It’s all about racism, wanting to make it ok to advocate a violent act against our president. Don’t tell me this extremism would be going on if Obama was a WASP.
still waiting for a responsible GOP leader to denounce this element … still waiting for those who speak at the tea party meetings to get on stage and say get rid of those signs, that’s NOT what we’re about … still waiting for responsible GOP to do more than criticize the media messengers for reporting what is right before their eyes.
Sorry, folks. But there are actual racists in this country. And here’s a news flash. Not a one of them thinks he or she is a racist.
As usual, I agree with believecommonsense. Conservative leaders need to get out in front and call out the racists and extremists among them. If you don’t think they exist in the crowds of protesters, then you’re naive.
And liberal leaders also need to step up to the microphone and call out those among them who charge that any critic of the President is a racist.
OK, to clarify my question, I will ask all of you and not just Scott, do you think Obama or for that matter, any politician should be harmed and if not, can you ackowledge that all the rhetoric, the carrying guns to public events, the calling Obama “Hitler” or “faciest” or “he is the antichrist”, might possibly inflame some to a violent attempt on Obama’s life? This is my great concern.Because I remember vividly the assasination of JFK, RFK and MLK I am quite sensitive to this terrible possibility.
^ Of course no one should be harmed, even politicians.
From afar I’m getting the impression that an environment is being created where the usually suppressed hatred is being allowed to surface unchallenged and more importantly, that it is being condoned instead of being condemned.
From there it can be a short step to actually carrying out the harm one would like to inflict. But similarly I also had the impression that the atmosphere against GWBush was such that the hatred felt against him could also have easily led to an attempt on his life. As it happened, just a couple of shoes were thrown at him and not even by an American national.
The obviously racist should be called out but care must be taken in not tarring everyone who is opposed to Obama with the same brush.
However, I also get the impression that valid criticism is being taken out of context and claimed to being applied to all.
Deadhead - To answer your question we must start with Cain and Abel. Move on to Egyptians and Jews. Etc, Etc. There always has been hatred in the world, man vs man, cause vs cause, sometimes based on race, sometimes on religion, sometimes on politial ideals, sometimes just on personal or family contact (Romeo and Juliet?) You are proposing that our rights of free speech and our rights to assemble should be revoked. I cannot support that. Can sick minds be controlled? I donot think that silencing the general population to opposing Mr Obama will change his skin pigmentation to be acceptable to someone whose heart is racist. Do NOT deny my rights because of a few demented minds.
Fennec…So you are saying that Bush and Cheney did something bad enough for you that they should have been harmed? Or are you trying to be clever? Are you for the death penalty?
Deadheadzan…Were YOU distressed when people were talking about harming President Bush and writing books about doing harm to him? If you weren’t you are a hypocrite and you are obsessing to the point that you appear to be wishing for something to happen so the Right can be blamed and harmed in the next election cycle.
Let me be personally clear, I do not agree with most of Obama’s policies nor do I respect his run up through the Chicago machine and his limited experience at running anything. I do not wish him or any politician harm and I don’t care if Obama is Purple, Green, or whatever. It means nothing to me.
There have been some great posts and I do appreciate the recent one by omQ R. It was very poignent and objective.
fennec. thanks for the article, I hadn’t read it yet. I too like reading Brooks’ commentary.
winfield, I’ll just share that I refused to watch the movie about a fictional assassination attempt on Bush, even when it was shown on TV. I don’t find any entertainment or amusement about assassinations, having lived through too man y in my lifetime. I also think Beck should have been reprimanded for his sick joke about assassinating Pelosi via poison in her wine. Did you object to that?
BCS…I honestly didn’t hear Beck’s comment or hear about it. If he said it I don’t agree with it, but it is not mine or the publics job to handle HR issues for other companies (maybe he was reprimanded). I have worked in customer service and have had many situations where customers have demanded to know how I or my company handled a situation they didn’t like (it was none of their business).
I don’t pay that much attention to the screamers on either side of the aisle. Beck, Olberman, Maddow, Hannity, etc all sing the same tune over and over.
scott, you are totally incorrect, and the nature of your ignorance merely proves the point. Biologically, humans don’t have races. It’s a meaningless term. And Darwinist geneticists and biologists established that. So don’t try to draw the stupid link between Darwinism and Nazism, like Ben Stein did. It’s wrong, get it?
