exotic" backdrop for white America."'' Source: [http://www.kaleo.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/02/26/403d8ada33396]

I seem to recall something about the application of G&ouml;del's proof to beliefs, to demonstrate that one's beliefs cannot, taken as a whole, be logically self-consistent. It seemed very interesting at the time, but I can't pull up a cite -- can anyone help? (Yes, I know that G&ouml;del's proof actually demonstrates "incomplete or inconsistent", but the argument did something plausible at this point...) -- [[User:Karada|Karada]] 07:57, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This same pattern of White people playing Non-White characters may also apply to the movie [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers_movie Starship Troopers] which was partly based on the novel by [[Robert_Heinlein]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers]. In the original novel, the main protagonist Juan "Johnny" Rico was supposed to be Filipino man [[Starship_Troopers#Politics]], although [[Paul_Verhoeven]] made the decision to change the background of that character into being a White man from Buenos Aires instead.

[[Gödel's incompleteness theorem#Misconceptions about Gödel's theorems]]: "The theorem only applies to systems that are used as their own proof systems"; it follows that the theorem might imply that you can't be consistent if you justify your beliefs with other beliefs; on the other hand if, as most people, you justify your beliefs from one or several external referrents, the theorem does not apply. [[User:Jules.lt|Jules LT]] 19:36, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

The media may be guilty of such trends in the movie industry, but there is also a strong argument which points to the direction that the media has downcasted the image of Non-Whites in other aspects of mainstream presentation. For example, this next report done by history student Misty Handy and of which is titled ''"Racist media tears down image of black males"'' [http://www.statenews.com/editions/092899/op_handy.html] states that ''"By creating a monster-like image of Black Men, the media strategically teaches the nation to be unresponsive to the dilemmas in the Black community."''.

== belief is assigning probability greater than 50% ??? ==

Racist trends in the media may also be evident in news presentations. A report was done [http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2527] which observes that Latino issues whenever put out into the mainstream, is almost always portrayed negatively:

"A more important consequence is the narrow, distorting lens through which racial minorities are frequently portrayed in mainstream news. Studies commissioned by the National Association of Hispanic Journalists have found that only about 1 percent of the 12,000 stories aired yearly on the three network TV evening newscasts focus on Latinos or Latino issues -- and roughly 80 percent of these stories "portray Latinos negatively," often on subjects like crime, drugs and "illegal" immigrants."

Removed from the article: "To believe something can be interpreted as assigning a [[probability]] of more than 50% that something is true."

===Women (both Non-White and White) are romantically paired with White Men more than with Non-White Men onscreen ===

(also removed "The rule of the thumb from a school of [[epistemology]] that says that certainty should be as big as the corresponding evidence is called [[evidentialism]].", which is useless without the preceding "definition")

Observations have also been made which concerns that Hollywood has used White men in romantic leads with Non-White females more than Non-White males have been used opposite of their very own racial female counterparts. [[Denzel_Washington]] is widely considered to be an example of a Non-White actor who has been restricted by the White Media as well. For example in this link [http://www.blackcommentator.com/137/137_grayman_taboo.html], New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof asks, ''"when will Hollywood release a major motion picture in which a black man and white woman fall in love. Kristof raises an interesting point, but we feel his complaint misses the real problem, which is that Hollywood has shown a frustrating reluctance toward depicting romance between black men and black women."'' It also indirectly argues that most Non-White actresses have kissed and made out with White Men in movies, commercials, fashion, etc. more than they ever have with Non-White men in those same fields of entertainment.

This has little to do with [[evidentialism]], which is a [[theory of justification]], in any case.

The pattern of White men more than Non-White men being the protagonists in films (especially romantic films) while pairing up with women (whether those women are White, Asian, Black, Latina, Multi-racial, etc.) might be suspect in the current movie and/or television careers of [[Reese_Witherspoon]], [[Jessica_Alba]], [[Tia_Carrere]], [[Thandie_Newton]], [[Jennifer_Lopez]] (although Jennifer Lopez has done many intimate scenes with Non-White men in her music videos - just not in Hollywood movies), [[Jennifer_Aniston]], [[Kristin_Laura Kreuk]] to name a few. For example, there seems to be no evidence whatsoever that suggests that the actress [[Reese_Witherspoon]] has even kissed a Non-White actor in any of her movies (although she has done many romantic films in her career).

