Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 11-27-2007, 02:20 AM
DLKeeper1 DLKeeper1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: lovin the flon, imo
Posts: 597
Default Re: Slate.com on race and IQ

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Of course, "race facts" do not define individuals, nor should they ever. What assumptions am I making?

[/ QUOTE ]
You are assuming nurture over nature to the tune of 100%.

Is it really so hard to believe the obvious intellectual discrepancies between races, in light of the fact that professional sports are dominated by Blacks (i.e. racial differences clearly exist)?




[/ QUOTE ]

I'm assuming the opposite of what you say I'm assuming; that is that nature is more important than nurture. It seems as if you're agreeing with me in the second part of your statement?
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 11-27-2007, 02:35 AM
WhiteKnight WhiteKnight is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: omotive
Posts: 316
Default Re: Slate.com on race and IQ

Like I said, I didn't really read the thread (too long + too much BS to filter) and for some odd reason had you labeled in contrast to me. Clearly I need to work on my reading comprehension. Sorry for the misunderstanding, it appears we are in agreement [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 11-27-2007, 03:04 AM
West West is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,504
Default Re: Slate.com on race and IQ

[ QUOTE ]
5. It's the enviro people irrationally claiming that

- Intelligence doesn't inately differ between races, or, if it does
- Environment >>>>>> Genes. I don't know exactly how Taraz is quantifying his >>>>>>, but it looks a like a lot. Perhaps he gives a few percent to genes. Thing is, this statement is a lot more contrary to the evidence than the one that genes may play a significant part.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you explain the Flynn Effect?
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 11-27-2007, 03:34 AM
West West is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,504
Default Re: Slate.com on race and IQ

[ QUOTE ]
Like I said, I didn't really read the thread

[/ QUOTE ]

that much is obvious

[ QUOTE ]
Is it really so hard to believe the obvious intellectual discrepancies between races, in light of the fact that professional sports are dominated by Blacks (i.e. racial differences clearly exist)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Believing that discrepencies between races exist, and that they are innate and immutable, are two different things.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 11-27-2007, 03:56 AM
tame_deuces tame_deuces is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,494
Default Re: Slate.com on race and IQ


I think we went over this before in another thread and Taraz and other posters, myself included, posted around 10 points where it is shown through research that cultural factors have a great impact on intelligence scores. We also showed that in the field itself there is no consensus on what intelligence is.

In the very least this points towards an interactional effect and that we as of yet have too little academic consensus in the field to state absolutes.

That we get written of as politically correct dummies is really of no concern. This isn't a political discussion beyond some people taking academic results out of context and presenting them as such.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 11-27-2007, 04:22 AM
WhiteKnight WhiteKnight is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: omotive
Posts: 316
Default Re: Slate.com on race and IQ

[ QUOTE ]
that much is obvious

[/ QUOTE ]
Is only a good burn if we take this thread to be the be-all and end-all of information / wisdom pertaining to this debate. Suffice it to say I've conducted a fair amount of independent research which correlates nicely with my life experiences to date.

[ QUOTE ]
Believing that discrepancies between races exist, and that they are innate and immutable, are two different things.

[/ QUOTE ]
My BS detector is going off in a major way...

Based on the wording and context of your post, we are in agreement that discrepancies exist between Whites, Blacks, Asians, Ashkhenazi Jews, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this is a fair statement to make, otherwise you wouldn't even be trying to argue the difference in semantics.

So, what differences are there in all the groups I mentioned above? Clearly the answer is race/genetic lineage/ethnic origin/whatever. How is it wrong to say that these RACIAL DISCREPANCIES are INNATE to the RACES from which we are drawing our comparisons? I mean, it's not like the discrepancies are conjured out of thin air and bear no relation to race, right?

As for immutable, I'm no biologist, but if memory serves, there exists some difference in the tendon structure of Blacks, which, among other things, enables them to perform better in activities requiring running, jumping, and other forms of physical performance. Explain to me how this difference is "mutable," short of some sort of surgical procedure.

So I reiterate my original post with some paraphrasing. There exist some racial differences which are not mutable (skeletal/musculature structure, as outlined above). Is it really so hard to believe that intellectual capacity could be like this as well?