In fairness, there are those conservitives who oppose the presidnet on principal. But even they are racists if they don’t admit it. Racism comes wih what ever color skin you have.
“These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.” (Proverbs 6:16-19).
i can’t tell if you’re lying or just wrong-minded, but i do know that racist right leaning religious pundits sow discord among people.
Well, in all honesty, there are left-wing pundits doing pretty much the same. I have to agree in this case, though - stirring the public with exaggerations and lies about death panels, spurious Nazi comparisons, etc, is wrong. It was wrong during the Bush years, too - although imo Bush was definitely closer, and got a much better end than he deserved, but that’s another story.
Libs suck. We all know it. And they know it, too. That’s why more than 63% of people polled said they were “conservative”, 25% or less said they were “liberal”. Lot of support there.
[Correction]
40% -Conservative - very conservative
35%-Moderate
21%-Liberal
http://www.gallup.com/poll/122333/Political-Ideology-Conservative-Label-Prevails-South.aspx#2
scott, try to read, okay? I said biologically humans don’t have races. Of course I know that people think they exist, and idiots of all stripes are still trying to prove they do (e.g., The Bell Curve).
Darwin was against slavery, and this actually helped propel his theory of evolution.
He cannot be held responsible for those who misused, misunderstood, or simply screwed up his theory. “Social Darwinism” was an abomination that was utterly unsupported by Darwinist theory. And Hitler’s nonsense – unfortunately inspired by a number of American pseudoscientists – was not Darwinist, either.
I don’t accept your judgment on God’s feelings about me, either. You’re not entitled to offer any.
Considering that my “cold, hard heart” is apparently more empathic towards my fellow beings than yours (that’s what liberalism and feminism is all about, dude), I wonder what temperature yours is at? Liquid oxygen?
I find it amusing to read the anguish, despair and utter helplessness of liberals trying to discredit The Bell Curve. Beautifully written, thoroughly researched and totally logical.
For those who haven’t actually read it, Herrnstein says there is a direct correlation between intelligence and success. Shock! How can that be?
That seems so obvious why do liberals oppose those conclusions? Because the people in this country who have achieved success have certain ethnic backgrounds that don’t coincide with PC views. If we accept the correlation that would imply differences between the races. And that would be depressing.
GNWachs, I’m an authority on assessment worldwide, with a Ph.D in personality psychology. I am not an amateur. The Bell Curve is both nonscientific (they didn’t dare go through peer review) and thoroughly political in nature, not “well-researched” and “totally logical.” Indeed you can accept all their points and still come up with a different logical conclusion.
Meta-analyses by respected researchers like Hunter & Schmidt indicate that IQ accounts for about 20-25% of variation in job success. Emotional Intelligence, by contrast, is closer to 45%. This is particularly true at senior levels in organizations. (I’ve spoken to Frank Schmidt myself, who agrees that at executive levels IQ probably quits differentiating between good and great performance - they’re already pretty smart [ about 115 IQ], but that isn’t enough, and you get restriction of range.)
The Bell Curve is indeed well written. It had to be. If you read carefully, you will find that their conclusions actually conflict with some of their data.
Furthermore, some of their research has in fact failed to deliver. For example, the twin studies some people love to point to are nowhere near as compelling as believed. It turns out that twins adopted by separate couples tend to be adopted by extraordinarily similar people which means the environmental factors are too.
Furthermore, geneticists will tell you (fennec? you’re a biologist) that races are pure fiction! The overlap between gene pools is overwhelming. (Especially in the US, incidentally, where most African-Americans of slave descent are about half European-American ancestry. Make of that what you will.)
Read a few of the scientists countering it, e.g., Stephen Jay Gould’s Mismeasure of Man, or The Bell Curve Debate (ed. Jacoby and Glauberman).
Here’s that 5-page paper (by me) again now with page numbers as it was just published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. It uses Jensen’s method of correlated vectors and finds that East Asian-European-South Asian-Colored-African differences on the Raven’s items are all more pronounced on the more heritable ones.
If the Royal Society says group differences are partly heritable, that’s as official as it gets in my book!
Best, Phil
Professor J. Philippe Rushton, Ph.D., D.Sc.