Who said that? In what book? Is it so widely accepted among scholars that it deserves mentionning so high in the article? This is not only unsourced, it also looks pretty preposterous to me. When you say "X has a probability of more than 50%", you don't believe that "X", you believe that "X is more probable than not"; this is entirely different. [[User:Jules.lt|Jules LT]] 19:13, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[[Jessica_Alba]], [[Thandie_Newton]], [[Tia_Carrere]], and [[Kristin_Kreuk]] could also be examples of multi-racial women who have, through careful observation, only seemed to cater to White men's romantic needs in storylines of various genres throughout their careers. [[Thandie_Newton]], in [[Chronicles_of_Riddick]] has had several kissing scenes with the White actor [[Karl_Urban]], yet (even though her character seemed to exude a sense of seductive lust towards [[Vin_Diesel]]'s character Richard B. Riddick still did not do a kiss scene with him). Note: [[Vin_Diesel]] is a Multi-racial man. Such a "coincidental" observation is considered to be consistent with such a pattern - that these women for the most part, usually only do sex scenes with White men. There is even public speculation that observes White men making out with women of all races in action movies more than Non-White men (especially Asian men) do normal kissing scene with the women of their same race in romantic films.

== Definition of Belief ==

Such a pattern may also be considered evident in the career of actress [[Jessica_Alba]], even though she happens to be Multi-racial. Public questioning seems to arise concerning these women (whether they be Non-White, Mixed, or White) are actually aware of said repetitive pattern, and whether they are so awestruck by only White men that they cannot see themselves kissing an Asian, a Latino, A Black, or any other Non-White man for that matter.

A [http://www.yesselman.com/glosindx.htm#ReligiousBelief belief], in its varying degrees, can be a guess, a dogma, a hope, an intuition, a leap-of-faith. Belief is to make an hypothesis which then must pass the test of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Religion#Cash_Value Cash Value]—bringing Peace of Mind. [[User:Yesselman|Yesselman]] 20:35, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Of course, statistics cannot not lie; the majority of western movies, videogames, comicbooks, storylines, fashion commercials, and commercials in general do have women from different backgrounds (Asian, White, Black, Latino, etc.) interacting with White men (usually in lead roles) most of the time - more than they ever do with Non-White men in general. The public may even argue that there is more lesbianism in the media (sometimes in threesomes with a White man) on screen more than women attempt to do a simple kiss scene with most Non-White male characters (especially Asian males). This may very be most evident in the adult industry, but such a pattern's existence seems to be widespread in most other avenues of the media as well.

The probable cause as to why such a pattern seems to be happening is said to have been influenced by the very old and deeply-rooted Hollywood trend of repetitively promoting White men through protagonist leading roles, which in turn has resulted in the brainwashing of many women (regardless of color) in past, present, and unfortunately future generations. Sadly, even though we have seen progress (very slow progress) throughout the decades, Whites are still instinctively accepted as the social norm and ideal in the greater bulk of the entertainment industry because of their deliberate repetitive association with protagonism. White men are in fact, being subconsciously accepted as the ideal male standard while women (regardless of race) answer to White men first and foremost.

(edited to correct it in a way)

The public may also argue that these women might have been a result of the impact of the long and deeply rooted trend of the entertainment industry's strategy for putting White men in a heroic light through protagonist leading roles. In other words, such female actresses have been influenced much too long because of the repetitive White Influence in western media all these generations. That could be considered as the key to explaining why they choose roles which usually cater to White male protagonists - possible reaction from the repetitive heroic stereotyping by the media to elevate White men (which in turn may put an illusion of magnetic attraction and leadership skills for the general White man in the real world). Unfortunately, society is naturally receptive to what they see and here through the media and because the trend has been so deeply rooted for such a long time, many people of all races could be unknowingly be regarding White men as the most powerful and attractive.

->

=== Racial Cliches in Films ===

To belief is diffrent from the word believe, believe is to trust and see something in another person.

But belief is like to imagen to trust and have faith into a higher being.

Belief can't just be put out in words it comes from you and is within you.

I think what you ment was believe and even there is a mistake in that.

