‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 7 >  Last ›
 
   
 

The necessary evil of racial identity politics for whites

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17531
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
08 January 2019 07:44
 
Jan_CAN - 08 January 2019 04:03 AM
GAD - 07 January 2019 09:59 PM
LadyJane - 07 January 2019 12:25 PM

Whenever I’m reading about the latest CRISPR news, as it relates to discovering ways of minimizing the devastating effects of genetic disorders, it never escapes me that there are nefarious practices already underway. 

It’s one thing to turn problem genes off and on, and remedy muscular disorders in dogs, it’s quite another to manipulate the human genome in an effort to create a generation of designer babies with what we perceive as superior traits right now.  Even if you could I bet there’s a pretty good chance those mutants wouldn’t be able to reproduce.  In which case it would merely amount to an unsustainable hiccup somewhere along the rigorous process of evolution.  Referred to later as the moment we got a little too close to playing god and it backfired.  Again. 

I guess we’d be wise to explore the possible repercussions of exploiting the technology, as it advances, and make sure it aligns with the ethics that will most likely serve and protect our humanity.  At least until the asteroid comes.  That may prove to be a curve worth tracing.

I am super excited by genetic engineering, not to fix black people or make whites stronger etc, I don’t give a fuck about that bullshit, but because if we ever want to do more then sit on this rock singing kumbaya waiting for another rock to hit us and wipe us out we have to go boldly where no one has gone before. I think putting our minds into android bodies is the best solution (or an AI Cylon race as a legacy), but that looks a way off so genetic engineering can bride that gap.

On the other hand, perhaps we should heed the lessons learned from that world.  Don’t forget about the Eugenics Wars and the dangerous human augments, including Khan.

If we let fear of mistakes and misuse dictate then we would never advance in anything, and miss out on a lot of great scfi!

 
 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  7176
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
08 January 2019 07:47
 

GAD:
If we let fear of mistakes and misuse dictate then we would never advance in anything, and miss out on a lot of great scfi!

Yeah, my favorite episode on Sunday afternoon Creature Feature was “The Head that Wouldn’t Die.”

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17531
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
08 January 2019 07:58
 
hannahtoo - 08 January 2019 07:44 AM

The critical issue may not be whether there are some broad statistical differences between groups, but whether these are genuinely helpful when interacting with a member of the group.  So if you met one of the hillbillies, would it be a good idea to assume he was and idiot from the get-go?  Or maybe to talk awhile and decide?  Underestimation can create a serious problem for both parties.

Also, I am wondering why we are focusing on only negative traits of the dark-skinned man in the elevator.  I mean, is he really more likely to harass me or to start tapping out a catchy hip-hop tune?  Or if the elevator gets jammed, wouldn’t he have more athletic prowess to jump up and heave off the escape hatch panel in the ceiling?

And wouldn’t be great if we were all beautiful, special and loved by everyone for who we are, damn you are high on the kumbaya koolaid today. Underestimation works great for me, then I am never disappointed, but I can be pleasantly surprised.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17531
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
08 January 2019 08:00
 
hannahtoo - 08 January 2019 07:47 AM

GAD:
If we let fear of mistakes and misuse dictate then we would never advance in anything, and miss out on a lot of great scfi!

Yeah, my favorite episode on Sunday afternoon Creature Feature was “The Head that Wouldn’t Die.”

Heads that wouldn’t die is exactly what we need!

 
 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15809
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
08 January 2019 09:49
 
GAD - 07 January 2019 11:38 PM
burt - 07 January 2019 10:38 PM
GAD - 07 January 2019 09:44 PM
Jan_CAN - 07 January 2019 09:58 AM
GAD - 07 January 2019 09:16 AM
Jan_CAN - 07 January 2019 08:46 AM

Burt has clearly debunked the biased ‘rationale’, but it is falling on deaf ears because it doesn’t fit it with the misconceptions and prejudice.  As Burt says, “The point is to recognize difference and learn to do so without prejudice”.

Agree, Burt has argued his points quite well, but not even Burt can get around genes, statistics and human nature. So tell me, how do you recognize differences in the genes, statistics etc of groups that are different from your group without being call prejudiced, racist etc.?