Department of Psychology,
University of Western Ontario,
London, Ontario, N6A 5C2, Canada
http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/faculty/rushton_bio.htm
Proc. R. Soc. B (2007) 274, 1773–1777
doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0461
Published online 11 May 2007
February–March 2005 ● American Psychologist 149
Copyright 2005 by the American Psychological Association 0003-066X/05/$12.00
Vol. 60, No. 2, 149–160 DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.60.2.149
Go to Linda’s vita–lots of great articles on race and IQ. She’s fearless.
From:”Linda Gottfredson”
Subject:Re: paper
To:
Dear Bob,
Thank you for sending your paper, as Ray suggested you might. If you are
able to download papers from the internet, you can get any of mine from my
e-vita. Some might be of interest for your present project.
http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/
Thanks for the references, GNW. I see Gottfredson’s an advocate for the “g” factor. I am not, as it happens; I’m firmly on the side of multiple intelligences based on my own work in business (which unfortunately precludes publishing much of it due to client restrictions). Much interesting recent neurobiological work appears to support my view, but it’s certainly not completely decided yet. I’ll take a look at her.
As for Rushton, but frankly he’s more than a little dubious as regards his research, even though his academic credentials are sterling. There’s quite a bit of discussion regarding his work in The Bell Curve Debate, including his “penis vs. brain” theory, which is more than a little strange, claiming that you can have one or the other but not both, and ordering Asians, Caucasians, and Africans along the axis from brain to penis. Even leaving out the Darwinian errors in this, as one researcher pointed out, a better measure of sexuality is probably the size of the scrotum, not the mere pipe of delivery. He’s also done some unapproved work (violating standard procedures for ethical standards) for which he was rightly disciplined by his university.
When it comes to health care and medicine, Pharmacy, Big Pharma, pharmacology etc I have done the required study and spent the time. Obviously, your background and research lies in the fields above. I in no way able to debate your expertise in this field.
But one of my dearest friends is both a PhD in the field, a retired tenured professor from my alma mater the U of I and how he teaches at NYU.
The subject is of great interest to me and I wrote him about it last month. I sent his answers to you above. That is how I was able to reply so quickly. We have held many discussions on the subject. Literally Thursday night was the last. Humorously he described “liberal creationism”.
GNW - did you read all the way to the bottom, about Rushton’s associations? Anyone who funds an organization that starts with the assumption that blacks are “dangerous” and that white people need to protect their genes is likely to find that what they are looking for in their research…
I’m rushing out the door today so can’t dedicate the time this deserves (e.g., the work on brain size has traditionally been massively contaminated by body size and shape - but haven’t checked out this stuff), but there’s one massive, overwhelmingly important assumption that Rushton, et al., are making: That IQ measures intelligence, and secondarily that “intelligence” is a unitary thing (the latter is known as the g factor). This is by no means proven, though I know others will disagree with me on this; but recent neuropsychological studies and plenty of other kinds of research do suggest otherwise. If instead IQ measures a certain kind of paper-and-pencil (or web-based) problem-solving intelligence, then all their theories come tumbling down, and we replace it with a different approach, which is to identify which gene pools might have advantages in one category of intelligence over another. See, for example, Howard Gardners Frames of Mind for a very accessible description of multiple intelligences.
And I’ve found that analytical (cause-and-effect, chains of reasoning) thinking and conceptual (recognition of patterns, simplifying complex information) don’t correlate, and this is solid enough to separate the measures for managerial assessment!
If there is no such thing as “race” who exactly are the beneficiaries of Affirmative Action? When one competes the college application that box must be checked off. This is an example of when it helps liberals there is such a thing as race.
If there is no such thing as “race” who exactly is the Justice Department protecting when they don’t allow cities and states to change district boundary lines before elections. It might harm some (group?) Another example of if it helps liberals than there is such a thing as race.
If there is no such thing as race who are the beneficiaries of laws designed to stop DWB. Driving while black in which state police stop some groups more than others. Another example of if it helps liberals there is such a thing as race.
AAMOF, the only time there is no such thing as race is when it comes to IQ tests, then the concept of race doesn’t exist.
Naturally liberals don’t believe in g. Because if there was such a thing everything we call discriminatory would fall neatly into place. It would solve the hundreds of impossible to answer questions about difference in success rates. We could forget about AA and instead concentrate on education.