Racial cliches refer to the certain recognizable patterns within films which have been consistently identified by viewers as being negative towards Non-Whites. Racial cliches are considered offensive towards Non-Whites and have been said to be responsible for influencing society's broad perception towards Non-Whites negatively and on a subconscious level. For example, a racial cliche that has been identified by the public would be when a Non-White character predictably dies, or is associated with drugs, criminal tendencies, hostile behavior, or at least gets the lower end of the bargain in comparison to White characters. Likewise, if Non-White characters do play protagonists in storylines, they often team up with a White protagonist as well (making Non-Whites appear as inferior aspects, unable to solve challenges by themselves). Racial cliches often come with a "catch" attached with the circumstances surrounding Non-White characters (whether those characters are antagonists, or protagonists). Such a racial cliche can be identified in such media presentations like (note - the following list may also include other aspects of the media as well, such as video games, comic books, television commercials, etc.):

If you believe in a person you either do it or not you can not just believe have trust and faith in them her him or what ever just 50% else what kind of person would you be?

== Reasoning?? ==

''Beliefs can be acquired through perception, reasoning, contemplation or communication''

This statement is plain incorrect, How on Earth can resoning be related to 'belief' . Infact they have completely opposite meanings. Obviously if you can reason(or if there is a logical explanation) to something, then there won't be any 'need' to believe because that 'thing' would be undeniable fact(like a maths equation). The point of belief only arises if there is an absence of resoning!!

The only possibility here is if 'resoning' is being referred to as 'bias' dependent on culture/surroundings etc. [[User:Reasonit|Reasonit]] 00:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_6th_Day The 6th Day (2000)]'''

- At most, there were 2 black people present in this movie and both of them were secondary antagonists who were eventually defeated.

I think this results from a confusion between belief as an unproven fact and belief as a conviction adopted after a reasonning (for example a political position). The difference between the two of them might be thin in some cases. Just a thought... [[User:Fafner|Fafner]] 08:01, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes. A belief can be adopted based on a number of criteria:

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy:_Spirits_Within Final Fantasy: Spirits Within]'''

- authority

-In this animated movie, the major characters was a White male and a Multi-Racial female. The only Black character in this movie was killed (heroic martyrdom).

- experience

- perceived phenomena

- reasoning

- discussion (e.g. clarification/debate)

"Beliefs" don't necessarily have any relation to reason. Especially those induced by authority figures. An associated topic might be rigidity of belief systems and conflicts arising therefrom..

== "Is Belief Voluntary?" section ==

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_of_the_Apes_%282001_film%29 Planet of the Apes by Tim Burton]'''

-A film done by Tim Burton which is actually consistent in following the trends of the earlier versions that have all the Black characters die in the storyline. Only [[Michael_Clarke_Duncan]] survives (although he was cast as a Non-Human, but was under the authority of the lighter skinned ape played by [[Tim_Roth]]).

"''Most philosophers hold the view that belief formation is to some extent spontaneous and involuntary.''

Most philosophers!? That's a bold and sweeping statement. I'm not sure if to just suggest that is radically POV or ask for some kind of verification. For now I've added a "citeation needed" tag and left it.

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_of_the_Damned Queen of the Damned]'''

- All the black people die in this movie. All the survivors happened to be White.

Maybe "many philosophers" would be a better choice of words, and easier to add a few references for. The word "most" suggests that nearly all philosophers past-and-present agree about this - somehow, I seriously doubt that... -[[User:Neural|Neural]] 03:42, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

== Introduction ==

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equilibrium Equilibrium]'''

-[[Taye_Diggs]] is the perhaps the only Black character in the future setting of this storyline, but predictably plays the antagonist (bad character). Unlink the White character in this movie, he is unable to overcome the evils of his surroundings. He happens to be the only Non-White character in the entire film who happens to be evil and happens to be killed off.

The introduction:

<blockquote>Belief is usually defined as a conviction of the truth of a proposition without its verification; therefore a belief is a subjective mental interpretation derived from perceptions, contemplation(reasoning), or communication.</blockquote>

'''[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0285531/ Dreamcatcher (2003)]'''

- There is one Non-White character (not including background characters) in all of this film and he happens to be killed. The character was played by [[Morgan_Freeman]] and dies in a gun duel with a White man. He does play the bad guy however, but antagonists are always inferior to protagonists in most storylines.

is simply wrong. At least, there is no such definition in my SOD, and if it were the case, one would not be able to believe a verified proposition. Nor is "1+1=2" a "subjective mental interpretation" (Can you think of something that is subjective and yet not mental? Interpretation of what?), yet it is something one might believe.