Burt has already answered this better than I could.  I would just have answered by saying more simply that differences can be recognized but that this needs to be done without bias and prejudice.  When there is any presumption of one ‘race’ being ‘superior’ to another, than bias is to be suspected.

Yes Burt answered better then you could but his answer was really yes there can be genetic and statistical differences in intelligence etc between groups but he doesn’t like how Dean is using the ones he is arguing even if they were proved to be true.

I don’t think you or Burt would care enough to even argue if the data showed that inbred white hillbillies had genetic and statistical differences in intelligence etc vs white or blacks groups, which is just as biased as you accuse others of being. Either the data supports an argument or it doesn’t, your or their identity politics don’t change facts you don’t like, want to hear or are afraid of.

As in a later post, I am arguing against the validity of the testing instrument. If you try to measure the weight of water with a ruler it doesn’t work even though it does give results for the height of the container. I’d also argue against it’s validity for inbred white hillbillies.

So take a group of inbreeds and a non-inbred group (all other factors being equal, so no dodging) and the inbred group shows half the score on IQ, SAT (pick as many as you like)etc tests, is your argument that all the tests are wrong and that there really no difference between the groups?

No, inbreeding might well have an effect, but if the two groups were white hillbillies then standard IQ tests wouldn’t have validity when comparing them to outside groups of middle class whites, but might differentiate between the inbred group and the non-inbred group. I suspect that you’re being intentionally obtuse here.

 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
 
Avatar
 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
Total Posts:  865
Joined  13-02-2017
 
 
 
08 January 2019 14:55
 
Abel Dean - 06 January 2019 09:07 AM

Identity politics is often denounced for good reason. Sam Harris denounces it. He has especially denounced white nationalism. I have conflicting beliefs on the matter, for two reasons.

(1) On one hand, identity politics corrupts rational thought, as it makes reason subordinate to personal identity. In a mentality of identity politics (us-vs-them mentality), the interests of one’s group are almost always supreme to de facto truth and good reasoning. Thus identitarian political camps including white nationalism are endless founts of absurd myths. Humans evolved to be both rational and tribal, but the tribal instinct mattered much more to survival and reproductive success.

(2) On the other hand, if a group without a political identity is hated by one or more groups each with a political identity, then the group without a political identity will be conquered, as they will not even put up a fight in their defense.

Situation #2 has been the status quo for the white race ever since the end of World War 2. A white identity has long been akin to Nazism. But, this has allowed other races to encourage hatred and conspiracism against the white race. The white race is blamed for the problems among all other races. If any race is poorer, under-educated, underemployed, or excessively at odds with the justice system, then who is to blame? By default, the white race is blamed. The racial disadvantages are probably rooted in genetic differences (both intelligence variations and criminal variations are each largely heritable at least within each race, races are plainly genetically different, and such differences in behavior exist all over the world and throughout time), but it doesn’t matter, because such thinking is racist, and whites at large are racist evil people, and the best non-racist option is that hidden racism among whites is causing all the racial inequalities. This is the thinking of Black Lives Matter, whose formal affirmation claims that “Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise” in a world of “deadly oppression.” This conspiracy theory is nurtured popularly among academic intellectuals, who call it, “Critical Race Theory.”

Whites are a majority in many nations, and that matters less than you may think, because a large subset of whites have allied themselves with the non-whites in opposing the white race. This is the liberal political party in any white-majority nation (i.e. the Democratic Party in America). White liberals tend to be more than happy to see whites remain politically defenseless against conspiratorial slander, even if white liberals themselves are included among the targets.

This pattern matters now and will matter much more when whites become a minority in the nations they founded, due to migratory colonization and excess non-white fertility. Even as a minority, whites will remain disproportionately rich and politically powerful, but this will probably be not enough to stop the violence of the majority of anti-white mobs and voting blocks who will be aided and abetted by white liberals. The non-white races will each have a popular positive political identity, and whites won’t. Whites will be defenseless against the increasingly zealous anti-white mobs and voting blocks. They can not effectively defend themselves merely as a scattered mass of individuals. They must defend themselves as an organized group.