We say we believe in evolution and therefore different homo sapiens evolved differently. Pygmies, giants, black skin, white skin, redskin etc etc. the only place there was no evolution is in general intelligence.
church, I’ve described Beck’s performance re Pelosi as a sick joke and I fully condemn it. I don’t think making jokes about assassinating anyone is funny, nor appropriate and I condemn it. The position of speaker of the house is third in line for the presidency. I don’t give a durn what you think of the person who currently holds the office, assassination jokes are appalling.
Sophomoric is too kind, Beck is deranged but he sure is having fun and making money.
wminfield and I had a dialogue elsewhere on this site and I told him I equally condemn the movie made about a fictional assassination of Bush. I condemn all assassination jokes. Period.
And I’ve heard of media matters, of course, but don’t go to the site. I’ve stated repeatedly I like getting “news” and “facts.” Unlike you, I don’t seek sources that will conform to my preconceived and uninformed notions.
Sorry, not being clear (still on the run, but sneaking in some more!). “Race” is very real indeed in societal terms, but not in genetic terms. Since even the g-factor partisans agree that environmental factors account for 25-50% of the variance in IQ, then the societal perception of race matters a lot, if you get different treatment in the environment, including (as one African-American college buddy of mine at Harvard pointed out) the fact that even TV shows a lot of segregation, and a bias towards black men as being ignorant. Can you think of a black TV equivalent of House, Monk, the guy on Psych, most of the cast of CSI, etc.? And how many? This reinforces the belief that you can’t be smart, which certainly discourages learning! And 25%-50% of variance means you could drop IQ a solid 10 points without trying hard. And that’s what the fuss is about. Only in the US do we define race the way we do, let alone make judgements the way we do. Elsewhere you get different kinds of prejudice. Even in Africa, they differentiate amongst different areas by things like bone structure (“Oh, he’s East African”) rather than by skin color alone.
And as for your comment that “liberals don’t believe in g,” again, nonsense. I note that Murray & Herrnstein drew the wrong conclusion from their data, which was that we should cease all “HeadStart” programs or equivalent, when in fact the data – their data, and Rushton’s, and the data in the article you sent – points out that you can raise IQ with good education, which would benefit society and the individuals being educated! If we truly believe in a meritocracy, we should make the playing field as level as possible – throw as much education as you can at everyone, and the best will rise.
But in terms of race in genetic terms – nonsense, squared. fennec’s the real expert on this, not me, but there’s NO formal definition of race you can point to in genetic terms! Besides, as one researcher I met at Harvard told me, if you wiped out every human being on Earth except for one inbred tribe of about 100 people in the wilds of Borneo, you would still retain 85% of the variability of the human genome. In other words, given time genetic drift would produce most of the variations in skin color, eye color, hair color, and height we see today. Our gift as a species is variability!
That’s the real reason I am skeptical about the ability of a paper-and-pencil test to measure with such precision when the noise is so much greater than the signal, genetically speaking. Genetic drift is not evolution, it is one of the tools of evolution. Not the same.
Intelligence is far, far too complex an issue to turn into a single reified object. I believe in tailoring education and careers to people’s many different gifts. Focusing solely on someone’s ability to take certain kinds of tests is ludicrous on the face of it. And I say that as someone who can score 98-99%th percentile as a matter of course on the SAT, LSAT, GMAT, and so forth.
^ I’ve seen the clip a couple of times. It was a sick joke about assassinating Pelosi by poison. Only someone predisposed to hating Pelosi would think it was humorous.
treered over 14 years ago
the cartoon is WRONG! Obama is the one who said this is not about racism. the eternal optimist…
deadheadzan over 14 years ago
It’s all about racism, wanting to make it ok to advocate a violent act against our president. Don’t tell me this extremism would be going on if Obama was a WASP.
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
still waiting for a responsible GOP leader to denounce this element … still waiting for those who speak at the tea party meetings to get on stage and say get rid of those signs, that’s NOT what we’re about … still waiting for responsible GOP to do more than criticize the media messengers for reporting what is right before their eyes.
tpenna over 14 years ago
Sorry, folks. But there are actual racists in this country. And here’s a news flash. Not a one of them thinks he or she is a racist.
As usual, I agree with believecommonsense. Conservative leaders need to get out in front and call out the racists and extremists among them. If you don’t think they exist in the crowds of protesters, then you’re naive.
