US Prez Election 2012 Thread - Social Darwinism derail

[Warren Dew]

would start with a spelling test.
Like whether the weather be hot, or whether the weather be cold, we'll weather the weather, whatever the weather, whether there's weather or not.

You failed.

That's not very descent of you.

To the contrary, he's descending to ridicule as an argument. Or did you misspell something?

[amused]

So don't use IQ. Go find me ANY standardized test that you want and we'll use that. The disagreement is NOT over whether people of African decent are well behind others in regards to intelligence, but rather why. I want the truth, political correctness be damned!

It's genetic.
Some of the earliest IQ studies where of Blacks of varying admixture (pure through quadroons) going to an all black school, living in an all black neighborhood. The more white admixture, the closer they were to the white average. The Minnesota trans-racial adoption study should have put the question to rest.

If there was some "magic" social change that could make a difference it would have been found by now after all the money spent and research done.

How comforting, knowing you aren't alone in your racist views.

I have zero doubt that any of the 'studies' that 'prove' racial inferiority will have been concocted by racists trying to prove their point. Superficial differences such as skin color are just that, superficial.

White supremacist libertarians are just an embarrassment to watch.

[maiforpeace]

would start with a spelling test.
Like whether the weather be hot, or whether the weather be cold, we'll weather the weather, whatever the weather, whether there's weather or not.

You failed.

That's not very descent of you.

To the contrary, he's descending to ridicule as an argument. Or did you misspell something?

You missed something.

So don't use IQ. Go find me ANY standardized test that you want and we'll use that. The disagreement is NOT over wether people of African decent are well behind others in regards to intelligence, but rather why. I want the truth, political correctness be damned!

I would start with a spelling test.
Like whether the weather be hot, or whether the weather be cold, we'll weather the weather, whatever the weather, whether there's weather or not.

You failed.

That's not very descent of you.

[maiforpeace]

So don't use IQ. Go find me ANY standardized test that you want and we'll use that. The disagreement is NOT over whether people of African decent are well behind others in regards to intelligence, but rather why. I want the truth, political correctness be damned!

It's genetic.
Some of the earliest IQ studies where of Blacks of varying admixture (pure through quadroons) going to an all black school, living in an all black neighborhood. The more white admixture, the closer they were to the white average. The Minnesota trans-racial adoption study should have put the question to rest.

If there was some "magic" social change that could make a difference it would have been found by now after all the money spent and research done.

How comforting, knowing you aren't alone in your racist views.

I have zero doubt that any of the 'studies' that 'prove' racial inferiority will have been concocted by racists trying to prove their point. Superficial differences such as skin color are just that, superficial.

White supremacist libertarians are just an embarrassment to watch.

I do live in a bubble - having such close contact with this view is more shockingly abhorrent than an embarrassment to me at the moment.

[mistermack]

would start with a spelling test.
Like whether the weather be hot, or whether the weather be cold, we'll weather the weather, whatever the weather, whether there's weather or not.

You failed.

That's not very descent of you.

To the contrary, he's descending to ridicule as an argument. Or did you misspell something?

On the contrary, I was pointing out that claiming IQ tests are a true measure of intelligence is just as ridiculous as claiming that spelling tests are.

The ridicule isn't an argument, it's there to illustrate the weakness of an argument.
Failing a spelling test doesn't mean you're unintelligent. Nor does getting a low score on an IQ test.

[Warren Dew]

It might be helpful to distinguish between evolution, a very, very slow process, and social darwinism, which is much closer to what certain racist philosophies describe: http://www.allaboutscience.org/what-is- ... sm-faq.htm

Evolution can be fast when the selection pressure is high. In those areas of the world where completed fertility is in the range of 6, people who are genetically predisposed to stick to 2 kids per couple are going to be selected out in a couple of decades.

Quite possibly this has already happened to a significant extent within the past century in some places.

[Warren Dew]

You missed something.

Ah, you're right. Serves me right for not reading the posts in order.

[FBM]

It might be helpful to distinguish between evolution, a very, very slow process, and social darwinism, which is much closer to what certain racist philosophies describe: http://www.allaboutscience.org/what-is- ... sm-faq.htm

Evolution can be fast when the selection pressure is high. In those areas of the world where completed fertility is in the range of 6, people who are genetically predisposed to stick to 2 kids per couple are going to be selected out in a couple of decades.

Quite possibly this has already happened to a significant extent within the past century in some places.

If so, geneticists should easily be able to uncover some evidence for it. I haven't seen any such evidence, and until I do I don't see any reason to consider such talk as anachronistic expressions of social darwinism by people who haven't yet heard that it's a failed theory.

[Tyrannical]

So don't use IQ. Go find me ANY standardized test that you want and we'll use that. The disagreement is NOT over whether people of African decent are well behind others in regards to intelligence, but rather why. I want the truth, political correctness be damned!