Anyone can make any kind of improbable prediction they like, but the key predictions are already bearing fruit in South Africa, where the black-majority national government is seizing property owned by whites to give to blacks. This move is explicitly driven by the belief that the white race continues to systemically oppress the black race. Blacks are richer within South Africa than within any other African nation, but such facts don’t matter to them. Identity politics and ideology matters to them.

To be sure, the world would be much better without the existence of identity politics. The same is true for guns. The world would be much better off without guns. And, the first nation to dump all their guns in the ocean and to cut off alliances with armed nations will be the next nation conquered, enslaved and/or killed.

How is this not suspenders and shaved heads exchanged for a tie and hair parted on the side—the same racial bullshit just packaged into a genteel form, one obeying the ostensible forms of civilized discussion in order to become respectable, as it were?

The only identity politics we need to bother with is a finding common ground under a common human identity, not this absurd politics of racial identity against racial identity coming from both the right and the left.  Jesus Christ will we ever surpass our own adolescence?

Incidentally, if “the white race” is threatened with a loss of its identity, it deserves to lose it.

 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  7176
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
08 January 2019 15:09
 
GAD - 08 January 2019 07:58 AM
hannahtoo - 08 January 2019 07:44 AM

The critical issue may not be whether there are some broad statistical differences between groups, but whether these are genuinely helpful when interacting with a member of the group.  So if you met one of the hillbillies, would it be a good idea to assume he was and idiot from the get-go?  Or maybe to talk awhile and decide?  Underestimation can create a serious problem for both parties.

Also, I am wondering why we are focusing on only negative traits of the dark-skinned man in the elevator.  I mean, is he really more likely to harass me or to start tapping out a catchy hip-hop tune?  Or if the elevator gets jammed, wouldn’t he have more athletic prowess to jump up and heave off the escape hatch panel in the ceiling?

And wouldn’t be great if we were all beautiful, special and loved by everyone for who we are, damn you are high on the kumbaya koolaid today. Underestimation works great for me, then I am never disappointed, but I can be pleasantly surprised.

Trying to insert humor…

But really, I do believe that “no news is good news” these days in the sense that, if it is good, it is not news.  I saw a commercial touting The Wall. (It was on CBS, I think.)  It was complete fear mongering.  “Drugs pouring in!  Criminals!  Disease!”  In all caps.  It was completely over the top.  We are being manipulated by appealing to our fears.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
08 January 2019 18:55
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 08 January 2019 02:55 PM
Abel Dean - 06 January 2019 09:07 AM

Identity politics is often denounced for good reason. Sam Harris denounces it. He has especially denounced white nationalism. I have conflicting beliefs on the matter, for two reasons.

(1) On one hand, identity politics corrupts rational thought, as it makes reason subordinate to personal identity. In a mentality of identity politics (us-vs-them mentality), the interests of one’s group are almost always supreme to de facto truth and good reasoning. Thus identitarian political camps including white nationalism are endless founts of absurd myths. Humans evolved to be both rational and tribal, but the tribal instinct mattered much more to survival and reproductive success.

(2) On the other hand, if a group without a political identity is hated by one or more groups each with a political identity, then the group without a political identity will be conquered, as they will not even put up a fight in their defense.

Situation #2 has been the status quo for the white race ever since the end of World War 2. A white identity has long been akin to Nazism. But, this has allowed other races to encourage hatred and conspiracism against the white race. The white race is blamed for the problems among all other races. If any race is poorer, under-educated, underemployed, or excessively at odds with the justice system, then who is to blame? By default, the white race is blamed. The racial disadvantages are probably rooted in genetic differences (both intelligence variations and criminal variations are each largely heritable at least within each race, races are plainly genetically different, and such differences in behavior exist all over the world and throughout time), but it doesn’t matter, because such thinking is racist, and whites at large are racist evil people, and the best non-racist option is that hidden racism among whites is causing all the racial inequalities. This is the thinking of Black Lives Matter, whose formal affirmation claims that “Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise” in a world of “deadly oppression.” This conspiracy theory is nurtured popularly among academic intellectuals, who call it, “Critical Race Theory.”