What is it about introductions to philosophical articles that attracts such stuff? [[User:Banno|Banno]] 07:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

'''[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0288477/ Ghost Ship (2002)]'''

-The film has about 2 Non-White characters in the crew which sets out on a mission to salvage a Ghost Ship. Both of them die, and the first death from the salvage crew was a Latino male character. Isaiah Washington's character of Greer (Black male) and Alex Dimitriades character of Santos (Latino male) both get killed in this movie. Even though many Whites also die in this movie, the remaining survivor happens to be White.

==Religion==

The paragraph:

<blockquote>In the religious sense, "belief" refers to a part of a wider spiritual or moral foundation — generally called faith. Historically, faiths were generated by groups seeking a functionally valid foundation to sustain them. The generally accepted faiths usually note that, when the exercise of faith leads to oppression, clarification or further revelation is called for.</blockquote>

has been removed. I can;t see a reason to give prominence to religious belief. Someone may wish to insert it into a new section within the article. [[User:Banno|Banno]] 07:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminator_3 Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines]'''

- Most, if not all the Black characters in this movie (and its trilogy) have been killed off or killed off early. Of course the nuclear holocaust is a major part of the trilogy's base storyline, however, the remaining characters who were supposed to survive happened to be White. In fact, there is only 1 Black character in this film that had a speaking role, yet was still cast as a victim.

== Deductive vs. Inductive ==

It seems that the epistimology section contradicts itself, saying that belief is a deductive process, but the building of the belief system is an inductive one. Am I missing something? I'm in favor of stating all belief systems are inherently inductive, and that all deductive processes used in the belief system are based off of premises that require induction.

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saw_%282004_movie%29 Saw (2004)]'''

-There are two Non-Whites in this film who get killed off. The Black cop [[Danny_Glover]] and his Asian partner [[Ken_Leung]] die, whereas the only remaining survivors happen to be White.

[[User:140.233.44.55|140.233.44.55]]AME 2/21/07

:I'd say rather that the whole section is OR,and should be removed. [[User:Banno|Banno]] 04:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Done[[User:Peterdjones|1Z]] 17:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers_2:_Hero_of_the_Federation Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation]'''

-This film has about several Non-White characters. The Asian male character dies early while most of the platoon kill each other because of an invasive alien influence hijacking their bodies. In the end, the Hero (a White character) dies while a White female survives.

== Belief necessarily True ==

I disagree with the lead sentence "Belief is the psychological state in which an individual is convinced of the truth of a proposition." This is easily refuted, I and many others believe in God and would agree with a proposition such as "God exists" but would not necessarily argue that it can be proven as "True". In other words you can recognize that you have a belief, such as religion, or race or sexuality, and know that it not necessarily "True" but that you believe it anyway.[[User:Tstrobaugh|Tstrobaugh]] 14:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

And does that apply to "2+2=4" or "the sky is blue"? Or is there a difference between mere belief,

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fast_and_the_Furious_%282001_film%29 The Fast and the Furious]'''

and Belief with a capital B?

-There are many Non-Whites in this film and the main protagonists in the storyline are played by [[Vin_Diesel]] (Multi-Racial actor) and [[Paul_Walker]] (White actor). Rick Yune (Asian male) is type-casted as the villainous influence in the storyline who leads a corrupt Asian street gang. In the end, Paul Walker's character overcomes them all.

[[User:Peterdjones|1Z]] 18:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

: Actually I'm not sure what you consider to be Beliefs and/or beliefs, perhaps you could provide some more examples, which category is the "2+2" in? or the sky? The "2+2" one is obviously incorrect as others have stated above "Gödel had shown that mathematics is both incomplete and inconsistent. Mathematics must be incomplete because there will always exist mathematical truths that can’t be demonstrated. Truths exist in mathematics that do not follow from any axiom or theorem."[[User:Tstrobaugh|Tstrobaugh]] 20:16, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

::GIT doesn't have the slightest impact on the necessary truth of 2+2=4.

