IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts 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 3rd April 2018, 07:17 PM   #81
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 16,039
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
If you believe height is intrinsically valuable,
I’d just like to point out that people in general do treat height as intrinsically valuable. This can be seen in differences in income based on height, in dating practices, and parental attitudes toward their children’s height.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma 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 3rd April 2018, 07:49 PM   #82
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
Legendary Comedy Duo: Harris and Murray

Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
If you want to define racism such that acknowledging the truth is racist then I think you have a problem.
No idea how you got from my linking to the dictionary definition to conjecture about what I want to happen regarding the meanings that words convey. My name isn’t Merriam nor is it Webster. The word ”racism“ conveys what it does, you don’t have to like it.

You are welcome, of course, to argue that claims of genetic superiority in terms of measurable general intelligence aren’t really what’s at issue here, but rather something else such as systemic discrimination within some cultural context. I’d be interested to hear how that one plays out, given the OP.
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.”

Last edited by d4m10n; 3rd April 2018 at 07:57 PM.
d4m10n 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 3rd April 2018, 08:03 PM   #83
nelsondogg
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 371
Harris released a podcast going over all this today. He will have Ezra on to discuss their beef and iq and all that. Sounds like he is not going to hold back, should be good.
nelsondogg 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 4th April 2018, 12:19 AM   #84
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 35,980
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Take it up with the dictionary, my man. To say some group is superior in some way is to make a judgement about which differences really matter.



Scroll up to the top of the thread. Highlight the phrase "relatively poorer intellectual performance" and ask yourself why we are talking about those particular differences rather than far more obvious ones which are much easier to reliably measure.



I haven't characterized either Harris or Murray anywhere in this thread. Any impression of innuendo is entirely on your end of the line.
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
No idea how you got from my linking to the dictionary definition to conjecture about what I want to happen regarding the meanings that words convey. My name isn’t Merriam nor is it Webster. The word ”racism“ conveys what it does, you don’t have to like it.

You are welcome, of course, to argue that claims of genetic superiority in terms of measurable general intelligence aren’t really what’s at issue here, but rather something else such as systemic discrimination within some cultural context. I’d be interested to hear how that one plays out, given the OP.
You seem to be hopelessly confused here. So much so that I don't know how to help you out at this point.

The question that was at issue in the Harris-Murray podcast was the question of whether or not genetics plays some part in determining the differences in intelligence among groups and individuals. Whether they do or not is an empirical fact which can be represented by data. As Sam Harris points out in his latest podcast, data cannot be racist.

The only way in which you can begin down the racist path is when you decide what to do about these empirical facts however they may turn out to be. If you decide that the data justifies discrimination, then you are being racist. If you overinterpret the data to say, for example, that black people aren't smart enough to go to university then you are being extremely racist. If you think the data justifies white supremacy then you are being extraordinarily and unforgivably racist.

If you think "Intelligence is valuable, therefore it is racist to claim that some groups are, on average, more intelligent than other groups as a result of any amount of genetics, because Merriam-Webster says so" then, for whatever combination of environmental or genetic reasons, you are being extraordinarily dimwitted.
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin!
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 4th April 2018, 02:14 AM   #85
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 16,039
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
No idea how you got from my linking to the dictionary definition to conjecture about what I want to happen regarding the meanings that words convey. My name isn’t Merriam nor is it Webster. The word ”racism“ conveys what it does, you don’t have to like it.
You aren’t using the dictionary definition, as I pointed out in the part of my post that you cut from your quote.

Admittedly there is a typo there that makes it hard to parse. I’m on a cycling holiday and didn’t bring my computer. Not really used to typing on my phone.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma 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 4th April 2018, 07:55 AM   #86
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
The question that was at issue in the Harris-Murray podcast was the question of whether or not genetics plays some part in determining the differences in intelligence among groups and individuals. Whether they do or not is an empirical fact which can be represented by data. As Sam Harris points out in his latest podcast, data cannot be racist.
I'm not seeing anything about empiricism or data in any common defintion of racism. Once again, when I say "racism," what I mean to convey is simply the view that some group of people is superior to some other group of people (regarding some important variable) on account of their differing ancestry.

