ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Charles Murray , racial issues , racism charges , racism issues , sam harris

Reply
Old 20th May 2017, 10:05 AM   #41
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 22,510
Originally Posted by TraneWreck View Post
I fully accept that IQ and intelligence in an individual and in groups is partly determined by a range of heritable factors and environmental conditions. That ruins Murray's arguments, not mine.
Eh? Why does that ruin his argument when he also says this?
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 10:09 AM   #42
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 22,510
Originally Posted by TraneWreck View Post
You are flatly wrong. Murray has been one of the most influential racists of the last couple decades. His shoddy science has given an intellectual foundation to a wide range of malicious beliefs.

You can stubbornly refuse to see the truth in front of you, but, again, the man generates bunk science for the express reason of attempting to prove that black people are genetically inferior to white people.

Hey, that's *********** racist.



Again, you are just wrong. You just listened to a podcast where he presented very bad science to justify his position that black people are inferior to white people. That is a proud, public display of racism.

That you, like Harris, have chosen to ignore the actual science making it difficult to see where the malicious, flawed reasoning takes place is not a compelling argument against Murray's racism.




See, this is just sad. It isn't because he had a conversation. It's because he gave a teary defense of the man, validated his incorrect statements as being "just facts," and completely failed to criticize views that have been demolished for two decades. Harris endorsed those views, both explicitly and implicitly.

THAT is the reason for the criticism.
I think you are merely reasserting the same thing. I and Harris are not convinced that what we have seen and heard in front of us is racist. You insist it is. You accept that a study showing mean average IQs of East Asians as being more intelligent than other groups due to environmental and genetic factors would not be racist yet you asset that similar conclusions when put forward by Murray are. How does that work?
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 10:11 AM   #43
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 22,510
And seriously, I listened to the podcast - you did not - and he does not proudly and publicly claim that blacks are inferior to whites. This is why I am having trouble taking your word for anything. It seems you are making things up.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 10:15 AM   #44
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Eh? Why does that ruin his argument when he also says this?
Because he says it, then still draws conclusions that are not justified by the evidence.

This was the very careful analysis contained in the article I linked that you complained about "knitpicking." This is why they were so careful. Literally no one has provided an argument or defense of Murray that was not already dealt with in the article in the OP.
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 10:23 AM   #45
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
And seriously, I listened to the podcast - you did not - and he does not proudly and publicly claim that blacks are inferior to whites. This is why I am having trouble taking your word for anything. It seems you are making things up.
I listened long enough to hear him do it.

This isn't complicated stuff. Murray's entire game is to cloak obvious, gross racism behind a "scienc-y" facade. If you are unaware of the science or don't care to learn, it can be convincing. That's why he's particularly malicious and dangerous.

Murray also plays this coy little game of trying to distance himself from the Bell Curve and minimize the claims therein, but as you see in the Harris interview, he will always go back to defending it as "Science."

The man argues for race realism and provable genetic differences between those races in a way that is not supported by the evidence.

If you can't see how the assertion that black people are one standard deviation below white people in terms of intelligence, and environmental factors cannot explain it, is racist, I don't know what to tell you. It would be one thing if the science supported that claim, but it does not.
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 10:27 AM   #46
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I think you are merely reasserting the same thing.
As are you. You just say over and over you don't think he's racist. That's something you can keep saying over and over.

Quote:
I and Harris are not convinced that what we have seen and heard in front of us is racist. You insist it is. You accept that a study showing mean average IQs of East Asians as being more intelligent than other groups due to environmental and genetic factors would not be racist yet you asset that similar conclusions when put forward by Murray are. How does that work?
Did you miss the part where Murray argues that environmental conditions are insufficient to explain achievement differences between groups?

This is the fundamental problem with your repetitive, unconvincing defense of Murray: you ignore his actual conclusions.

Everyone agrees there is some combination of genetics and environmental conditions. Only one guy is saying that environmental conditions are inadequate to explain why white people are smarter than black people.
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 10:35 AM   #47
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
Here is a good article that runs down the notorious racists who were used as sources for the Bell Curve:

Quote:
For all the shock value of its assertion that blacks are intractably, and probably biologically, inferior in intelligence to whites and Asians, The Bell Curve is not quite an original piece of research. It is, in spite of all the controversy that is attending its publication, only a review of the literature—an elaborate interpretation of data culled from the work of other social scientists. For this reason, the credibility of its authors, Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein, rests significantly on the credibility of their sources.

[...]

Surely the most curious of the sources he and Herrnstein consulted is Mankind Quarterly—a journal of anthropology founded in Edinburgh in 1960. Five articles from the journal are actually cited in The Bell Curve’s bibliography (pp. 775, 807, and 828).2 But the influence on the book of scholars linked to Mankind Quarterly is more significant. No fewer than seventeen researchers cited in the bibliography of The Bell Curve have contributed to Mankind Quarterly. Ten are present or former editors, or members of its editorial advisory board. This is interesting because Mankind Quarterly is a notorious journal of “racial history” founded, and funded, by men who believe in the genetic superiority of the white race.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1994...he-bell-curve/
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 10:36 AM   #48
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 22,510
Originally Posted by TraneWreck View Post
As are you. You just say over and over you don't think he's racist. That's something you can keep saying over and over.



Did you miss the part where Murray argues that environmental conditions are insufficient to explain achievement differences between groups?

This is the fundamental problem with your repetitive, unconvincing defense of Murray: you ignore his actual conclusions.