Whites are a majority in many nations, and that matters less than you may think, because a large subset of whites have allied themselves with the non-whites in opposing the white race. This is the liberal political party in any white-majority nation (i.e. the Democratic Party in America). White liberals tend to be more than happy to see whites remain politically defenseless against conspiratorial slander, even if white liberals themselves are included among the targets.

This pattern matters now and will matter much more when whites become a minority in the nations they founded, due to migratory colonization and excess non-white fertility. Even as a minority, whites will remain disproportionately rich and politically powerful, but this will probably be not enough to stop the violence of the majority of anti-white mobs and voting blocks who will be aided and abetted by white liberals. The non-white races will each have a popular positive political identity, and whites won’t. Whites will be defenseless against the increasingly zealous anti-white mobs and voting blocks. They can not effectively defend themselves merely as a scattered mass of individuals. They must defend themselves as an organized group.

Anyone can make any kind of improbable prediction they like, but the key predictions are already bearing fruit in South Africa, where the black-majority national government is seizing property owned by whites to give to blacks. This move is explicitly driven by the belief that the white race continues to systemically oppress the black race. Blacks are richer within South Africa than within any other African nation, but such facts don’t matter to them. Identity politics and ideology matters to them.

To be sure, the world would be much better without the existence of identity politics. The same is true for guns. The world would be much better off without guns. And, the first nation to dump all their guns in the ocean and to cut off alliances with armed nations will be the next nation conquered, enslaved and/or killed.

How is this not suspenders and shaved heads exchanged for a tie and hair parted on the side—the same racial bullshit just packaged into a genteel form, one obeying the ostensible forms of civilized discussion in order to become respectable, as it were?

The only identity politics we need to bother with is a finding common ground under a common human identity, not this absurd politics of racial identity against racial identity coming from both the right and the left.  Jesus Christ will we ever surpass our own adolescence?

Incidentally, if “the white race” is threatened with a loss of its identity, it deserves to lose it.

White nationalism is far from anything to idealize as a moral end, in my opinion. Similarly, I don’t think we should idealize guns. And yet, if people everywhere wanted to murder me, then I had best protect myself with a few guns. In white nations at this point, the best defense against widespread conspiratorial hatred is that whites are a majority. When they lose that majority and the hateful conspiracism persists, then their rights are removed and they are murdered, unless they unify enough against the threat so they can fight back. This isn’t saying that whites are the master race, nor that only whites deserve to live, nor that non-whites shouldn’t have rights, nor anything like that. It is about whites protecting their own lives and their own interests in the face of an external existential threat.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
08 January 2019 19:20
 
burt - 07 January 2019 08:09 PM
Abel Dean - 07 January 2019 11:00 AM

Suppose your set of British bell curves works in your favor. Great. You did not censor the bell curves, but you had scientific arguments using the bell curves. If the two American bell curves can be accurately explained without racism, then I think that is well and good. If they can be explained, then we can solve the underlying problem. Let’s say it isn’t genetic but it is caused by white teachers being racist against their black students without knowing it. Then great. Let’s have non-racist teachers, and that will solve the problem. This is just a hypothetical, so maybe it is not racist teachers but something else. Maybe it is bad food. Maybe it is poison in the paint. Maybe it is a black culture of laziness (as mainstream American conservatives tend to believe). Then one way or the other we can get a handle on what the problem really is and we can solve it. One way or the other, we know from the bell curves that the problem starts from a young age and persists until adulthood. We know that some black children are exceptionally smart, and we know that their high intelligence starts from a young age and persists until adulthood. We know this from the science of intelligence. It is true that the science of human intelligence as a whole seems to lead in a more racist direction. Intelligence variations are 74% heritable within each race, the racial intelligence inequalities exist within every nation studied and not just within a single nation, and whatever genotypic trait correlates with intelligence, including brain size and allele frequencies, likewise varies among the races as expected. Even if this is all true (yes, I know you don’t believe it), then we can deal with this actual science using our fundamental moral values, we can take the human species in a better direction, and the dogmas do much more harm than good. Let’s say genetic engineering for intelligence is a bad idea for now because of unintended side effects, like you said. Then, we can put that on the back burner until CRISPR is better understood. I am all for that. Yes, let’s find solutions. The sex differences in mental abilities is another interesting topic for me, and I will leave it aside for now. You have great thoughts on the matter.