There is a common expression in the law of defamation to the effect that a statement cannot be libel if it's true. It seems to me that you are attempting to carve out a similar exception for the concept of racism. I don't believe you will be successful in this, for fairly obvious reasons.
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.”
d4m10n 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 4th April 2018, 07:57 AM   #87
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
You aren’t using the dictionary definition, as I pointed out in the part of my post that you cut from your quote.
Here you go:
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.”
d4m10n 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 4th April 2018, 08:03 AM   #88
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 35,980
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I'm not seeing anything about empiricism or data in any common defintion of racism. Once again, when I say "racism," what I mean to convey is simply the view that some group of people is superior to some other group of people (regarding some important variable) on account of their differing ancestry.

There is a common expression in the law of defamation to the effect that a statement cannot be libel if it's true. It seems to me that you are attempting to carve out a similar exception for the concept of racism. I don't believe you will be successful in this, for fairly obvious reasons.
What the ****?
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin!
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 4th April 2018, 04:55 PM   #89
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post

The question that was at issue in the Harris-Murray podcast was the question of whether or not genetics plays some part in determining the differences in intelligence among groups and individuals. Whether they do or not is an empirical fact which can be represented by data. As Sam Harris points out in his latest podcast, data cannot be racist.

Do you think an IQ of 150 is superior to an IQ of 90?
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 5th April 2018, 12:31 AM   #90
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 22,554
nvm
__________________
“Don’t blame me. I voted for Kodos.”
The Great Zaganza 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 5th April 2018, 04:53 AM   #91
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 35,980
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Do you think an IQ of 150 is superior to an IQ of 90?
Higher in number? Yes. Better to be 150 IQ than 90? Yes. Do you disagree with these things?

How you evaluate IQ is one thing, what the data says about the IQ levels of different groups is another. If you find a difference, then you find a difference. So what?
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin!
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 5th April 2018, 05:05 AM   #92
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 22,554
There is too much demand to identify genes who by their absence or presence enhance intelligence as to be bothered by the possible implication of giving racists more fodder, as if they needed any.
Would White Supremacists refuse a hypothetical gene injection therapy for and extra 10 IQ points if the sequences were primarily found in Africans?
Only the stupid ones would.
__________________
“Don’t blame me. I voted for Kodos.”
The Great Zaganza 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 5th April 2018, 08:06 AM   #93
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
If you find a difference, then you find a difference. So what?
The "so what?" is that you are very much making a claim about racial superiority, then, and the "It's not racist if it's true!" argument is not valid. It's dictionary definition racism.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 5th April 2018, 08:25 AM   #94
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,709
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
The "so what?" is that you are very much making a claim about racial superiority, then, and the "It's not racist if it's true!" argument is not valid. It's dictionary definition racism.
Can you clarify? If say, sickle cell anemia (hereditary genetic condition) is mostly found in one ethnicity, is that a racist fact?
Giz 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 5th April 2018, 08:40 AM   #95
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
Can you clarify? If say, sickle cell anemia (hereditary genetic condition) is mostly found in one ethnicity, is that a racist fact?
No, bobody outside of the 1930's era eugenics supporters have claimed that people without sickle cell anemia are superior to those with it on that basis alone.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 5th April 2018, 02:05 PM   #96
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 35,980
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
The "so what?" is that you are very much making a claim about racial superiority, then, and the "It's not racist if it's true!" argument is not valid. It's dictionary definition racism.
No it is NOT a claim about racial superiority! You and Damion are making an elementary failure of logic! It is not making any claim about the superiority of one group of humans over another.

As I pointed out above, you may as well say the same thing about height.
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin!
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 5th April 2018, 02:40 PM   #97
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
No it is NOT a claim about racial superiority! You and Damion are making an elementary failure of logic! It is not making any claim about the superiority of one group of humans over another.