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lethal_Weapon_4 Lethal Weapon 4]'''

-[[Danny_Glover]] (Black Cop) and [[Mel_Gibson]] (White cop) overcome the hostile Asian male villain played by [[Jet_Li]]. In the las fight scene however, Danny Glover's character gets knocked out (making him unable to continue for awhile). On the other hand, Mel Gibson's character stabs and eventually shoots and kills the Asian villain (making him the direct and last cause of the Asian's demise).

[[User:Peterdjones|1Z]] 21:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

::: Really? Explain how GIT has no influence on elementary math. Here's my rebuttal when you're done. (and thanks for answering all my questions, I can see this will be productive) "Gödel showed that "it is impossible to establish the internal logical consistency of a very large class of deductive systems--elementary arithmetic, for example--unless one adopts principles of reasoning so complex that their internal consistency is as open to doubt as that of the systems themselves."(10) In short, we can have no certitude that our most cherished systems of math are free from internal contradiction." from [http://www.rae.org/godel.html].[[User:Tstrobaugh|Tstrobaugh]] 14:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

rems.[[User:Peterdjones|1Z]] 19:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Training_Day Training Day]'''

-Ethan_Hawke (a White police recruit) prevails over the main character (Alonzo Harris by [[Denzel_Washington]])in the film. Even though Alonzo Harris was the central character in the storyline, he was still a villain.

[http://www.sm.luth.se/~torkel/eget/godel/prove.html GIT does not stop you being able to prove individual theorems] [[User:Peterdjones|1Z]] 19:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Almighty Bruce Almighty]'''

::Exactly my point about beliefs to begin with. Just as belief in God is accepted without proof and those that accept it know it can't be proved. From the page you cited:"So suppose we accept the axioms and methods of proof formalized in T as valid without proof."[[User:Tstrobaugh|Tstrobaugh]] 13:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

-[[Jim_Carrey]] (White character) is the central character in this film. [[Morgan_Freeman]] (Deity in the human form of a Black male) plays the wise spiritual influence to Jim Carrey's character (he props him up). Even though [[Morgan_Freeman]] played God so to speak, ultimately, he only serves to play a support role to the central White character in this film. Note: The Racial Cliche here can be classified as the Magic Negro character (which could be designed to play subordinate to White protagonists in films): For more read - [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Negro Definition], and [http://www.blackcommentator.com/49/49_magic.html Black Magic]

:::But '''that''' point has nothing to do with Godel. We don't need GIT to tell us we can't prove every axiom. (And we can adopt the formalist's approach of defining truth only within an axiomatic system). [[User:Peterdjones|1Z]] 14:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Matrix The Matrix]'''

- The Matrix films have the main White protagonist ([[Keanu_Reeves]]) destined to save humanity (note that most Media Messiahs are White; examples include John Connor from the Terminator Series, Ripley in the Alien Series, Johnny Rico in Starship Troopers, Superman in the Comics, Batman in all his movies, James Bond in all his movies, all the protagonists in the Lord of the Rings series, etc.). In the Matrix, the "Magic Negro" character could be identified as Morpheus played by [[Laurence_Fishburne]]. Ultimately though, the fate of humanity can only rest in the hands Neo.

:::If you think "god exists" is not necessarily true, you presumably think there is some evidence or argument which could disprove it. Would you continue to believe in God if the disproof were presented to you? if not, doesn't that show there is ''some'' connection between truth and belief? [[User:Peterdjones|1Z]] 14:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

:::::That is not true. I do not believe that there is any evidence or argument to disprove it, also no evidence or argument to prove it. Where prove means using empirical, objective evidence and Popperian hypo-thetico-deductive logic. The connection, as you say, between proof and belief is in mine and other believers minds and beyond the reach of scientific inquiry and objective "Truth".[[User:Tstrobaugh|Tstrobaugh]] 16:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Point 1: You can think what you like, Tstrobaugh, but if you can't find your ideas in the literature, then it can't go in the Wiki. [[User:Banno|Banno]] 22:00, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Point 2: The implication of your opening statement is that one can believe something while holding it not to be true; for example, that one could coherently say "I believe god exists , but it is not true that god exists". See [[Moore's paradox]]. You seem simply to have confused truth with proof of truth. [[User:Banno|Banno]] 22:00, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Decision Executive Decision]'''

-In this film, the U.S. special forces team were composed of many Non-White characters. The Villains were Non-White as well. [[Halle_Berry]] was the Non-White female who found herself caught up in the hostile situation. Ultimately, [[Kurt_Russell]] who played the White protagonist and the other White character (the one, who through sheer luck, diffused the bomb) played by [[Oliver_Platt]] end up saving the day. The Black soldier (the one who was supposed to diffuse the bomb) gets paralyzed (making him unable to continue); such misfortune creates the opportunity for Oliver Platt's character to be the difference maker in that critical situation. In the end, the White protagonist played by [[Kurt_Russell]] saves the day and wins the heart of the Non-White female.

