#81
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I've also seen people cross the street to avoid having to pass by a group of blacks. Oddly enough, I've never heard of anyone crossing the street to avoid a jew [/ QUOTE ] Bayes, IMO. [/ QUOTE ] I'm confused by your reply. I assume you mean Bayes theorum but I'm not sure what you mean in this context. regarding my thoughts... I'm of course only using my observational evidence but I feel pretty confident in saying that large parts of our society continues to treat people differently based on little more then skin color. (note for instance the repeated threads and postings by InTheDark with the seeming need to assert the inferiority of certain races). Every year they do tests and continue to find pervasive racism. Things like: If you have a 'black sounding name' you are less likely to get called into a job interview. There are places that have no places available for rent when a black person inquires but magically have rooms available when whites inquire. Things like taxis refusing to stop for black people. I'm sure we could list numerous recent similar studies. The end point being that blacks are treated differently in our society and, with that difference in treatment, comes differences in ways they perform, learn, etc. For anyone to assert that there are no differences and that jews are looked at the same in our society as blacks is ignoring plenty of evidence to the contrary. |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I've also seen people cross the street to avoid having to pass by a group of blacks. Oddly enough, I've never heard of anyone crossing the street to avoid a jew [/ QUOTE ] Bayes, IMO. [/ QUOTE ] Poorly applied, IMO (unless crossing the street is effortless and instantaneous) |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I'm studying psychology and neuroscience right now, so forgive me if I trust my reading of the literature more than yours. [/ QUOTE ] So very much explained in one sentence. My hope is that in less than 20 years you discover exactly how much garbage you've been shoveled under the banner of academic literature. Best luck. [/ QUOTE ] This is baffling to me. "Ah, you're studying in the field, that explains why you don't get it." I'm curious, where do you get your information on the subject if not from academic resources? [/ QUOTE ] You won't see the bias you confront from inside academia. I didn't but that was 25 years ago and at least an order of magnitude less. Imagine a BA in psychology and you don't meet 2 conservative profs in 4 years. Imagine a poli sci BA that meets none. Now imagine an associate prof looking to do a little research in the area we are discussing. He's in thick with ideologically hom,ogenous professors, cautious PC administrators and there was this vague idea of tenure someday. What sort of heretical hypothesis is he likely to investigate? Even with tenure, how many will rock the boat? Investigate Robert Putnam to see just how unPC results are handled. I couild only find this Globe piece but add to it the fact that he did his best to submarine his most recent research. That's what your in with. Boston Globe |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I'm studying psychology and neuroscience right now, so forgive me if I trust my reading of the literature more than yours. [/ QUOTE ] So very much explained in one sentence. My hope is that in less than 20 years you discover exactly how much garbage you've been shoveled under the banner of academic literature. Best luck. [/ QUOTE ] This is baffling to me. "Ah, you're studying in the field, that explains why you don't get it." I'm curious, where do you get your information on the subject if not from academic resources? [/ QUOTE ] You won't see the bias you confront from inside academia. I didn't but that was 25 years ago and at least an order of magnitude less. Imagine a BA in psychology and you don't meet 2 conservative profs in 4 years. Imagine a poli sci BA that meets none. Now imagine an associate prof looking to do a little research in the area we are discussing. He's in thick with ideologically hom,ogenous professors, cautious PC administrators and there was this vague idea of tenure someday. What sort of heretical hypothesis is he likely to investigate? Even with tenure, how many will rock the boat? Investigate Robert Putnam to see just how unPC results are handled. I couild only find this Globe piece but add to it the fact that he did his best to submarine his most recent research. That's what your in with. Boston Globe [/ QUOTE ] This is some wonderful narrative fallacy. Imagine a bunch of things that might be so that would be EXTREMELY convenient for me if they were! |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