As I pointed out above, you may as well say the same thing about height.
IQ superiority is THE core metric race supremacists have historically used. It's the primary core feature that distinguishes us from cousin ape species.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 5th April 2018, 03:21 PM   #98
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 35,980
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
IQ superiority is THE core metric race supremacists have historically used. It's the primary core feature that distinguishes us from cousin ape species.
If you say so. Then take it up with them. Harris, Murray and I are not making the claim for racial superiority.
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin!
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 5th April 2018, 03:46 PM   #99
sir drinks-a-lot
Philosopher
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 5,335
Originally Posted by nelsondogg View Post
Harris released a podcast going over all this today. He will have Ezra on to discuss their beef and iq and all that. Sounds like he is not going to hold back, should be good.
Yes, the housekeeping episode. I listened to almost all of it. Not sure how good the Ezra podcast will be - I could see it going either way.

I usually enjoy the Sam Harris podcast. I enjoyed the Charles Murray episode. The Glenn Loury one on race was also very good, as is Glenn;s own podcast.
__________________
So, if he's doing it by divine means, I can only tell him this: 'Mr. Geller, you're doing it the hard way.' --James Randi
sir drinks-a-lot 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 5th April 2018, 04:04 PM   #100
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
Can anyone provide the best evidence with links that IQ tests are not biased?
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 5th April 2018, 09:47 PM   #101
fuelair
Banned
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,581
Originally Posted by fuelair View Post
Not sure where you get that for pornography, a large number of studies and projects have been done - especially since the late 1940's. Except those done by people with an ax to grind on to chop it up and burn it, the evidence is heavily for it being mostly harmless except for persons who have deficiencies in certain types of mental function where sex is a consideration. There is a lot more to this and I have too many other interests to go on and on with this.......

Note, my specialty is the type and scope of the porn over time. Many things go in and out of favor - mostly a cycling of things of most interest to the general public.
Couple of fun points here though: Japan and Germany are both countries with cleanliness concerns that are well ingrained yet a reasonably large percent of their porn material (app. 25-35%) involves waste material. Countries such as France, Germany and Italy go big for priest and nun (with or without civilians as it were) or preachers (not Catholic). The US, of course, is big on most everything so can't be specific for it. There is more but I suspect forum management would not be happy if I clarified.

On the bright side, it is correct though.
fuelair 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 5th April 2018, 10:00 PM   #102
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 22,554
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
IQ superiority is THE core metric race supremacists have historically used. It's the primary core feature that distinguishes us from cousin ape species.
Actually, Nazi-ideology had it that Arians were less smart than "The Jews", but more physically fit and willing to fight.
Hitler feared that, unless stopped, their superior intelligence would inevitably let "the jewish race" take over the world. And the stopping had to be done with brute force because, obviously, the Germanic Race was to dumb to outsmart them.
__________________
“Don’t blame me. I voted for Kodos.”

Last edited by The Great Zaganza; 5th April 2018 at 10:01 PM.
The Great Zaganza 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 6th April 2018, 06:23 AM   #103
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 35,980
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Can anyone provide the best evidence with links that IQ tests are not biased?
The claim that "racial group A" may have a difference in average IQ than "racial group B", in part as a result of nature, and not entirely because of nurture, is obviously a target-rich environment.

What, if anything, is a "race" anyway? Is it a social construct or a biological concept? If we are only considering self-reported "race" then are we capturing anything meaningful?
What is "intelligence" anyway? Do IQ tests reliably represent intelligence? Are IQ tests culturally biased?
How can we disentangle nature from nurture? Etc...

All of these are questions that are probably not settled definitively and for most people the mere existence of the doubt is sufficient to say we cannot and should not try to assert the claim above.