== Removed Paragraph, For Now... ==

"If one has an external inducement to belief, such as a prospective marriage partner, he may be unable to drastically change his true belief in order to obtain the desired reward. The best he might do would be to pretend at belief. There is a possibility that with study, he would come to change his belief, depending on his earlier sources and his confidence in the validity of new ones."

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_of_the_Rings_movie_trilogy The Lord of The Rings Trilogy]'''

- The only Non-White human characters in this film were played by the Haradrim and the Easterlings, and they happened to be bad.

I believe this paragraph needs rewritten, because the example is unclear. What I mean is the relevence to the example given in connection with the topic. (Yes, I know the connection is implied. Yet an encyclopedia is meant to give [[information]] and describe, not [[imply]].) The paragraph also did not seem consistent with the section it was previously in and probably needs moved. If no one else does, I hope to rewrite this, but I'll have to research how beliefs play roles in marital relationships (and since I am not married, well, I'll have to trust sources that are plausibly verifiable.) [[User:69.245.172.44|69.245.172.44]] 18:19, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StarWars Starwars Trilogies]'''

-[[Billy-Dee_Williams]]] and [[Samuel_L_Jackson]] were the only Non-White characters to play major roles in the Starwars mega series. Even though both of their characters were major players in the storylines, they are ultimately playing subordinate roles (support characters) to the central White characters.

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_Bill Kill Bill]'''

-[[Uma_Thurman]] plays Beatrix Kiddo (a White female protagonist) and ends up killing scores of Asian men (portrayed as insignificant and disposable extras], a Black female hostile (played by [[Vivica_A._Fox]], a Eurasian female villain, and ultimately an Asian female villain (played by [[Lucy_Liu]]).

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_7#Characters Final Fantasy VII]'''

- A Japanese video game (which has recently been turned into a CGI movie - [[Final_Fantasy:_Advent_Children]] has its main White protagonist (Cloud Strife) destined to save the world. The Non-White characters in this movie (Yuffie Kisaragi -Asian, Barret Wallace -Black, and Tseng - Asian) are not the central characters, even though Final Fantasy was created by the Japanese. Other Final Fantasy protagonists such as Squall Leonhart from [[Final_Fantasy_8]] also happen to be White as well.

'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Incredibles The Incredibles]'''

-[[Samuel_L,_Jackson]] voices a Black CGI superhero who is only secondary to the entire family of white Superheroes. The main superhero in that CGI film is "Mr. Incredible", a White superhero voiced by [[Craig_T._Nelson]].

Source materials:

[http://www.feoamante.com/Movies/Racial/racial_2000.html Racial cliches identified in several films]

[http://www.mrcranky.com/movies/fastandthefurious.html Racial cliche identified in the film "The Fast and the Furious"]

[http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=932196 Asians type-casted in "The Fast and the Furious"]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Negro Magic Negro]

An extensive analysis on Racial Cliches in Entertainment can be reviewed via: [http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/sfischo/OffenseJMP.pdf "Offensive Ethnic Cliches in Movies: Drugs, Sex, and Servility"] - written by Stuart Fischoff, PH.D., Ana Franco, Elaine Gram, Angela Hernendez, and James Parker from Media Psychology Lab. California State University, Los Angeles (based on a paper presented at the American Psychological Association, Boston, August 21, 1999)

=== Regressive Mentalities vs. Progressive Mentalities ===

There is a defensive reasoning mentality that has been used by many supporters of the current White Media which insists that Non-Whites simply cannot generate enough impact and worldwide gross in leading roles, unlike the current bulk of White protagonism in films. In the eyes of the anti-media movement, the main problem with such an argument could be that there aren't enough Non-Whites in leading protagonist roles to begin with, which would henceforth, couldn't allow for a consistent comparison of statistics. In fact, for the few Non-Whites (in proportion to the ratio of Whites permitted to be cast for protagonist roles), [[Will_Smith]] is a factual example of Non-Whites being an extremely competitive force in the entertainment industry:

A listing of some of the movies starring [[Will_Smith]] as the main protagonist in the storylines:

Independence Day : '''$816,969,255 Worldwide Gross'''

Men In Black 2 : '''$440,200,000 Worldwide Gross'''.