Seriously, every single study (academic, government, private, military) conducted on this topic in the history of ever has resulted in a material IQ discrepancy between races. Don't even bother with the "define IQ or it's meaningless" drivel. It's like pornography, I may not be able to clearly define it, but it's pretty apparent when I see it. The fact of the matter is that Blacks (mean IQ 70-85), who have been given every opportunity for success over the past 2 generations consistently perform 2-3 standard deviations less than the group that has been discriminated against more than any other group in world history (Jews, mean IQ = 110-115).

Immutable? I think so.

Edited for link: http://www.halfsigma.com/2007/10/race-difference.html
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 11-27-2007, 04:47 AM
Taraz Taraz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 2,517
Default Re: Slate.com on race and IQ

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
that much is obvious

[/ QUOTE ]
Is only a good burn if we take this thread to be the be-all and end-all of information / wisdom pertaining to this debate. Suffice it to say I've conducted a fair amount of independent research which correlates nicely with my life experiences to date.

[/ QUOTE ]

So we're supposed to trust your independent research? Cite your sources like the rest of us. I'm studying psychology and neuroscience right now, so forgive me if I trust my reading of the literature more than yours.

[ QUOTE ]

Based on the wording and context of your post, we are in agreement that discrepancies exist between Whites, Blacks, Asians, Ashkhenazi Jews, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this is a fair statement to make, otherwise you wouldn't even be trying to argue the difference in semantics.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course.

[ QUOTE ]

So, what differences are there in all the groups I mentioned above? Clearly the answer is race/genetic lineage/ethnic origin/whatever. How is it wrong to say that these RACIAL DISCREPANCIES are INNATE to the RACES from which we are drawing our comparisons? I mean, it's not like the discrepancies are conjured out of thin air and bear no relation to race, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Innate means inborn and hereditary. There are countless other factors that could be at work: culture, social class, societal expectations, discrimination, nutrition, education, etc.

[ QUOTE ]

So I reiterate my original post with some paraphrasing. There exist some racial differences which are not mutable (skeletal/musculature structure, as outlined above). Is it really so hard to believe that intellectual capacity could be like this as well?

[/ QUOTE ]

It could be like this, but we don't have good reason to believe that it actually is like this in light of everything else we know about intelligence. I will not dispute the muscular argument here. But even if that were 100% true, intelligence is almost infinitely more complex than simple muscle structure and we wouldn't expect the difference to be so simple.

[ QUOTE ]

Seriously, every single study (academic, government, private, military) conducted on this topic in the history of ever has resulted in a material IQ discrepancy between races. Don't even bother with the "define IQ or it's meaningless" drivel. It's like pornography, I may not be able to clearly define it, but it's pretty apparent when I see it. The fact of the matter is that Blacks (mean IQ 70-85), who have been given every opportunity for success over the past 2 generations consistently perform 2-3 standard deviations less than the group that has been discriminated against more than any other group in world history (Jews, mean IQ = 110-115).

[/ QUOTE ]

I really can't tell if you're leveling us all or not. Are you serious? Are you really trying to say that the situations of Jews and blacks now and throughout history are so similar that the only explanation for differences between the two groups are genetic? I don't even know where to begin with that.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 11-27-2007, 07:34 AM
DougShrapnel DougShrapnel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,155
Default Re: Slate.com on race and IQ

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One man's response to Saletan: No, Blacks are not Dumber than Whites

[/ QUOTE ]
Why is this about Whites and Blacks? Why aren't these intellectual luminaries debunking the notion that Whites are dumber than Asians???

Perhaps it's because just about every one of their retarded scapegoats (culture/repression/minority status/socioeconomic status/educational attainment/nutrition) proves exactly the opposite when you look at the White/Asian differential?

[/ QUOTE ]Are you serious? Asians typical place more value on education then whites.

Before I get in to this. What's the point? Even if you could show some superiority, would it still not be best to judge the individual?
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 11-27-2007, 10:20 AM
InTheDark InTheDark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 207
Default Re: Slate.com on race and IQ

[ 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.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 11-27-2007, 10:37 AM
tame_deuces tame_deuces is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,494
Default Re: Slate.com on race and IQ

Since essentially you are saying you are right and everybody who disagrees with you is deluded, I'll go out on a limb and saying attacking others for a lack of critical thinking is probably not the best position to hold.

You might want to consider laying out your case without rhetorics.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.