You’re missing a couple of points: the oppression of blacks in America isn’t just racist teachers, bad nutrition, etc., it’s systematic, it’s there even among teachers who don’t believe they are being racist, in families who adopt black children (as have some of my cousin’s evangelical kids), and in people on the street who avoid eye contact with black males they happen to pass (in both African and American black culture, eye contact as two guys pass each other is affirmative of recognition; among whites with a Northern European ancestry, eye contact in passing a stranger is considered improper). I haven’t seen racial evidence (likely too sensitive a topic to study objectively), but it’s there in expectations that are little more than “in the air.” This does show up with girls and math, and with teachers expectations. In studies where teachers are told that certain students are “slow learners” or “of lower intelligence” these students are, in fact evaluated in that way by the teachers, and their class performance is below average; likewise, if girls are primed with ideas relating to low female performance in math they will do less well on a subsequent exam than if they are primed with ideas of good female performance (and how these studies ever got past an ethics committee is amazing). Add to this the effects of child rearing in poor inner city or rural families (black or otherwise). I saw a recent study which claimed that by age 4 or 5 a child raised in a middle or upper class home has heard more than 30,000,000 words spoken to them, than has a child raised in the inner city. And there is the further matter of cultural attitudes about children. This is anecdotal, but I think it generalizes: the wife of a cousin teaches elementary school in Southern California. She has blacks, whites, and Hispanics in her class and once in conversation she said to me that she had noticed that the Hispanic children didn’t seem to be able to engage in peer to peer conversation, which was far less of a problem for the blacks and whites. Her eventual conclusion was that this had to do with home environments where Hispanic children were almost never included in adult conversations but rather were just told what to do or not to do, or otherwise given instructions. Cultural effects, again.

Regarding my use of the British bell curves, I gave those to indicate that reliance on such things will give equivocal results, depending on how a sample is parsed, not to support the validity of IQ testing as measuring anything other than certain forms of analytically based thought processes in WEIRD subjects. My general position on IQ (or other ) tests, and why I think that they are not valid measures of differences between populations that are not homogeneous in social or economic terms, is as follows:

1. The brain operates as a highly complex neural network. It is “programmed” during infancy and childhood in terms of patterns that can be recognized.
2. These patterns include different thought patterns, as well as patterns of recognition and response behavior (as in sensory-motor connections).
3. This occurs via strengthening of synaptic connections that are frequent in input and thought, and pruning of synaptic connections that are infrequent or absent.
4. What arises from this are particular surface manifestations of underlying cognitive capacities.
5. The neural structures and processes supporting these cognitive capacities have evolved genetically based on necessities of survival.
6. The surface manifestations of these capacities, on the other hand, are culturally laden because a child grows to maturity within a specific culture.
7. Thus, these surface manifestations are to large extent, tied to cognitive skills that are important in the given culture for adaptation to a successful life in that culture.
8. The existence of a particular, culturally adapted manifestation of an underlying cognitive capacity can block easy learning of a different form of its manifestation.
9. As a result, tests of surface level expressions of underlying cognitive capacities will be valid measures only in culturally homogeneous populations.

Homogeneous populations includes the absence of innate cultural prejudices against some subsets of the population.

I respect your thoughts on this matter. There are many ideas about what could be the root causes and mechanisms of intelligence variations, and the sum of the effects of the diverse range of environmental variations on intelligence seems to be the remainder of the heritability value. If the heritability of intelligence is 0.74 (74%), then environmental effects account for 0.26 (26%). That doesn’t mean the racial gaps must be genetic. The probability of a mostly genetic cause of the race gaps increases with a greater within-group heritability value, but at least a small possibility always remain that the cause of the race gaps is mostly environmental. If so, then the science of IQ can help us isolate those root causes. Whatever the causes of the racial differences may be, a low IQ means about the same things for blacks as it does for whites, and likewise a high IQ means about the same things for blacks as it does for whites, and it is important. The scientific facts should not be routinely censored, shamed and pushed into obscurity as though they are at odds with the liberal ideals of racial equality. The facts need to be popularly understood and integrated in a full understanding of racial inequality generally.

