Moron claims that people are being called racist for saying things like "I love Black people". As opposed to saying things like "Not in the truthfullness sense that exposes the racial aspects of criminality in America". Or claiming that the Bell Curve proves Black people generally have lower IQs. Even you would have to admit that those two comments aren't the same as "I love Black people". The video you posted features a moron and a liar.
ps -When did I ever say that the Bell curve proves that Black people have low IQs? The Bell Curve is a study of White people and statistics about them.
Beantown AntiFacist: from Wikipedia: Rushton & Jensen (2005) wrote that, in the United States, self-identified blacks and whites have been the subjects of the greatest number of studies. They stated that the black-white IQ difference is about 15 to 18 points or 1 to 1.1 standard deviations (SDs), which implies that between 11 and 16 percent of the black population have an IQ above 100 (the general population median). (WYD 9/16/2017 at 4:53am).
Thersites: Racism isn't science. Stating scientific fact, that's there's a standard deviation difference in average IQs between races, isn't racist. (WYD 9/17/2017 at 10:34am).
SPLC: [Jensen] gave an interview to the White Nationalist American Renaissance magazine in which he laid out his beliefs about black people... Jensen ridiculed people, including his own mother, who believe "that blacks would be no different from the rest of us - the rest of the population — if they simply had the same education and all of that".
"the book provided statistical data making the assertion that blacks were, on average, less intelligent than whites..."
Did you read it? I did.
All the statistical data presented was from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth and restricted to white people. He barely mentions other races except in passing.
Murray's thesis in the Bell Curve was that IQ was hereditable and therefore genetic. He proved that it was 50-75% hereditable. And if IQ IS partially hereditable, education won't matter. The races are not "blank, but equal, slates". Just the same as a white footaller is not on a par with a black footballer. The basic machine is "different" in qualitative ways.
This was the author's subject (from the introduction)
Here are six conclusions regarding tests of cognitive ability, drawn from the classical tradition, that are by now beyond significant technical dispute:
1. There is such a thing as a general factor of cognitive ability on which human beings differ.
2. All standardized tests of academic aptitude or achievement measure this general factor to some degree, but IQ tests expressly designed for that purpose measure it most accurately.
3. IQ scores match, to a first degree, whatever it is that people mean when they use the word intelligent or smart in ordinary language.
4. IQ scores are stable, although not perfectly so, over much of a person’s life.
5. Properly administered IQ tests are not demonstrably biased against social, economic, ethnic, or racial groups.
6. Cognitive ability is substantially heritable, apparently no less than 40 percent and no more than 80 percent.
His critics disagree. The SPLC categorizes him as an extremist. As per the SPLC page on Murray, he says "a huge number of well-meaning whites fear that they are closet racists, and this book tells them they are not". Sounds to me like Murray himself disagrees with your assessment that "He barely mentions other races except in passing" (although this was regarding his book, "Losing Ground").
Have I read anything by him? No, I'm not interested in junk science that attempts to justify racism.
They read what real experts in genetics and heredity wrote. Click the "disagree" link in my previous comment. This is how most of us acquire knowledge: we rely on the research of others. Did you conduct your own studies to verify what you read in Charles Murray's book?
Murray is a real expert, and presents their consensus opinion. The NLSY is also the go-to database for research by experts on the subject. THAT is why he used it for "The Bell Curve".
The SPLC is a bunch of lawyers worried about how their investments in foreign bond funds are performing. :)
Stephen Jay Gould (an American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science) wrote that the "entire argument" of the authors of The Bell Curve rests on four unsupported, and mostly false, assumptions about intelligence: Intelligence must be reducible to a single number. Intelligence must be capable of rank ordering people in a linear order. Intelligence must be primarily genetically based. Intelligence must be essentially immutable.
Noam Chomsky, one of the founders of the field of cognitive science, directly criticized the book and its assumptions on IQ. ... [As per Chomsky] there is almost no evidence of a genetic link, and greater evidence that environmental issues are what determine IQ differences.
He wrote about what was in the book? "The 1994 book, now seeing an unfortunate resurgence, investigates racial differences in IQ—without being honest about the authors' motives" Murray's 'true motives' were in the book? The ones that wax nostalgically for White Supremacy?
Charles Murray is about as racist as Booker T. Washington.
He also said, "“There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.”
“Among a large class, there seemed to be a dependence upon the government for every conceivable thing. The members of this class had little ambition to create a position for themselves, but wanted the federal officials to create one for them. How many times I wished then and have often wished since, that by some power of magic, I might remove the great bulk of these people into the country districts and plant them upon the soil – upon the solid and never deceptive foundation of Mother Nature, where all nations and races that have ever succeeded have gotten their start – a start that at first may be slow and toilsome, but one that nevertheless is real.” ― Booker T. Washington, Up from Slavery
27 comments:
Moron.
...truth hurts, Dervy?
No, lies.
Moron claims that people are being called racist for saying things like "I love Black people". As opposed to saying things like "Not in the truthfullness sense that exposes the racial aspects of criminality in America". Or claiming that the Bell Curve proves Black people generally have lower IQs. Even you would have to admit that those two comments aren't the same as "I love Black people". The video you posted features a moron and a liar.
"All lives matter"? Proof of racism? lol!