But what if those questions were settled and it became possible to assert the claim truthfully? Is it not a matter of empirical fact in that case? For many people it would be very unwelcome, and I think that I prefer the idea that it is meaningless to assert it. That said, I think if it is true, then we just have to accept it, just like we may have to accept other "inconvenient truths". We cannot just pick and choose those that we wish were true. Not if we have any respect for truth.

Now, having said that, what people then decide to do as a result of this is another matter. It is then that I agree with you that people will attempt to put such things to nefarious uses. And that is what should be resisted.
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin!
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 6th April 2018, 03:51 PM   #104
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
My own intuitive sense (how's that for stellar skepticism, huh? lol) is that if there are differences, they really are just differences, in that no one perfectly "controlled" (by economic status, etc) ethnic group will consistently score better or worse according to all possible metrics and tests of intelligence.

It's the nature of the tests that interests me the most in this regard, because I think the capacity for bias is extraordinary. For example, if you were to let Temple Grandin devise an IQ test, I bet you'd see a higher correlation between autism and high IQ.

If you were to have an Amazonian tribe with little contact with the larger world devise one, who the heck knows what demographic would score highest there?

Etc and so on.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 7th April 2018, 03:23 PM   #105
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 16,039
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I haven’t disputed that. But Harris hasn’t made any claim of superiority, nor has anyone in this thread. Again, the bit of my post that you cut:
Quote:
But that’s not what you said was racist. You said that to make a purely empirical statement about group differences in the context of other people having a judgement about the value of the trait that differs, is racist.
Note the part I’ve highlighted. If I point out that two groups have different skin tones and someone else says that one skin tone is superior to another, does that make me racist?
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma 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 7th April 2018, 03:29 PM   #106
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 16,039
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
My own intuitive sense (how's that for stellar skepticism, huh? lol) is that if there are differences, they really are just differences, in that no one perfectly "controlled" (by economic status, etc) ethnic group will consistently score better or worse according to all possible metrics and tests of intelligence.

It's the nature of the tests that interests me the most in this regard, because I think the capacity for bias is extraordinary. For example, if you were to let Temple Grandin devise an IQ test, I bet you'd see a higher correlation between autism and high IQ.

If you were to have an Amazonian tribe with little contact with the larger world devise one, who the heck knows what demographic would score highest there?

Etc and so on.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)
Quote:
Research in the field of behavioral genetics has established that the construct of g is highly heritable. It has a number of other biological correlates, including brain size. It is also a significant predictor of individual differences in many social outcomes, particularly in education and employment. The most widely accepted contemporary theories of intelligence incorporate the g factor.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma 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 7th April 2018, 04:14 PM   #107
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Is the predictive value in education, employment, and income the sole or primary validation of legitimacy when it comes to the g factor?
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan

Last edited by kellyb; 7th April 2018 at 04:15 PM.
kellyb 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 7th April 2018, 04:25 PM   #108
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
The wiki article in general IQ exclusively or almost exclusively cites this book for it's validation claims regarding employment outcomes, income, scholastic achievement, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_g_...Mental_Ability

Does anyone have it, or has anyone here read it? Or know if the relevant information contained within it is available on the web somewhere?
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 8th April 2018, 10:17 AM   #109
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
Legendary Comedy Duo: Harris and Murray

Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
I haven’t disputed that. But Harris hasn’t made any claim of superiority, nor has anyone in this thread.

Harris doesn’t believe that it is better for people to have higher intelligence and more potential cognitive abilities? Murray doesn’t believe that, either? Okay, if you say so, but I really doubt that people can be indifferent to such a vital set of attributes in any modern increasingly cognitive economy.
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.”

Last edited by d4m10n; 8th April 2018 at 10:19 AM.
d4m10n 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 8th April 2018, 11:36 AM   #110
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,709
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Harris doesn’t believe that it is better for people to have higher intelligence and more potential cognitive abilities? Murray doesn’t believe that, either? Okay, if you say so, but I really doubt that people can be indifferent to such a vital set of attributes in any modern increasingly cognitive economy.