And liberal leaders also need to step up to the microphone and call out those among them who charge that any critic of the President is a racist.
HUMPHRIES over 14 years ago
scott from the way you post - whose God ?
deadheadzan over 14 years ago
scott, what’s your view on Obama? Do you think he should be harmed?
deadheadzan over 14 years ago
OK, to clarify my question, I will ask all of you and not just Scott, do you think Obama or for that matter, any politician should be harmed and if not, can you ackowledge that all the rhetoric, the carrying guns to public events, the calling Obama “Hitler” or “faciest” or “he is the antichrist”, might possibly inflame some to a violent attempt on Obama’s life? This is my great concern.Because I remember vividly the assasination of JFK, RFK and MLK I am quite sensitive to this terrible possibility.
OmqR-IV.0 over 14 years ago
^ Of course no one should be harmed, even politicians.
From afar I’m getting the impression that an environment is being created where the usually suppressed hatred is being allowed to surface unchallenged and more importantly, that it is being condoned instead of being condemned. From there it can be a short step to actually carrying out the harm one would like to inflict. But similarly I also had the impression that the atmosphere against GWBush was such that the hatred felt against him could also have easily led to an attempt on his life. As it happened, just a couple of shoes were thrown at him and not even by an American national.
The obviously racist should be called out but care must be taken in not tarring everyone who is opposed to Obama with the same brush. However, I also get the impression that valid criticism is being taken out of context and claimed to being applied to all.
Loco80 over 14 years ago
Deadhead - To answer your question we must start with Cain and Abel. Move on to Egyptians and Jews. Etc, Etc. There always has been hatred in the world, man vs man, cause vs cause, sometimes based on race, sometimes on religion, sometimes on politial ideals, sometimes just on personal or family contact (Romeo and Juliet?) You are proposing that our rights of free speech and our rights to assemble should be revoked. I cannot support that. Can sick minds be controlled? I donot think that silencing the general population to opposing Mr Obama will change his skin pigmentation to be acceptable to someone whose heart is racist. Do NOT deny my rights because of a few demented minds.
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
Howie, huh?
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
omQR, that’s a fair recap of situation and a good post.
NoFearPup over 14 years ago
I wonder why Bush was fair game, but Obama is off limits?
wminfield over 14 years ago
Fennec…So you are saying that Bush and Cheney did something bad enough for you that they should have been harmed? Or are you trying to be clever? Are you for the death penalty?
Deadheadzan…Were YOU distressed when people were talking about harming President Bush and writing books about doing harm to him? If you weren’t you are a hypocrite and you are obsessing to the point that you appear to be wishing for something to happen so the Right can be blamed and harmed in the next election cycle.
Let me be personally clear, I do not agree with most of Obama’s policies nor do I respect his run up through the Chicago machine and his limited experience at running anything. I do not wish him or any politician harm and I don’t care if Obama is Purple, Green, or whatever. It means nothing to me.
There have been some great posts and I do appreciate the recent one by omQ R. It was very poignent and objective.
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
fennec. thanks for the article, I hadn’t read it yet. I too like reading Brooks’ commentary.
winfield, I’ll just share that I refused to watch the movie about a fictional assassination attempt on Bush, even when it was shown on TV. I don’t find any entertainment or amusement about assassinations, having lived through too man y in my lifetime. I also think Beck should have been reprimanded for his sick joke about assassinating Pelosi via poison in her wine. Did you object to that?
wminfield over 14 years ago
BCS…I honestly didn’t hear Beck’s comment or hear about it. If he said it I don’t agree with it, but it is not mine or the publics job to handle HR issues for other companies (maybe he was reprimanded). I have worked in customer service and have had many situations where customers have demanded to know how I or my company handled a situation they didn’t like (it was none of their business).
I don’t pay that much attention to the screamers on either side of the aisle. Beck, Olberman, Maddow, Hannity, etc all sing the same tune over and over.
Motivemagus over 14 years ago
scott, you are totally incorrect, and the nature of your ignorance merely proves the point. Biologically, humans don’t have races. It’s a meaningless term. And Darwinist geneticists and biologists established that. So don’t try to draw the stupid link between Darwinism and Nazism, like Ben Stein did. It’s wrong, get it?