Men In Black : '''$587,800,000 Worldwide Gross'''

Bad Boys 2 : '''$262,000,000 Worldwide Gross'''

Bad Boys : '''$140,800,000 Worldwide Gross'''

Hitch : '''$357,855,338 Worldwide Gross'''

Wild Wild West : '''$217,700,000 Worldwide Gross'''

Enemy of the State : '''$250,300,000 Worldwide Gross'''

I Robot : '''$346,701,023 Worldwide Gross'''

His numbers and career totals can be found via: [http://www.the-numbers.com/people/WSMIT.html]. To emphasize, [[Will_Smith]] according to that source, has been able to generate '''$3,923,512,439 Worldwide gross''', '''$1,827,463,970 U.S. gross'''.

The next defensive argument which advocates of the current white media adhere to insists that Hollywood is nothing more but a business and therefore, doesn't have to prioritize itself for the needs of society. This could suggest that the current Media is doing nothing wrong because it is only functioning the way it was designed for - entertainment; hence it needs not be morally conscious. Perhaps the problem with such a defensive mentality is that the media cannot literally separate itself from society, for society is the ultimate recipient of what the media shares (since the public is naturally receptive to whatever the media presents and influences upon the mainstream general consensus). For this inescapable interaction between media and public, the media (as a whole) may have an undeniable obligation to the necessities of society; it really has no choice but to be aware of the public's concerns.

=== Other Regressive and Progressive Approaches that may deal with Media Affairs ===

Many argue that attacking the media's racist tendencies requires the public to be able to identify which approaches are regressive to society, and which approaches are progressive for society. There are two common approaches shared by modern society into dealing with the current media's trends: '''1.)''' ''Leave it as it is'', or '''2.)''' ''Expose its deceptive patterns and continue to proliferate public awareness so as to pressure the entire industry into persistent change''.

'''Upon the analysis of the first approach''': ''"Leave it as it is."''

'''-''' This approach might seem to be the more regressive mentality because instead of addressing the deceptions, the decpetions are allowed to continue. Furthermore, it's critical to realize that the media is everywhere. Even though most people do not rely directly on the media for guidance and wisdom, human beings are helplessly receptive to what they watch, hear, read, and interact with. The entertainment industry has been deeply rooted in social affairs far too long to be ignored and shut off completely. "Leave it as it is" could be regarded as an impractical approach to most people of the modern age.

'''Upon the analysis of the second approach''': ''"Expose its deceptive patterns and continue to proliferate public awareness so as to pressure the entire industry into persistent change."''

'''-''' This is could be considered as the more progressive mentality of the two because it advocates direct intervention from the public into the affairs of the media by sheer awareness. Through constant and repetitive pressure by the public's voice, the media will be in the receptive position instead. Since the public always outnumbers the media, society has access to a stronger resource through unity than what the media can counter with. This mentality simply means ''"in order to remove a problem, don't run from it, but instead, just face it directly"''.

=== Non-White Population outnumbers Whites in California (Hollywood)===

There is a growing argument from the public which states that Hollywood should have more Non-Whites than Whites in leading roles in its films because California is a state which has more Non-Whites combined than that of the White population. See California demographics: [[California#Demographics]].This could strongly argue that Hollywood is left with no excuse whatsoever for its refusal to consistently increase the opportunities for Non-Whites in its films. Such a situation also applies for Texas where the Non-white population has been estimated to be around 50.2 %: [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8902484/]

=== Diversity in Media Presentations should not be Limited to Storylines only Central to Race Issues ===

Many people have often said that in order to fight racism effectively and to establish normalcy for Diversity, the public must continue to pressure the mainstream media into fully changing itself while allowing more protagonist roles in media presentations not central to race issues (to balance out the Diversity in all aspects of western media). It is widely considered to be a logical step towards gradually reversing the effects of the already deeply rooted stereotypes plaguing modern society. In other words, the point emphasized by the public enforces that the media must consider more Non-Whites in leading roles in every movie genre, while not constricting them to only support roles or in storylines that are centered around the very subject of [[Racism]]. Such a step would likely construct a fresh image for Non-Whites in everyone's minds, which would then establish normalcy for all people (reversing the effects of White normalcy which has been influenced on society for over a century by the mainstream media).''