[ Edited: 08 January 2019 19:33 by Abel Dean]
 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15809
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
08 January 2019 21:21
 
Abel Dean - 08 January 2019 07:20 PM
burt - 07 January 2019 08:09 PM
Abel Dean - 07 January 2019 11:00 AM

Suppose your set of British bell curves works in your favor. Great. You did not censor the bell curves, but you had scientific arguments using the bell curves. If the two American bell curves can be accurately explained without racism, then I think that is well and good. If they can be explained, then we can solve the underlying problem. Let’s say it isn’t genetic but it is caused by white teachers being racist against their black students without knowing it. Then great. Let’s have non-racist teachers, and that will solve the problem. This is just a hypothetical, so maybe it is not racist teachers but something else. Maybe it is bad food. Maybe it is poison in the paint. Maybe it is a black culture of laziness (as mainstream American conservatives tend to believe). Then one way or the other we can get a handle on what the problem really is and we can solve it. One way or the other, we know from the bell curves that the problem starts from a young age and persists until adulthood. We know that some black children are exceptionally smart, and we know that their high intelligence starts from a young age and persists until adulthood. We know this from the science of intelligence. It is true that the science of human intelligence as a whole seems to lead in a more racist direction. Intelligence variations are 74% heritable within each race, the racial intelligence inequalities exist within every nation studied and not just within a single nation, and whatever genotypic trait correlates with intelligence, including brain size and allele frequencies, likewise varies among the races as expected. Even if this is all true (yes, I know you don’t believe it), then we can deal with this actual science using our fundamental moral values, we can take the human species in a better direction, and the dogmas do much more harm than good. Let’s say genetic engineering for intelligence is a bad idea for now because of unintended side effects, like you said. Then, we can put that on the back burner until CRISPR is better understood. I am all for that. Yes, let’s find solutions. The sex differences in mental abilities is another interesting topic for me, and I will leave it aside for now. You have great thoughts on the matter.

You’re missing a couple of points: the oppression of blacks in America isn’t just racist teachers, bad nutrition, etc., it’s systematic, it’s there even among teachers who don’t believe they are being racist, in families who adopt black children (as have some of my cousin’s evangelical kids), and in people on the street who avoid eye contact with black males they happen to pass (in both African and American black culture, eye contact as two guys pass each other is affirmative of recognition; among whites with a Northern European ancestry, eye contact in passing a stranger is considered improper). I haven’t seen racial evidence (likely too sensitive a topic to study objectively), but it’s there in expectations that are little more than “in the air.” This does show up with girls and math, and with teachers expectations. In studies where teachers are told that certain students are “slow learners” or “of lower intelligence” these students are, in fact evaluated in that way by the teachers, and their class performance is below average; likewise, if girls are primed with ideas relating to low female performance in math they will do less well on a subsequent exam than if they are primed with ideas of good female performance (and how these studies ever got past an ethics committee is amazing). Add to this the effects of child rearing in poor inner city or rural families (black or otherwise). I saw a recent study which claimed that by age 4 or 5 a child raised in a middle or upper class home has heard more than 30,000,000 words spoken to them, than has a child raised in the inner city. And there is the further matter of cultural attitudes about children. This is anecdotal, but I think it generalizes: the wife of a cousin teaches elementary school in Southern California. She has blacks, whites, and Hispanics in her class and once in conversation she said to me that she had noticed that the Hispanic children didn’t seem to be able to engage in peer to peer conversation, which was far less of a problem for the blacks and whites. Her eventual conclusion was that this had to do with home environments where Hispanic children were almost never included in adult conversations but rather were just told what to do or not to do, or otherwise given instructions. Cultural effects, again.

