Frank, quite frankly, this is not a topic that any of you are in a suitable position to discuss. But it's been fun.
CNBC commentator Marc Faber says "Thank God white people populated America, not black
- Thread starter Smallcock
- Start date
From the person who tried to argue that people are different 'evolutionarily', that is funny.
Still can't understand this line from your wiki page, can you?
What is the quote from?
What is equally important is the inverse of what it says, which is that there is a TON of circumstantial evidence that says there is a genetic component.
Circumstantial evidence allows for the possibility, without establishing that it is necessary. That's up to you and your scientists. A definition would be one good place to start.
Funny no one, you included, has managed to come up with one after all these millennia.
Well, considering that your own understanding of this topic appears to be listing wiki articles and then not reading them thoroughly, I think that's the pot calling the kettle black.
On another note, let's assume that there is an evolutionary difference between Ghanaians and Koreans. Where does that get us?
No one alleges that the difference is so great that ALL Koreans are academic or professional class intellects. Ditto no one alleges that all Ghanaians are mentally sub average manual workers. No one says "Speak slowly when you talk to that Black guy. He's Black. So he's stupid." Achievement and intelligence appears to be highly subjective and individuated - as does talent and ability sets.
Teachers, social workers, judges, etc all deal with individuals as individuals without reference to whether their abilities are "evolutionary" as defined by their racial background. We've all met highly intelligent and very stupid people from all backgrounds.
So the issue of IQ testing and racial background remains an academic one. I wasn't even aware that this testing had been done since WW2. Didn't hold me back in a legal career. No judges or other lawyers know it or pay much attention to it either.
So unless you're a multiple PH D educational psychologist, the whole subject area is not really relevant.
Unless of course, you're the type of guy who really, really wants to racially stereotype others. Now who wants to do that? Well, that would be Far Right White Heritage guys, right? I mean, saying that Jews are evolved to be so smart they will take all the good jobs from Whites is an "argument" for quota-ing Jews. Hmm sort of like the "Jews Will Not Replace Us!" chant the Neo Nazis yelled at Charlotteville, right?
And saying that Blacks and Latinos are dumber than whites is a pretty good argument for everything from Trump's Wall, to voter suppression to lynching. Actually, that last one was done, wasn't it? Back when Whites actually believed that Blacks were intellectually and morally inferior to Whites in the pre Civil Rights movement era.
And if we can establish that IQ is evolutionary, we can suggest that behavioural traits are evolved too, right? The "crafty Jew"? The "murdering Muslim"? The "drug dealing, raping Latino immigrant"?
See where this might go? Right back to Germany in the 1930's.
Sorry you have that wrong too, the Presidency is the only thing he did 'win'. The Electors were required by law to hand it to him, so it barely counts as a 'win', but it's a very real fact, as is the College. The sham is that it's democratic. The fact you're deliberately ignoring in this topic is that he decisively lost the popular vote.
Are you actually proposing to abandon Race determines Intelligence, for a year-old topic like America's Rigged Election System?
For a guy who claims to be knowledgeable in genetics to suggest this ridiculous extrapolation is hilarious. Maybe it could apply to a small isolated island populated by one family group but that isn't applicable for 99.99999% of the world's population.
To put it in terms you might understand better, your idea would only apply to a seriously inbred population.
That's the way science works. If you want an idea accepted then you need evidence for it.
Do you realize how silly it is when the terms "true findings" and "social sciences" are put together?
Do you think blacks from Africa are the same "race" as American descendants of slaves (or even people from southern Africa vs north or east)?
As does socio-economic status and parental education levels. People's lives are far more complex than just IQ.
You're right that it allows for the possibility.
It's like evolutionary theory itself - predicated on a mountain of circumstantial evidence. We've never seen humans evolve into another species but evolution tells us that we descended from Porto-human ancestors. Circumstial evidence tells us who is guilty or innocent in courts of law every day.
You cling to the concept of no population groups or races, because you know that if you concede that point, everything else falls like dominoes. Yours is a simple though noble position.
Yes life is much more complex than IQ. We agree on that.
Black Americans are majority black but have lots of racial admixture with whites and natives.
Lol the expression is "tried and true". You must be new to English.
That's what the 100 years of circumstantial evidence gleaned from the studies that you reject are for.
I'm not sure you even know what you talking about? The concept is straight forward.
What is the Nazis view? Don't they think that Jews are inferior sub-humans? How do you conclude I share such a crazy view? That's appalling.
I'm in here literally saying that Jews are smarter than the average goyim yet you distort this to mean the exact opposite. Strange.
You're right that averages can never be applied to individuals. There are dumb Koreans just as there are genius Ghanaians.
However group averages will be pronounced in multiracial nations when it comes to in academic achievement and all that spring from it (you tell your kids to school and get a degree because you know it benefits their life chances). When a group is underperforming, the instinct now is to argue that there is something wrong with the schools, the teachers, and so on. But this may not be the case at all. The key could be as simple as innate ability - measured by IQ. This changes how we try to remedy the disparity in achievement by focusing on the source rather than everything else around it. Expecting kids with a low IQ compete with kids with high IQs is cruel and pointless. It's self defeating and a setup for failure.
Oagre, people who have very low IQ are deemed mentally disabled in courts of law. Ruling on admission into post-secondary education and affirmative action policies have looked at this data as well, sometimes directly or indirectly.
Having a high or low IQ tells us nothing about the subjective qualities of a person. A higher IQ person could be a cold violent person while a low IQ person could be kind and compassionate. You're trying to tether too many wild ideas together to paint this area of study as some sort of uber-Nazi incarnation.
Why don’t you want to use this science for the good of society?
Oagre nailed it, and its worth reposting the best lines from his very well put post.
The study linked previously showed that identical twins raised in different socioeconomic standards performed differently on IQ tests.
In other words, its not the skin colour, its the amount of money the family has. Its just coincidental that in the US the lines of income also happen to be the same as 'race', or more accurately skin colour and background.
oagre's quote is way behind the times. They've already taken all the good jobs. Someone should tell those "Far Right White Heritage" that ship has sailed.