It's genetic.
Some of the earliest IQ studies where of Blacks of varying admixture (pure through quadroons) going to an all black school, living in an all black neighborhood. The more white admixture, the closer they were to the white average. The Minnesota trans-racial adoption study should have put the question to rest.

If there was some "magic" social change that could make a difference it would have been found by now after all the money spent and research done.

How comforting, knowing you aren't alone in your racist views.

I have zero doubt that any of the 'studies' that 'prove' racial inferiority will have been concocted by racists trying to prove their point. Superficial differences such as skin color are just that, superficial.

White supremacist libertarians are just an embarrassment to watch.

Speaking of embarrassment, do you ever read what you write?
You demonstrate no concept of evolutionary inheritance, and repeat the tired old canard that IQ is merely related to skin color. Why don't you do everyone a favor and at least do some cursory research into the subject so that your ignorance is not so glaring.

[mistermack]

In those areas of the world where completed fertility is in the range of 6, people who are genetically predisposed to stick to 2 kids per couple are going to be selected out in a couple of decades.

How on earth can you be genetically predisposed to stick to 2 kids?
Socially predisposed, yes, but GENETICALLY?

How come our genes are so different to those of our ancestors from 200 years ago, in that case?

[Tyrannical]

It might be helpful to distinguish between evolution, a very, very slow process, and social darwinism, which is much closer to what certain racist philosophies describe: http://www.allaboutscience.org/what-is- ... sm-faq.htm

Evolution can be fast when the selection pressure is high. In those areas of the world where completed fertility is in the range of 6, people who are genetically predisposed to stick to 2 kids per couple are going to be selected out in a couple of decades.

Quite possibly this has already happened to a significant extent within the past century in some places.

If so, geneticists should easily be able to uncover some evidence for it. I haven't seen any such evidence, and until I do I don't see any reason to consider such talk as anachronistic expressions of social Darwinism by people who haven't yet heard that it's a failed theory.

Intelligence is the culmination of multiple genes and their expressions, there is no single gene that determines intelligence. But give it a few more decades of genetic research and we'll probably have a scientific answer on why some humans are smarter than others. Then we just need statistic.

[Tyrannical]

In those areas of the world where completed fertility is in the range of 6, people who are genetically predisposed to stick to 2 kids per couple are going to be selected out in a couple of decades.

How on earth can you be genetically predisposed to stick to 2 kids?
Socially predisposed, yes, but GENETICALLY?

How come our genes are so different to those of our ancestors from 200 years ago, in that case?

Because genes both dictate fertility and behavior. Do you even believe in or understand evolution

[Warren Dew]

It's genetic.
Some of the earliest IQ studies where of Blacks of varying admixture (pure through quadroons) going to an all black school, living in an all black neighborhood. The more white admixture, the closer they were to the white average. The Minnesota trans-racial adoption study should have put the question to rest.

That fails to explain the German children of American GIs study that showed that children of black American GIs in the postwar period had the same average IQ as children of white American GIs. To me, when you combine that result with the Minnesota twins study, the conclusion has to be that it's cultural expectations that are driving the IQ differences.

Not that that changes drewish's concerns. The fact that people on welfare have more children than people who work to support themselves is still a problem. Of course, that problem has an easy fix: change the welfare system so it doesn't inentivize having frequent children, and change the tax system so it doesn't penalize children in working households.

[FBM]

Oversimplification, I think. Genetics isn't the only determiner of intelligence. Nutrition and environmental factors weigh heavily on a population's average intelligence. Furthermore, cultural factors weigh even more heavily on a group's average performance on standardized IQ tests. Such tests made by Western standards and based on Western culture would be alien and incomprehensible to distant groups for reasons other than intelligence.

To wit, aborigines in various countries know the names and various properties of thousands of plants and animals, as well as their seasonal behaviors. A Western person would struggle to approach what they would consider even rudimentary mastery of such information. I don't see any innate lack of intelligence in such cultures or peoples.

[Tyrannical]

It's genetic.
Some of the earliest IQ studies where of Blacks of varying admixture (pure through quadroons) going to an all black school, living in an all black neighborhood. The more white admixture, the closer they were to the white average. The Minnesota trans-racial adoption study should have put the question to rest.

That fails to explain the German children of American GIs study that showed that children of black American GIs in the postwar period had the same average IQ as children of white American GIs. To me, when you combine that result with the Minnesota twins study, the conclusion has to be that it's cultural expectations that are driving the IQ differences.

Not that that changes drewish's concerns. The fact that people on welfare have more children than people who work to support themselves is still a problem. Of course, that problem has an easy fix: change the welfare system so it doesn't inentivize having frequent children, and change the tax system so it doesn't penalize children in working households.

Well, I'd like to see that study. I assume they have IQ results for the parents? The military in the US has long done competency testing, so this result may be just the result of eliminating the low IQ blacks.