Regarding my use of the British bell curves, I gave those to indicate that reliance on such things will give equivocal results, depending on how a sample is parsed, not to support the validity of IQ testing as measuring anything other than certain forms of analytically based thought processes in WEIRD subjects. My general position on IQ (or other ) tests, and why I think that they are not valid measures of differences between populations that are not homogeneous in social or economic terms, is as follows:

1. The brain operates as a highly complex neural network. It is “programmed” during infancy and childhood in terms of patterns that can be recognized.
2. These patterns include different thought patterns, as well as patterns of recognition and response behavior (as in sensory-motor connections).
3. This occurs via strengthening of synaptic connections that are frequent in input and thought, and pruning of synaptic connections that are infrequent or absent.
4. What arises from this are particular surface manifestations of underlying cognitive capacities.
5. The neural structures and processes supporting these cognitive capacities have evolved genetically based on necessities of survival.
6. The surface manifestations of these capacities, on the other hand, are culturally laden because a child grows to maturity within a specific culture.
7. Thus, these surface manifestations are to large extent, tied to cognitive skills that are important in the given culture for adaptation to a successful life in that culture.
8. The existence of a particular, culturally adapted manifestation of an underlying cognitive capacity can block easy learning of a different form of its manifestation.
9. As a result, tests of surface level expressions of underlying cognitive capacities will be valid measures only in culturally homogeneous populations.

Homogeneous populations includes the absence of innate cultural prejudices against some subsets of the population.

I respect your thoughts on this matter. There are many ideas about what could be the root causes and mechanisms of intelligence variations, and the sum of the effects of the diverse range of environmental variations on intelligence seems to be the remainder of the heritability value. If the heritability of intelligence is 0.74 (74%), then environmental effects account for 0.26 (26%). That doesn’t mean the racial gaps must be genetic. The probability of a mostly genetic cause of the race gaps increases with a greater within-group heritability value, but at least a small possibility always remain that the cause of the race gaps is mostly environmental. If so, then the science of IQ can help us isolate those root causes. Whatever the causes of the racial differences may be, a low IQ means about the same things for blacks as it does for whites, and likewise a high IQ means about the same things for blacks as it does for whites, and it is important. The scientific facts should not be routinely censored, shamed and pushed into obscurity as though they are at odds with the liberal ideals of racial equality. The facts need to be popularly understood and integrated in a full understanding of racial inequality generally.

No, the heritability factor doesn’t work in the way you seem to believe. Sometimes a very small effect an have major results. Basically, I still agree with Anal, you are basically pushing white nationalism in a coat and tie rather than shaved head. You are advocating more tribalism in a time when human unity is the goal and whatever excuses you put forward fall flat. So we’ve nothing more to say to each other.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
09 January 2019 03:56
 

A handful of academics within the study of human intelligence and evolutionary biology make some of the same arguments that I am making, and both their probable and improbable claims are routinely judged according to either popular dogmas or evil ideological associations, NOT according to their empirical probabilities. I think we really need to get a grip and let go of the dogmas. We can take the universe in a better direction, but to do so we can NOT assume from the get-go that the universe already conforms to our wishful thinking on such matters. That is more likely to take us to much worse places, and we are confused and blind in our anticipation of those places. Do you really think that massive genome-wide association studies will affirm equal average genotypic intelligence or just a random ordering for all races?

 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
 
Avatar
 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
Total Posts:  865
Joined  13-02-2017
 
 
 
09 January 2019 04:50
 
Abel Dean - 08 January 2019 06:55 PM

It is about whites protecting their own lives and their own interests in the face of an external existential threat.

.

But for the idiotic racial identification you are promoting, the interests of “whites” are the same interests as anyone else.  Take away that idiotic identification and the “external existential threats” are garden-variety injustices that everyone has a common interest in rectifying. 

You add nothing but genteel stupidity to the conversation, sir, but I am glad you are doing it out here in the open, for everyone to see.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3301
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
09 January 2019 05:06
 
Abel Dean - 09 January 2019 03:56 AM

A handful of academics within the study of human intelligence and evolutionary biology make some of the same arguments that I am making, and both their probable and improbable claims are routinely judged according to either popular dogmas or evil ideological associations, NOT according to their empirical probabilities. I think we really need to get a grip and let go of the dogmas. We can take the universe in a better direction, but to do so we can NOT assume from the get-go that the universe already conforms to our wishful thinking on such matters. That is more likely to take us to much worse places, and we are confused and blind in our anticipation of those places. Do you really think that massive genome-wide association studies will affirm equal average genotypic intelligence or just a random ordering for all races?