This may be considered as a necessary and mandatory step towards gradually eliminating the negative stigma of which the mainstream media has deviced upon the public's mentality towards the concept of "Diversity" and its repetitive association with race issues. For example, it argues that, if diversity is increased in the media but only in presentations that deal with race issues (such as movies like "Crash" [[Crash_%282005_film%29]]), the public will continue to be stigmatized by the exterior image of Diversity - because the subject "Racism" carries a lot of negativity. Since "Diversity" is a mainstream term which concerns Non-Whites, then Whites will only continue to be subconsciously accepted as the social standard/norm, and such a stigma cannot be reversed if Non-Whites are tainted with racial issues. In short, more Non-Whites must be cast in storylines and presentations belonging to all avenues and genres of the mainstream media. This includes, commercials, comicbooks, novels, movies, computer games, fashion, the adult industry, news, theatre, etc. and not just in music and sports.

In essence, the ultimate goal is to establish Diversity as the social norm in modern society. If Diversity could be established as the standard normalcy for society, then the term "Diversity" would be perceived as a concept belonging to everyone (Blacks, Asians, Whites, Latinos, etc. equally). People would then no longer instinctively identify with 2 general groups like "White" or "Non-White", since the normalcy of Diversity has been successfully established. However, since "Whiteness" continues to be the subconsciously accepted norm of society, everything Non-White is coined the term "Diversity"; for "Diversity" is not an established normalcy yet, making it subconsciously accepted as being inferior so to speak.

===External links===

[http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/stereotyping/whiteness_and_privilege/whiteness_authority.cfm Media Awareness]

[http://www.blackcommentator.com/137/137_grayman_taboo.html Black Commentator]

[http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/stereotyping/ethnics_and_minorities/minorities_entertainment.cfm Minorities and Entertainment]

[http://www.yaaams.org/hollywooderas.shtml Yaaams web pages]

[http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/article512.html Medialit.org Article512]

[http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/article413.html Medialit.org Article413]

[http://www.npr.org/programs/specials/racism/hollywood/010906.hollywood.html NPR.org]

[http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/01/05/144914.php Archives 2005/01/05]

[http://news.ufl.edu/2003/01/14/movie-types/ UFL.edu]

[http://www.arasite.org/hooks.htm Arasite.org]

[http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0711/p13s02-almo.html CSMonitor.com]

[http://www.uweb.ucsb.edu/~monicamd/changingfaceinfilm.html Uweb.ucsb.edu "The Changing Face In Film"]

[http://www.imdiversity.com/villages/asian/arts_culture_media/pns_harold_kumar_0804.asp Imdiversity.com]

[http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/jc45.2002/colombe/ Ejumpcut.org Archives 2002]

[http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/18/18_yellow.html Brightlightsfilm.com]

[http://www.modelminority.com/article385.html Modelminority.com]

[http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/poets/g_l/jerome/hollywood.htm English.uiuc.edu on Hollywood]

[http://www.rowmanlittlefield.com/Catalog/Singlebook.shtml?command=search&db=%5EDB%5CCatalog.db&eqSKUdatarq=0847699471 Rowmanlittlefield Catalog]

[http://www.feoamante.com/Movies/Racial/racial_2000.html Racial Cliches identified in films]

[http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/sfischo/OffenseJMP.pdf Racial Cliches in Films and their influence on Society's Perceptions]

[http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1264/is_n11_v27/ai_19136206 Findarticles.com Article # 19136206]

[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8902484/ MSNBC]

[http://academic.udayton.edu/race/01race/white11.htm Academic.udayton.edu]

[http://www.upress.umn.edu/Books/O/ordover_american.html Upress.umn.edu]

[http://www.emmerich1.com/EUGENICS.htm Emmerich1.com]

[http://www.innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html Innercity.org]

[http://www.the-numbers.com/people/WSMIT.html The-Numbers.com]

[http://www.statenews.com/editions/092899/op_handy.html Statenews.com]

[http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2527 Fair.org]

[http://www.kaleo.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/02/26/403d8ada33396 Kaleo.org]