Everyone agrees there is some combination of genetics and environmental conditions. Only one guy is saying that environmental conditions are inadequate to explain why white people are smarter than black people.
What? I have not asserted that Murray is not a racist. I have said he may be but I haven't seen evidence to support that. And if YOU think that environmental and genetic factors combine to cause difference in intelligence among groups then you DO think environmental factors alone are inadequate to explain them.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 10:39 AM   #49
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
What? I have not asserted that Murray is not a racist. I have said he may be but I haven't seen evidence to support that. And if YOU think that environmental and genetic factors combine to cause difference in intelligence among groups then you DO think environmental factors alone are inadequate to explain them.
No, that's just a bad conclusion. Environmental factors may be completely sufficient to determine the difference in IQ and intelligence BETWEEN "RACES," while still acknowledging that there is a genetic component.

That's the point of the Flynn effect: the difference between white people and black people today is 1/2 the difference between white people today and white people in 1948. The genetics are the same, the environment changed, that is more than sufficient to explain the difference.
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 10:55 AM   #50
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 22,510
Originally Posted by TraneWreck View Post
No, that's just a bad conclusion. Environmental factors may be completely sufficient to determine the difference in IQ and intelligence BETWEEN "RACES," while still acknowledging that there is a genetic component.

That's the point of the Flynn effect: the difference between white people and black people today is 1/2 the difference between white people today and white people in 1948. The genetics are the same, the environment changed, that is more than sufficient to explain the difference.
Alright, well I will read up more on the issue, starting with the paper that the Vox authors wrote as an update to Knowns and Unknowns, and the NYRB article. Hopefully that will give me a more informed idea about Murray's work. If I think it demonstrates he is a racist then I'll say so, but I'm not going to make such a claim without being having strong evidence.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 11:05 AM   #51
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Alright, well I will read up more on the issue, starting with the paper that the Vox authors wrote as an update to Knowns and Unknowns, and the NYRB article. Hopefully that will give me a more informed idea about Murray's work. If I think it demonstrates he is a racist then I'll say so, but I'm not going to make such a claim without being having strong evidence.
All I can ask is that you read more, though I would be curious if you could provide a list of non-racist academics who uncritically quote from journals edited by ex-Nazis:

Quote:
Undaunted, Mankind Quarterly published work by some of those who had taken part in research under Hitlerís regime in Germany. Ottmar von Verschuer, a leading race scientist in Nazi Germany and an academic mentor of Josef Mengele, even served on the Mankind Quarterly editorial board.
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2017, 03:19 AM   #52
DreadNiK
A typical atypical
 
DreadNiK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 886
it is telling that despite repeated requests, tranewreck is singularly unable to provide a quote from this awful gross racist that we can read (or hear, a timestamp from the podcast would do fine) and go 'oh yeah, that is pretty racist, maybe you are right instead of appearing to engage in somewhat hysterical attacks that basically completely validate what is said in the intro to the podcast...'
__________________
Question Everything - Just not always out loud...

Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate
DreadNiK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2017, 08:59 AM   #53
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Demanding a single discrete quote to focus on while ignoring his sources and conclusions seems like a red herring to me.
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2017, 11:01 AM   #54
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 14,331
Originally Posted by TraneWreck View Post
All I can ask is that you read more, though I would be curious if you could provide a list of non-racist academics who uncritically quote from journals edited by ex-Nazis:
Quote:
Quote:
Undaunted, Mankind Quarterly published work by some of those who had taken part in research under Hitlerís regime in Germany. Ottmar von Verschuer, a leading race scientist in Nazi Germany and an academic mentor of Josef Mengele, even served on the Mankind Quarterly editorial board.
And I bet just as much bias is shown by the people Tranewreck quotes. Reparations supporters for instance. So I give little credence to the Godwin ploy.

Race is one of several subjects on which it is nearly impossible to find unbiased research. Others are pornography, Marijuana, and homosexulity- nature or nurture.

And about now, there may be enough data acquired to come to a conclusion. But 'Africa' is too broad, it would need to be separated into the ummm 7 different ethnicities of Africa.

Ooops, double the number of groups, each of those 7 diluted with Euros. Maybe African-Americans ARE dumber, because of Euro genes? Hahahahaha.

And the culmination of all this research will have to point out exactly which group is the stupidest. Serbians? Pacific Islanders? Amazon pygmies? There has to be ONE. Would liberals accept that?

And of course, that avg would not meant that every member is shtoopid either. I bet there is a genius Pygmy Serbian out there too.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Medium minds discuss events.
Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.
casebro is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2017, 11:10 AM   #55
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 14,331
Hmm, I can't remember- did 23&Me ask about my IQ? They asked a lot of sciency stuff. I didn't do Ancestry, did they?

But those sites also each have a bias. 23+ wanted to gather new data, to sell to Big Pharma. Which they did, to the tune of $75M. Ancestry is an LDS group, they want to baptize ancestors of Mormons in absentia.

But you can get all 50M exomes sequenced for about $500 now. 50x more than either of those two. I'll go search...

https://www.genosresearch.com

But Ooops, they have been merged. I'm not sure they will do direct to public stuff any more. " As a result of the acquisition, we are temporarily holding off on accepting new orders. "
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Medium minds discuss events.
Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.

Last edited by casebro; 21st May 2017 at 11:27 AM.
casebro is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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 -7. The time now is 07:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.