|
|
|
|
#1
11-24-2007, 09:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
Most of the work that is cited in that Slate article has been shown to be flawed methodologically. [/ QUOTE ] Damn near every bit of social science has warts or worse. Some is fraudulent, some skewed by agenda. Some is withheld since it doesn't confirm (or rejects) the beloved PC hypothesis, as in the recent revelations regarding Robert Putman. So when I look at any race/IQ research from the last 40 years I assume there exists pressure to conform, as academia rewards the small players when they do. I think that older research might sometimes include a racist taint as well. But so many trends have occured over and over, a critically thinking observer is going to reach similar conclusions to Saletan. 
|
|
#2
11-24-2007, 04:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Most of the work that is cited in that Slate article has been shown to be flawed methodologically. [/ QUOTE ] Damn near every bit of social science has warts or worse. Some is fraudulent, some skewed by agenda. Some is withheld since it doesn't confirm (or rejects) the beloved PC hypothesis, as in the recent revelations regarding Robert Putman. So when I look at any race/IQ research from the last 40 years I assume there exists pressure to conform, as academia rewards the small players when they do. I think that older research might sometimes include a racist taint as well. But so many trends have occured over and over, a critically thinking observer is going to reach similar conclusions to Saletan. [/ QUOTE ] Afraid not. You should read that earlier link and move on from there. This link is not specifically about the precise paper referenced by Saletan, but you should see the relevance. More , more , more Might want to check this out (Caste) Another perspective
|
|
#3
11-24-2007, 07:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
|
|
#4
11-24-2007, 07:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Most of the work that is cited in that Slate article has been shown to be flawed methodologically. [/ QUOTE ] Damn near every bit of social science has warts or worse. Some is fraudulent, some skewed by agenda. Some is withheld since it doesn't confirm (or rejects) the beloved PC hypothesis, as in the recent revelations regarding Robert Putman. So when I look at any race/IQ research from the last 40 years I assume there exists pressure to conform, as academia rewards the small players when they do. I think that older research might sometimes include a racist taint as well. But so many trends have occured over and over, a critically thinking observer is going to reach similar conclusions to Saletan. [/ QUOTE ] Afraid not. You should read that earlier link and move on from there. This link is not specifically about the precise paper referenced by Saletan, but you should see the relevance. More , more , more Might want to check this out (Caste) Another perspective [/ QUOTE ] You do understand that this is an intellectual shooting war. The concept of a black/white intelligence difference wasn't even argued in the negative until maybe 50 years ago. Good news for your side. IQ is being deconstructed. Race is being deconstructed. All associated discussion is nearly a firing offense. Bravo.
|
|
#5
11-24-2007, 08:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
You do understand that this is an intellectual shooting war. The concept of a black/white intelligence difference wasn't even argued in the negative until maybe 50 years ago. Good news for your side. IQ is being deconstructed. Race is being deconstructed. All associated discussion is nearly a firing offense. Bravo. [/ QUOTE ] I don't see why people think that it is so much of a taboo to talk about these things. Obviously a lot of work in this area is being published and discussed. Obviously whenever someone claims to have proof that one race is "better" than another in some sense or another people are skeptical of their motives. Historically speaking there is good reason for this since we have a long history of prejudice and racism. There is also a reason that race and IQ are being deconstructed. Namely, the fact that neither of them are accurate measures of what we commonly think they are.
|
|
#6
11-24-2007, 09:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see why people think that it is so much of a taboo to talk about these things. [/ QUOTE ] Are you cloistered? Larry Summers took a boot up the ass for saying only the mildest of unPC heresy. Academia is unforgiving and dogmatic in the extreme.
|
|
#7
11-25-2007, 05:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I don't see why people think that it is so much of a taboo to talk about these things. [/ QUOTE ] Are you cloistered? Larry Summers took a boot up the ass for saying only the mildest of unPC heresy. Academia is unforgiving and dogmatic in the extreme. [/ QUOTE ] How can you possibly claim that these things aren't discussed? The article that was linked to cited several recent papers and books. These things are very much discussed in the academic community. In fact, several people have made careers out of studying just these issues. If people do good research, it will get published. Believe it or not, it is in the best interests of an academic to publish controversial results. They will get attention and attention = money. There is no problem so long as you don't make offhanded comments like Watson's "if you've ever worked with a black man you know what I'm talking about."
|
|
#8
11-25-2007, 03:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You do understand that this is an intellectual shooting war. The concept of a black/white intelligence difference wasn't even argued in the negative until maybe 50 years ago. Good news for your side. IQ is being deconstructed. Race is being deconstructed. All associated discussion is nearly a firing offense. Bravo. [/ QUOTE ] I don't see why people think that it is so much of a taboo to talk about these things. Obviously a lot of work in this area is being published and discussed. Obviously whenever someone claims to have proof that one race is "better" than another in some sense or another people are skeptical of their motives. Historically speaking there is good reason for this since we have a long history of prejudice and racism. There is also a reason that race and IQ are being deconstructed. Namely, the fact that neither of them are accurate measures of what we commonly think they are. [/ QUOTE ] InTheDark has crafted himself a nice little cocoon so that he need never be contradicted on any of his beliefs. If something is published that discredits his ideas, it is simply a vehicle of the PC machine. If people like you admit they are willing to talk about race and IQ in an honest manner, it is some sort of trap/the second you disagree you are just another PC drone. This is his MO. His armor is impenetrable. I'm trying to figure out what possible argument or evidence could be presented that would make him reconsider his position but I'm now certain that no such thing could ever exist.
|
|
#9
11-25-2007, 05:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
InTheDark has crafted himself a nice little cocoon so that he need never be contradicted on any of his beliefs. If something is published that discredits his ideas, it is simply a vehicle of the PC machine. If people like you admit they are willing to talk about race and IQ in an honest manner, it is some sort of trap/the second you disagree you are just another PC drone. This is his MO. His armor is impenetrable. I'm trying to figure out what possible argument or evidence could be presented that would make him reconsider his position but I'm now certain that no such thing could ever exist. [/ QUOTE ] I always hold out hope that I can change someone's mind when I think they they aren't fully informed. As long as you can show them why their position is unsupported or incorrect. Maybe I'm just naive though . . .
|
|
#10
11-25-2007, 09:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
I always hold out hope that I can change someone's mind when I think they they aren't fully informed. As long as you can show them why their position is unsupported or incorrect. Maybe I'm just naive though . . . [/ QUOTE ] You do understand that every possible position to this debate is supported with science, yes? My position is also supported with 400 years of observational and anecdotal evidence that formed the common wisdom of its day. It will require extraordinary evidence to overturn that, at least for me. It will require only hope and good intentions for your side to feel supported.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