ChuckTrent64 over 14 years ago
In fairness, there are those conservitives who oppose the presidnet on principal. But even they are racists if they don’t admit it. Racism comes wih what ever color skin you have.
parkersinthehouse over 14 years ago
hey scott
“These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.” (Proverbs 6:16-19).
i can’t tell if you’re lying or just wrong-minded, but i do know that racist right leaning religious pundits sow discord among people.
4uk4ata over 14 years ago
Well, in all honesty, there are left-wing pundits doing pretty much the same. I have to agree in this case, though - stirring the public with exaggerations and lies about death panels, spurious Nazi comparisons, etc, is wrong. It was wrong during the Bush years, too - although imo Bush was definitely closer, and got a much better end than he deserved, but that’s another story.
NoFearPup over 14 years ago
Libs suck. We all know it. And they know it, too. That’s why more than 63% of people polled said they were “conservative”, 25% or less said they were “liberal”. Lot of support there. [Correction] 40% -Conservative - very conservative 35%-Moderate 21%-Liberal http://www.gallup.com/poll/122333/Political-Ideology-Conservative-Label-Prevails-South.aspx#2
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/52602
Motivemagus over 14 years ago
scott, try to read, okay? I said biologically humans don’t have races. Of course I know that people think they exist, and idiots of all stripes are still trying to prove they do (e.g., The Bell Curve). Darwin was against slavery, and this actually helped propel his theory of evolution. He cannot be held responsible for those who misused, misunderstood, or simply screwed up his theory. “Social Darwinism” was an abomination that was utterly unsupported by Darwinist theory. And Hitler’s nonsense – unfortunately inspired by a number of American pseudoscientists – was not Darwinist, either. I don’t accept your judgment on God’s feelings about me, either. You’re not entitled to offer any. Considering that my “cold, hard heart” is apparently more empathic towards my fellow beings than yours (that’s what liberalism and feminism is all about, dude), I wonder what temperature yours is at? Liquid oxygen?
GNWachs over 14 years ago
I find it amusing to read the anguish, despair and utter helplessness of liberals trying to discredit The Bell Curve. Beautifully written, thoroughly researched and totally logical.
For those who haven’t actually read it, Herrnstein says there is a direct correlation between intelligence and success. Shock! How can that be?
That seems so obvious why do liberals oppose those conclusions? Because the people in this country who have achieved success have certain ethnic backgrounds that don’t coincide with PC views. If we accept the correlation that would imply differences between the races. And that would be depressing.
Motivemagus over 14 years ago
GNWachs, I’m an authority on assessment worldwide, with a Ph.D in personality psychology. I am not an amateur. The Bell Curve is both nonscientific (they didn’t dare go through peer review) and thoroughly political in nature, not “well-researched” and “totally logical.” Indeed you can accept all their points and still come up with a different logical conclusion. Meta-analyses by respected researchers like Hunter & Schmidt indicate that IQ accounts for about 20-25% of variation in job success. Emotional Intelligence, by contrast, is closer to 45%. This is particularly true at senior levels in organizations. (I’ve spoken to Frank Schmidt myself, who agrees that at executive levels IQ probably quits differentiating between good and great performance - they’re already pretty smart [ about 115 IQ], but that isn’t enough, and you get restriction of range.) The Bell Curve is indeed well written. It had to be. If you read carefully, you will find that their conclusions actually conflict with some of their data. Furthermore, some of their research has in fact failed to deliver. For example, the twin studies some people love to point to are nowhere near as compelling as believed. It turns out that twins adopted by separate couples tend to be adopted by extraordinarily similar people which means the environmental factors are too. Furthermore, geneticists will tell you (fennec? you’re a biologist) that races are pure fiction! The overlap between gene pools is overwhelming. (Especially in the US, incidentally, where most African-Americans of slave descent are about half European-American ancestry. Make of that what you will.) Read a few of the scientists countering it, e.g., Stephen Jay Gould’s Mismeasure of Man, or The Bell Curve Debate (ed. Jacoby and Glauberman).
GNWachs over 14 years ago
To MM
Here’s that 5-page paper (by me) again now with page numbers as it was just published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. It uses Jensen’s method of correlated vectors and finds that East Asian-European-South Asian-Colored-African differences on the Raven’s items are all more pronounced on the more heritable ones.