It is clear that it is you who is engaging in wishful thinking, and that it is your way of thinking that would “take us to much worse places”.  I suggest you step back and do some self-examination as to your motives in choosing to give credit to a handful of academics rather than those who have shown the flaws in those studies and/or their interpretation.

 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
09 January 2019 05:27
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher - 09 January 2019 04:50 AM
Abel Dean - 08 January 2019 06:55 PM

It is about whites protecting their own lives and their own interests in the face of an external existential threat.

.

But for the idiotic racial identification you are promoting, the interests of “whites” are the same interests as anyone else.  Take away that idiotic identification and the “external existential threats” are garden-variety injustices that everyone has a common interest in rectifying. 

You add nothing but genteel stupidity to the conversation, sir, but I am glad you are doing it out here in the open, for everyone to see.

Yes, certainly better than systemic censorship, which is the status quo almost everywhere. In the western world since World War 2, groups protecting their own interests has been generally acceptable, with one key exception. It is now popular to believe, with the zealous encouragement of the consensus of academic authorities, that the way to resolve the systemic social injustices everywhere in the world is to stop white people (including you, not just me) from being implicitly or secretly oppressive against non-whites everywhere. It is a complete delusion. It follows from projecting good liberal ideals onto our beliefs about objective reality. If darker races absolutely must NOT be less intelligent, then the only way to explain their systemic disadvantages is either their own laziness/bad choices or they are being systemically oppressed by whites. Both alternatives are delusions, and the conservative world has chosen the former alternative and the liberal world has chosen the latter alternative. The liberal alternative matters more, because disadvantaged non-whites have generally sided with it, and the liberal ideology dominates popular media and academia. Even though races are psychologically different, it would be great if everyone in the world stopped seeing race and stopped worrying about racial inequality. This was tried from the fifties to the eighties. The expectation was that racial inequality would go away. It is the origin of the belief that biological races don’t even exist. Anti-racism then became popular among whites. And yet racial inequality persisted with about the same magnitudes. So, liberals and disadvantaged non-whites everywhere started to blame secret/implicit racism among the white race for all such problems, and whites self-impose a moral stricture to not even try to defend themselves against the conspiracism. This is no solution for anyone. This is the opposite of a solution. One way or the other, we need to lose the moral dogmas governing our beliefs about objective reality.

[ Edited: 09 January 2019 05:38 by Abel Dean]
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
09 January 2019 05:36
 
Jan_CAN - 09 January 2019 05:06 AM
Abel Dean - 09 January 2019 03:56 AM

A handful of academics within the study of human intelligence and evolutionary biology make some of the same arguments that I am making, and both their probable and improbable claims are routinely judged according to either popular dogmas or evil ideological associations, NOT according to their empirical probabilities. I think we really need to get a grip and let go of the dogmas. We can take the universe in a better direction, but to do so we can NOT assume from the get-go that the universe already conforms to our wishful thinking on such matters. That is more likely to take us to much worse places, and we are confused and blind in our anticipation of those places. Do you really think that massive genome-wide association studies will affirm equal average genotypic intelligence or just a random ordering for all races?

It is clear that it is you who is engaging in wishful thinking, and that it is your way of thinking that would “take us to much worse places”.  I suggest you step back and do some self-examination as to your motives in choosing to give credit to a handful of academics rather than those who have shown the flaws in those studies and/or their interpretation.

I agree with you. Often in my life I have been persuaded by a wrong set of claims, and I was persuaded that it was wrong only by reviewing the criticisms and seeing whose logic is objectively more sound, whose facts match the objective reality, and whose theory better aligns with the established background knowledge. And it is much too easy to get out of one conspiratorial rabbit hole only to be sucked into yet another conspiratorial rabbit hole, which I see commonly among the Alt Right. The way to keep a handle on reality, in my opinion, is to dive willingly into the criticisms from every intelligent perspective.

 
‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 7 >  Last ›