Drown in your circular logic, panchreston boy.
ps -When did I ever say that the Bell curve proves that Black people have low IQs? The Bell Curve is a study of White people and statistics about them.
Wikipedia: "...the book provided statistical data making the assertion that blacks were, on average, less intelligent than whites..."
Beantown AntiFacist: from Wikipedia: Rushton & Jensen (2005) wrote that, in the United States, self-identified blacks and whites have been the subjects of the greatest number of studies. They stated that the black-white IQ difference is about 15 to 18 points or 1 to 1.1 standard deviations (SDs), which implies that between 11 and 16 percent of the black population have an IQ above 100 (the general population median). (WYD 9/16/2017 at 4:53am).
Thersites: Racism isn't science. Stating scientific fact, that's there's a standard deviation difference in average IQs between races, isn't racist. (WYD 9/17/2017 at 10:34am).
SPLC: [Jensen] gave an interview to the White Nationalist American Renaissance magazine in which he laid out his beliefs about black people... Jensen ridiculed people, including his own mother, who believe "that blacks would be no different from the rest of us - the rest of the population — if they simply had the same education and all of that".
"the book provided statistical data making the assertion that blacks were, on average, less intelligent than whites..."
Did you read it? I did.
All the statistical data presented was from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth and restricted to white people. He barely mentions other races except in passing.
Murray's thesis in the Bell Curve was that IQ was hereditable and therefore genetic. He proved that it was 50-75% hereditable. And if IQ IS partially hereditable, education won't matter. The races are not "blank, but equal, slates". Just the same as a white footaller is not on a par with a black footballer. The basic machine is "different" in qualitative ways.
This was the author's subject (from the introduction)
Here are six conclusions regarding tests of cognitive ability, drawn from the classical tradition, that are by now beyond significant technical dispute:
1. There is such a thing as a general factor of cognitive ability on which human beings differ.
2. All standardized tests of academic aptitude or achievement measure this general factor to some degree, but IQ tests expressly designed for that purpose measure it most accurately.
3. IQ scores match, to a first degree, whatever it is that people mean when they use the word intelligent or smart in ordinary language.
4. IQ scores are stable, although not perfectly so, over much of a person’s life.
5. Properly administered IQ tests are not demonstrably biased against social, economic, ethnic, or racial groups.
6. Cognitive ability is substantially heritable, apparently no less than 40 percent and no more than 80 percent.
"He proved that it was 50-75% hereditable".
His critics disagree. The SPLC categorizes him as an extremist. As per the SPLC page on Murray, he says "a huge number of well-meaning whites fear that they are closet racists, and this book tells them they are not". Sounds to me like Murray himself disagrees with your assessment that "He barely mentions other races except in passing" (although this was regarding his book, "Losing Ground").
Have I read anything by him? No, I'm not interested in junk science that attempts to justify racism.
The SPLC are experts in genetics and heredity? Who knew that a bunch of race baiters like the SPLC were so scientific?
They read what real experts in genetics and heredity wrote. Click the "disagree" link in my previous comment. This is how most of us acquire knowledge: we rely on the research of others. Did you conduct your own studies to verify what you read in Charles Murray's book?
Murray is a real expert, and presents their consensus opinion. The NLSY is also the go-to database for research by experts on the subject. THAT is why he used it for "The Bell Curve".
The SPLC is a bunch of lawyers worried about how their investments in foreign bond funds are performing. :)
:)
Stephen Jay Gould (an American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science) wrote that the "entire argument" of the authors of The Bell Curve rests on four unsupported, and mostly false, assumptions about intelligence: Intelligence must be reducible to a single number. Intelligence must be capable of rank ordering people in a linear order. Intelligence must be primarily genetically based. Intelligence must be essentially immutable.
Noam Chomsky, one of the founders of the field of cognitive science, directly criticized the book and its assumptions on IQ. ... [As per Chomsky] there is almost no evidence of a genetic link, and greater evidence that environmental issues are what determine IQ differences.
Chomsky is a linguist and Gould is an idiot. LOL!
Murray is a racist.
lol! ...says the clairvoyant mind-reader author who proports to know Murray's "true intentions".
He wrote a book. Nobody needs to mind read.
Scientific America: "...we must call this book what it is: racist."
If the book is racist I think we can assume it's author is racist.
He wrote about what was in the book? "The 1994 book, now seeing an unfortunate resurgence, investigates racial differences in IQ—without being honest about the authors' motives" Murray's 'true motives' were in the book? The ones that wax nostalgically for White Supremacy?
Charles Murray is about as racist as Booker T. Washington.
Booker T. Washington never said Black people genetically have low IQs.
No, he said things like, "Excellence is to do a common thing in an uncommon way." In many ways, that advice precludes a need for a high IQ.
He also said, "“There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.”
In the DNC, it still pays to hold grievances.
“Among a large class, there seemed to be a dependence upon the government for every conceivable thing. The members of this class had little ambition to create a position for themselves, but wanted the federal officials to create one for them. How many times I wished then and have often wished since, that by some power of magic, I might remove the great bulk of these people into the country districts and plant them upon the soil – upon the solid and never deceptive foundation of Mother Nature, where all nations and races that have ever succeeded have gotten their start – a start that at first may be slow and toilsome, but one that nevertheless is real.”
― Booker T. Washington, Up from Slavery
Post a Comment