If the Royal Society says group differences are partly heritable, that’s as official as it gets in my book! Best, Phil
Professor J. Philippe Rushton, Ph.D., D.Sc. Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, N6A 5C2, Canada http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/faculty/rushton_bio.htm
Proc. R. Soc. B (2007) 274, 1773–1777 doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0461 Published online 11 May 2007
GNWachs over 14 years ago
To MM
February–March 2005 ● American Psychologist 149 Copyright 2005 by the American Psychological Association 0003-066X/05/$12.00 Vol. 60, No. 2, 149–160 DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.60.2.149
GNWachs over 14 years ago
To MM
Go to Linda’s vita–lots of great articles on race and IQ. She’s fearless.
From:”Linda Gottfredson” Subject:Re: paper To:
Dear Bob,
Thank you for sending your paper, as Ray suggested you might. If you are able to download papers from the internet, you can get any of mine from my e-vita. Some might be of interest for your present project. http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/
Motivemagus over 14 years ago
Thanks for the references, GNW. I see Gottfredson’s an advocate for the “g” factor. I am not, as it happens; I’m firmly on the side of multiple intelligences based on my own work in business (which unfortunately precludes publishing much of it due to client restrictions). Much interesting recent neurobiological work appears to support my view, but it’s certainly not completely decided yet. I’ll take a look at her. As for Rushton, but frankly he’s more than a little dubious as regards his research, even though his academic credentials are sterling. There’s quite a bit of discussion regarding his work in The Bell Curve Debate, including his “penis vs. brain” theory, which is more than a little strange, claiming that you can have one or the other but not both, and ordering Asians, Caucasians, and Africans along the axis from brain to penis. Even leaving out the Darwinian errors in this, as one researcher pointed out, a better measure of sexuality is probably the size of the scrotum, not the mere pipe of delivery. He’s also done some unapproved work (violating standard procedures for ethical standards) for which he was rightly disciplined by his university.
GNWachs over 14 years ago
To MM
When it comes to health care and medicine, Pharmacy, Big Pharma, pharmacology etc I have done the required study and spent the time. Obviously, your background and research lies in the fields above. I in no way able to debate your expertise in this field.
But one of my dearest friends is both a PhD in the field, a retired tenured professor from my alma mater the U of I and how he teaches at NYU.
The subject is of great interest to me and I wrote him about it last month. I sent his answers to you above. That is how I was able to reply so quickly. We have held many discussions on the subject. Literally Thursday night was the last. Humorously he described “liberal creationism”.
http://www.slate.com/id/2178122/entry/2178123/
That pretty much describes my personal views.
GNWachs over 14 years ago
All 4 articles together
http://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2178122
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
^ if you want to rephrase your question without the condescending, sexist remark about twisted panties, I’ll respond.
Motivemagus over 14 years ago
GNW - did you read all the way to the bottom, about Rushton’s associations? Anyone who funds an organization that starts with the assumption that blacks are “dangerous” and that white people need to protect their genes is likely to find that what they are looking for in their research… I’m rushing out the door today so can’t dedicate the time this deserves (e.g., the work on brain size has traditionally been massively contaminated by body size and shape - but haven’t checked out this stuff), but there’s one massive, overwhelmingly important assumption that Rushton, et al., are making: That IQ measures intelligence, and secondarily that “intelligence” is a unitary thing (the latter is known as the g factor). This is by no means proven, though I know others will disagree with me on this; but recent neuropsychological studies and plenty of other kinds of research do suggest otherwise. If instead IQ measures a certain kind of paper-and-pencil (or web-based) problem-solving intelligence, then all their theories come tumbling down, and we replace it with a different approach, which is to identify which gene pools might have advantages in one category of intelligence over another. See, for example, Howard Gardners Frames of Mind for a very accessible description of multiple intelligences. And I’ve found that analytical (cause-and-effect, chains of reasoning) thinking and conceptual (recognition of patterns, simplifying complex information) don’t correlate, and this is solid enough to separate the measures for managerial assessment!
GNWachs over 14 years ago
MM
If there is no such thing as “race” who exactly are the beneficiaries of Affirmative Action? When one competes the college application that box must be checked off. This is an example of when it helps liberals there is such a thing as race.
If there is no such thing as “race” who exactly is the Justice Department protecting when they don’t allow cities and states to change district boundary lines before elections. It might harm some (group?) Another example of if it helps liberals than there is such a thing as race.