You won't see the bias you confront from inside academia. I didn't but that was 25 years ago and at least an order of magnitude less. Imagine a BA in psychology and you don't meet 2 conservative profs in 4 years. Imagine a poli sci BA that meets none. Now imagine an associate prof looking to do a little research in the area we are discussing. He's in thick with ideologically hom,ogenous professors, cautious PC administrators and there was this vague idea of tenure someday. What sort of heretical hypothesis is he likely to investigate? Even with tenure, how many will rock the boat? Investigate Robert Putnam to see just how unPC results are handled. I couild only find this Globe piece but add to it the fact that he did his best to submarine his most recent research. That's what your in with. Boston Globe [/ QUOTE ] You still haven't answered my question. What are your sources then if not from academia? |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You won't see the bias you confront from inside academia. I didn't but that was 25 years ago and at least an order of magnitude less. Imagine a BA in psychology and you don't meet 2 conservative profs in 4 years. Imagine a poli sci BA that meets none. Now imagine an associate prof looking to do a little research in the area we are discussing. He's in thick with ideologically hom,ogenous professors, cautious PC administrators and there was this vague idea of tenure someday. What sort of heretical hypothesis is he likely to investigate? Even with tenure, how many will rock the boat? Investigate Robert Putnam to see just how unPC results are handled. I couild only find this Globe piece but add to it the fact that he did his best to submarine his most recent research. That's what your in with. Boston Globe [/ QUOTE ] You still haven't answered my question. What are your sources then if not from academia? [/ QUOTE ] Sources from academia are still of some value, just less than they used to be. Hard leftist ideology gained status in American colleges in the 70s. Unlike hard science, the research in the squishy science has less weight today than in the past. I discount accordingly. Read up on Putnam and tell me I've got it wrong. You won't. Cocoon's too fragile. |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] You won't see the bias you confront from inside academia. I didn't but that was 25 years ago and at least an order of magnitude less. Imagine a BA in psychology and you don't meet 2 conservative profs in 4 years. Imagine a poli sci BA that meets none. Now imagine an associate prof looking to do a little research in the area we are discussing. He's in thick with ideologically hom,ogenous professors, cautious PC administrators and there was this vague idea of tenure someday. What sort of heretical hypothesis is he likely to investigate? Even with tenure, how many will rock the boat? Investigate Robert Putnam to see just how unPC results are handled. I couild only find this Globe piece but add to it the fact that he did his best to submarine his most recent research. That's what your in with. Boston Globe [/ QUOTE ] You still haven't answered my question. What are your sources then if not from academia? [/ QUOTE ] Sources from academia are still of some value, just less than they used to be. Hard leftist ideology gained status in American colleges in the 70s. Unlike hard science, the research in the squishy science has less weight today than in the past. I discount accordingly. Read up on Putnam and tell me I've got it wrong. You won't. Cocoon's too fragile. [/ QUOTE ] So research is legit just only research from the 30's. Excellent. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
So research is legit just only research from the 30's. Excellent. [/ QUOTE ] Come on Vhawk, you know there is no reason to suspect biased research on race in the 30s. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
So research is legit just only research from the 30's. Excellent. [/ QUOTE ] Not at all. We must also give great weight to any contemporary research supporting his position, because it bucks the trend and is therefore credible. Similarly, we must acknowledge that creation scientists are much more likely to be correct than ordinary scientists - they're the ones who have the courage to go against the majority. It hardly matters that most scientists accept evolution - there's so much pressure in academia to accept evolution, how could they not? But even with all that pressure, some brave souls choose to seek the truth instead of worshipping political correctness. And my friends - they should be applauded. They should be applauded. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
I like that inthedark doesn't really even bother to try to hide his bias.
If the science/academia/whatever reinforces his conservative ideology, then it probably has some value. If the conclusion of an academic journal disagrees with his political wishes, then it should be discounted. Its like Bush in 2000 who discounted any science which agreed with global warming. Oddly enough, he now apparently agrees with the science that he dismissed previously because he didn't like it politically. InTheDark-- you will continue to appear as just a ridiculous partisan since you discount any sources which disagree with your politics. |
|
|