The sentence "I am not a racist but.." is quite enough for me to say something about you. Saying that one race is better than other, is exactly what Nazi German believed. and you know were that led to...
I'm going back to what I wrote - you assume that IQ relates to job performance - what do you mean? Doesn't it depends on the job? Different jobs needs different kind of intelligence. Also I have to ask you - are you looking to research something just because the results might benefit you personally as a white man?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Please give me the benefit of doubt regarding my motives. I've spent eight years using myself as "sting bait" by speaking civic viewpoints that I think are true but that are not permitted to be spoken here. In any forum, if it appears that the expression of certain topics or certain opinions is not permitted, then the first thing that must be done is to boldly speak those prohibited opinions on those prohibited topics. Once the forum is censored, it becomes worthless as a forum.
My first order of business for as long as God gives me to be on steemit will be to verify daily that censorship has not sprouted on this forum.
What if one race really is "better" than another? Which is more dangerous, to deny such a truth or to confront it squarely and then make informed policy decisions? Current scientific evidence appears to show that the Nazis were right. Does that mean that we should follow their political path? Probably not.
Again, I've spent my whole adult life working for "liberty and justice for all" and in particular I have spent my life fighting against racism in the United States. My values haven't changed. But I appear to have been misinformed regarding some important, world-view changing facts.
Regarding whether measured IQ is useful in ranking people, that issue is discussed exhaustively in the scientific literature. The short answer is that the issue is a red herring.
I can understand if you say one culture is better than other for you. For me the culture that will support freedom of speech, co operation, community, non violent, equal opportunities for all - will be a better culture than a culture that support violence, fanatic religion, separation and hate of others etc'. But - I would like to live in a world where I choose which community to live in. I based on what is best for me. I don't see IQ as something that important that I will define people by and decide who is better who is not. I will decide who is better human being by being the best human being - the one who live to support others and follow love and not ego and fear. This is the most important thing and not IQ. You can have the highest IQ and be a psychopath, so?
I don't understand why you put so much emphases on it, sorry. Would you like to live in a society if only people with high IQ, or a society that respect each other and support each other?
Don't you begin any encounter with a new person by asking them what their IQ is? :) I don't even know what my own IQ is. IQ is not important to me personally. In my life, I've been both brilliant and and idiotic.
What fascinates me about this topic is that a fact that is so pregnant with policy implications for society is so totally suppressed that (1) no one discusses it, (2) no one is allowed to discuss it, and (3) no one is objecting to the false propaganda and the censorship.
Accepting or denying facts does not indicate anything about you except... your intelligence! If one race really is genetically more intelligent than another race, then accepting that fact does not make you a racist.
One of the topics that I might like to explore is whether racism is a bad thing. We all, of course, know that it is a Very Bad Thing. But is it, really? Who knows, since that is another topic that is prohibited and so never explored.
Well you are exploring it now and you also found some articles about it - so it's not really prohibited...
I don't know about false propaganda about this subject of IQ and race. I never really heard any propaganda around this subject.
You keep saying - one race is more "intelligent" - without really exploring this word. The actual sentence should be - One race has more IQ - which is a Western measurement that focuses on the left side of the brain and refer to math, logic thinking etc' - than other race. Yes, most likely a race that uses this kind of intelligence in their every day life will also be better in it. On the other hand - in Jungle lows intelligence (Let's call it JQ) the other race is much better than the first race. It doesn't mean anything to me.. IQ is a measurement developed by western white men.. I rest my case :-)
The Rushton Jensen (2005) article disposes of those objections. It is filled with numerous citations of studies that test those ideas. The consistent finding is that measured IQ is associated with a variety of intelligence measures that cannot be influenced by culture bias or by any environmental factor. Many scientists in many studies have explored all of that by cleverly looking at adopted children, at twins, at trends over the life cycle, and at many other ways of testing alternative explanations for what is observed.
You'd have to read the paper, as well as survey the literature that has emerged in response to it. The intelligence difference really exists, apparently. The question now is what are the policy implications? Should government allow employers to hire based upon race? Etc.
I don't think you answered my questions. IQ measures one kind of intelligence. Are you saying there is only one intelligence than? In other words - it's ok to be a psychopath, as long as you have high IQ... Also it's better for any employer, no matter what the job is, to employ a psychopath with high IQ, than really nice person, reliable, friendly, with lower level of IQ.. this is what you actually saying.
I feel like I am repeating myself and we are not going anywhere with it.. By the way, scientists are again mostly western white man, ruled by left brain so it doesn't really helps. And no, I have no intention of reading it - again because IQ doesn't interest me that much. I might read about emotional intelligence though.. more interesting for me.
I'm not saying any of that. What I am saying is that "intelligence", defined as general mental aptitude, i.e. how well and how quickly the brain processes stimuli, does definitely vary by race and that these difference in the average intelligence of races is partly genetic.
"Intelligence" has a particular meaning that is reflected in the various ways that it is measured. For example, some studies use simple nonverbal tasks that all children find easy and that all children complete in about one second. Those studies measure "reaction times" and "movement times" and find statistically significant differences across race. The nature of what is being tested is very closely related to the number of neurons in the brain, how quickly they fire, and how complex the folding of the brain tissue is. These tests are measuring the performance of the brain at such a "low level" that the race differences have implications for all of the nine kinds of "intelligence". The tests are not culture biased and are not verbal or language biased.
What I think is happening here is that you really don't want to accept the hypothesis that the data seem to be supporting. That's ok. I'm just here for pleasant conversation. But if you wanted to "go somewhere further" with this, the next step would be for you to take a look at enough of the article to see for yourself the nature of the evidence and form your own opinion regarding whether the authors are biased.
And one more thing - I don't know why you keep mentioning governments and employers as even today, for a lot of different jobs, you do need to past tests.. look at the universities system - you need to have high marks in tests to get accepted.
Just using that as an important example of a policy question. In the United States it is illegal for an employer to ask about race or to consider race in any employment or supervisory decision, such as hiring, salary, promotion, job assignment, or really any other kind of significant decision.
Administering intelligence tests is, AFAIK, never done in connection with hiring or promoting or any similar decision. Such testing would be prohibitively expensive. It's much cheaper to just look at the resume, note that the person has a name and an address that suggests that he or she is African American, and pass over that resume. In the United States, that would be totally illegal. The policy question is whether it should be illegal. If sub-Sahara Africans really are morons for genetic reasons, then there are arguments on both sides, even if one is focusing solely on justice.