Should genetic research into cognition be prohibited?
Giz 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 8th April 2018, 11:40 AM   #111
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Harris doesn’t believe that it is better for people to have higher intelligence and more potential cognitive abilities?.
They'd argue that it's better, but not that they're better, I bet.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 8th April 2018, 11:43 AM   #112
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
Should genetic research into cognition be prohibited?

Of course not. We’re going to need artificial enhancement to keep up with the thinking machines.
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.”
d4m10n 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 8th April 2018, 11:49 AM   #113
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,709
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Of course not. We’re going to need artificial enhancement to keep up with the thinking machines.
Oh really?

Firstly, as genes are hereditary, are you not worried about racist findings?

Secondly, if augmentations become possible, can you guarantee that they are performed proportionally to all ethnicities (otherwise a specific ethnicity may become stereotyped as the unaugmented “inferiors”)?

Just ban it. Only way to be safe.
Giz 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 8th April 2018, 11:56 AM   #114
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
If they're simply correlating genes to the g factor as it's currently understood and tested for, I have a feeling it's going to be the genetics of wealthier white men.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 8th April 2018, 11:59 AM   #115
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,632
I think genetic and other enhancements in cognition (and medical technological enhancements of all sorts) are probable destined to be useful toys for the super rich.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb 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 8th April 2018, 12:05 PM   #116
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
Firstly, as genes are hereditary, are you not worried about racist findings?
Not particularly...don't see any reason to perform cognitive research on racially distinct population samples in particular. Plenty of other relevant research to be done.

Originally Posted by Giz View Post
Secondly, if augmentations become possible, can you guarantee that they are performed proportionally to all ethnicities (otherwise a specific ethnicity may become stereotyped as the unaugmented “inferiors”)?
Even if everyone on Earth was a uniform shade of tan, unaugmented folks would still be seen as inferior, on account of their actual cognitive inferiority.
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.”
d4m10n 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 8th April 2018, 12:07 PM   #117
baron
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,627
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
My own intuitive sense (how's that for stellar skepticism, huh? lol) is that if there are differences, they really are just differences, in that no one perfectly "controlled" (by economic status, etc) ethnic group will consistently score better or worse according to all possible metrics and tests of intelligence.
My view is that there are almost certainly IQ differences between ethnic groups, but this is no more than an academic point of interest. The knowledge cannot and should not have practical application and therefore cannot be a measure of superiority. People who use it in this way either have an agenda or are too stupid to understand the concept of averages.
baron 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 8th April 2018, 12:16 PM   #118
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,709
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Not particularly...don't see any reason to perform cognitive research on racially distinct population samples in particular. Plenty of other relevant research to be done.
.
Not suggesting research racially distinct populations. But hereditary characteristics are unlikely to be completely uniformally distributed between the various different groupings of family trees.

Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post


Even if everyone on Earth was a uniform shade of tan, unaugmented folks would still be seen as inferior, on account of their actual cognitive inferiority.
Not what I was saying at all. My point was typecasting ethnicities because their prevalence (or lack of) augmentation. You jumped to talking about individuals whose augmentation status is known. That’s like me saying; lif ethnicity X has proportionately more felons, isn’t there a risk of racist stereotyping?”. And you replying, “well, felons will always be stereotyped as criminals on account of their criminality “.
Giz 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 8th April 2018, 12:33 PM   #119
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
It strikes me as really odd to base public policy on the possibility of people reasoning badly. I'm not seeing any way to prevent stereotyping or other hasty generalizations. About all we can do is teach people to reason carefully, instead of indulging in such shortcuts.
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.”
d4m10n 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 8th April 2018, 03:39 PM   #120
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 35,980
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
It strikes me as really odd to base public policy on the possibility of people reasoning badly. I'm not seeing any way to prevent stereotyping or other hasty generalizations. About all we can do is teach people to reason carefully, instead of indulging in such shortcuts.
You should take your own advice.
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin!
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
Reply

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

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 09:12 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.