If there is no such thing as race who are the beneficiaries of laws designed to stop DWB. Driving while black in which state police stop some groups more than others. Another example of if it helps liberals there is such a thing as race.
AAMOF, the only time there is no such thing as race is when it comes to IQ tests, then the concept of race doesn’t exist.
Naturally liberals don’t believe in g. Because if there was such a thing everything we call discriminatory would fall neatly into place. It would solve the hundreds of impossible to answer questions about difference in success rates. We could forget about AA and instead concentrate on education.
We say we believe in evolution and therefore different homo sapiens evolved differently. Pygmies, giants, black skin, white skin, redskin etc etc. the only place there was no evolution is in general intelligence.
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
church, I’ve described Beck’s performance re Pelosi as a sick joke and I fully condemn it. I don’t think making jokes about assassinating anyone is funny, nor appropriate and I condemn it. The position of speaker of the house is third in line for the presidency. I don’t give a durn what you think of the person who currently holds the office, assassination jokes are appalling.
Sophomoric is too kind, Beck is deranged but he sure is having fun and making money.
wminfield and I had a dialogue elsewhere on this site and I told him I equally condemn the movie made about a fictional assassination of Bush. I condemn all assassination jokes. Period.
And I’ve heard of media matters, of course, but don’t go to the site. I’ve stated repeatedly I like getting “news” and “facts.” Unlike you, I don’t seek sources that will conform to my preconceived and uninformed notions.
OmqR-IV.0 over 14 years ago
MM asked: GNW - did you read all the way to the bottom, about Rushton’s associations?
I did so I’m curious about this whole discussion. Alas, time is short & I’m just skimming. Gerald, how morally corrupt are you?
Motivemagus over 14 years ago
Sorry, not being clear (still on the run, but sneaking in some more!). “Race” is very real indeed in societal terms, but not in genetic terms. Since even the g-factor partisans agree that environmental factors account for 25-50% of the variance in IQ, then the societal perception of race matters a lot, if you get different treatment in the environment, including (as one African-American college buddy of mine at Harvard pointed out) the fact that even TV shows a lot of segregation, and a bias towards black men as being ignorant. Can you think of a black TV equivalent of House, Monk, the guy on Psych, most of the cast of CSI, etc.? And how many? This reinforces the belief that you can’t be smart, which certainly discourages learning! And 25%-50% of variance means you could drop IQ a solid 10 points without trying hard. And that’s what the fuss is about. Only in the US do we define race the way we do, let alone make judgements the way we do. Elsewhere you get different kinds of prejudice. Even in Africa, they differentiate amongst different areas by things like bone structure (“Oh, he’s East African”) rather than by skin color alone. And as for your comment that “liberals don’t believe in g,” again, nonsense. I note that Murray & Herrnstein drew the wrong conclusion from their data, which was that we should cease all “HeadStart” programs or equivalent, when in fact the data – their data, and Rushton’s, and the data in the article you sent – points out that you can raise IQ with good education, which would benefit society and the individuals being educated! If we truly believe in a meritocracy, we should make the playing field as level as possible – throw as much education as you can at everyone, and the best will rise. But in terms of race in genetic terms – nonsense, squared. fennec’s the real expert on this, not me, but there’s NO formal definition of race you can point to in genetic terms! Besides, as one researcher I met at Harvard told me, if you wiped out every human being on Earth except for one inbred tribe of about 100 people in the wilds of Borneo, you would still retain 85% of the variability of the human genome. In other words, given time genetic drift would produce most of the variations in skin color, eye color, hair color, and height we see today. Our gift as a species is variability! That’s the real reason I am skeptical about the ability of a paper-and-pencil test to measure with such precision when the noise is so much greater than the signal, genetically speaking. Genetic drift is not evolution, it is one of the tools of evolution. Not the same. Intelligence is far, far too complex an issue to turn into a single reified object. I believe in tailoring education and careers to people’s many different gifts. Focusing solely on someone’s ability to take certain kinds of tests is ludicrous on the face of it. And I say that as someone who can score 98-99%th percentile as a matter of course on the SAT, LSAT, GMAT, and so forth.
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
^ I’ve seen the clip a couple of times. It was a sick joke about assassinating Pelosi by poison. Only someone predisposed to hating Pelosi would think it was humorous.
believecommonsense over 14 years ago
( )