# Are you a racist? Warning signs **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 7, 2014, 8:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519 "2014-07-07T08:12:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 27
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/521 "2014-07-21T17:14:26Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I was not taking a position on whether CP’s analogy to humans and cockroaches was logically compelling. I was taking a position on what CP himself meant with that analogy. > > iiandyii himself now appears to agree with me about this (and says he only meant to mock CP without conveying an incorrect interpretation of his intention). I have no idea what you’re saying now. What I’m saying is that you only accuse one side of this “debate” of having bad motives. You are seemingly able to read the minds of one side and the other side is just a cipher for you. Then you chide the “dishonest” side for their dishonesty, at the same time claiming you have taken no position. Judging one side as honest and the other as dishonest IS a position. Following one side down the rabbit hole of intention while ignoring the intentions of the other side (which intentions are widely perceived as racist as hell) IS a position. I get that you are some sort of defender of weak arguments and idiots on this board and that Chief Pedant has been placed, by virtue of needing your help, in the same bucket as the guy with the weird fetish for playacting the anal rape of children with cardboard, but your inability to see your own biases is really stark. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/522 "2014-07-21T17:15:11Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > You are the one who is obsessed about “Self-identified” groups and “African-American” is a clear example of a self-identified group. Actually, it’s the Feds who are obsessed with self-identification groups, in service of protecting reporting interests. If you don’t know who self-identifies where, you can’t decide who is being discriminated against. See [here](http://www.eeoc.gov/employers/eeo1/qanda-implementation.cfm) and [here](http://ieor.columbia.edu/files/seasdepts/industrial-engineering-operations-research/pdf-files/Ethnicity_Form.pdf) and [here](http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_1997standards) for help. From the third link: \*\*“The revised standards will have five minimum categories for data on race: American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and White. There will be two categories for data on ethnicity: “Hispanic or Latino” and “Not Hispanic or Latino.”” "1. The racial and ethnic categories set forth in the standards should not be interpreted as being primarily biological or genetic in reference. Race and ethnicity may be thought of in terms of social and cultural characteristics as well as ancestry. “…do not tell an individual who he or she is, or specify how an individual should classify himself or herself.” \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/523 "2014-07-21T17:15:13Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I didn’t misrepresent his position. He’s consistently (in this thread and others) misrepresented mine (calling me “egalitarian”, whatever that means, along with insisting that I believe that there is no genetic variation between various groups), but for some reason I don’t see you speaking up about that. What he means by egalitarian is: he believes the notion that some groups might be more intelligent than others offends your sense of fairness and justice, and this is in part what drives your positions WRT this issue. I think he is likely correct about this. I don’t recall the “no genetic variation” argument. (I know CP has repeatedly invoked other genetic variations as examples of how intelligence might also be so, but I don’t recall him insisting that you disputed this.) ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/524 "2014-07-21T17:17:16Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > What I’m saying is that you only accuse one side of this “debate” of having bad motives. You are seemingly able to read the minds of one side and the other side is just a cipher for you. Then you chide the “dishonest” side for their dishonesty, at the same time claiming you have taken no position. Judging one side as honest and the other as dishonest IS a position. Following one side down the rabbit hole of intention while ignoring the intentions of the other side (which intentions are widely perceived as racist as hell) IS a position. Again, I didn’t claim to have taken no position on anything connected to this. I’ve taken no position here on one specific issue. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/525 "2014-07-21T17:21:39Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > What he means by egalitarian is: he believes the notion that some groups might be more intelligent than others offends your sense of fairness and justice, and this is in part what drives your positions WRT this issue. I think he is likely correct about this. I don’t think that’s what he means by “egalitarian”. From my recollection, he thinks that those opposed to his argument believe that nature magically keeps every ethnic group equal in all ways, genetically speaking, or some such, and for some reason calls this “egalitarian”. He also (foolishly) compares us to Creationists. > [@](#): > > I don’t recall the “no genetic variation” argument. (I know CP has repeatedly invoked other genetic variations as examples of how intelligence might also be so, but I don’t recall him insisting that you disputed this.) He did in post #479, insisting that I “hope that mother nature has somehow exempted all functionally signficant genes from being maldistributed among human populations”. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/526 "2014-07-21T17:23:22Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Again, I didn’t claim to have taken no position on anything connected to this. I’ve taken no position here on one specific issue. You consistently defend one side making arguments on this issue, attacking claimed errors of the other side, and without attacking the same sorts of claimed errors that are made by the side you seem to have chosen to defend. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/527 "2014-07-21T17:25:32Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Umm, how exactly is citing Apartheid supposed to be _helping_ your racist case? Of course they based their rationale partly on appearance - because they were fucked-up people. Is that where you want to plant your flag? “It’s OK to use appearance to classify people because the Apartheid regime did it” is about as good a character reference for you as the cockroach thing. And it’s your theory that the appearance of race groups which part of the apartheid history is unrelated to gene clustering? So…groups such as races cluster by appearance but it’s incorrect that the genes driving appearance types do not themselves cluster? Say what? Exactly how confused are you on what the concept of gene clustering means? It means that given gene variants–including ones coding for appearance types–appear more frequently within one group than another… ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/528 "2014-07-21T17:27:54Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > He inadvertently compared black people to cockroaches. I don’t think he intended to, but he certainly did it – at least with regards to comparisons of relative intelligence. Thus, a ripe opportunity for mockery. And it hit a nerve, as I intended. > > I never said it was intended. It’s hard for me to believe that you are stupid enough (you two-neuroned cockroach of an idiot) to think this is correct. So let’s practice. Where did I inadvertently compare black people to cockroaches? Cite? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/529 "2014-07-21T17:35:39Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > It’s hard for me to believe that you are stupid enough (you two-neuroned cockroach of an idiot) to think this is correct. > > So let’s practice. > > Where did I inadvertently compare black people to cockroaches? > Cite? Post #472: > [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > I’m pretty sure we humans are smarter than cockroaches, but I’m not sure we know which genes are responsible for that, **either**. So I guess there’s “zero evidence” humans are smarter than cockroaches? (bolding mine) It’s the “either” that clinches it. You’re pretty sure that white people are inherently genetically smarter than black people, but we don’t know the genes responsible (and with this in mind, it’s a very foolish conclusion to reach). And you’re sure that humans are inherently genetically smarter than cockroaches, but you’re “not sure we know which genes are responsible for that, **either** ”. And thus you said that whatever non-genetic reasons show us that cockroaches are dumber than people also show us that black people are dumber than white people. Otherwise, why bring up the comparison at all? Oh I don’t think you did it on purpose. And I don’t think that, deep within your psyche, you believe black people are comparable to cockroaches. But I think you truly believe that black people’s (as a group) inferior intelligence, on average, is pretty self-evident to all, just as cockroaches’ inferior intelligence is self-evident to all. Because otherwise, I don’t see how the comparison is at all relevant to the discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/530 "2014-07-21T17:45:20Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > **Fotheringay-Phillips** , you seem to think that every position deserves to be treated respectfully. I disagree. Every position deserves to be confronted on the facts and data, but some positions also deserve mockery and disrespect. When someone comes to the board and suggests the Holocaust didn’t happen, they deserve to have their arguments shredded (factually), and they deserve mockery and disrespect (and worse). Similarly, when someone suggests that black people are inherently genetically inferior in intellect, they deserve to have their arguments shredded (again, factually), and they deserve mockery and disrespect. Especially in the Pit. > > That is what I attempt to do with regards to these positions. > > We know nothing about the genes for intelligence in humans, much less their prevalence in various groups. Therefore, it’s ridiculous to make claims about some groups of humans being inherently genetically less intelligent than others. In addition, such claims are very, very racist. They deserve to be attacked on both accounts. The pseudo-science thrown around deserves to be shredded and mocked, and the certainty with which one holds that black people are intellectually inferior deserves extreme disrespect. > > People _should_ be afraid to say racist things. If someone holds such an opinion, they _should_ be afraid to state it publicly – just like if someone holds the opinion that the Jews should be exterminated. Over and over again, for decades and decades, these opinions have been shown to be based on shit for evidence. It’s no different now. > > When someone finds all the genes for high and low intelligence, and they can prove that their presence correlates highly with high (and low) test-score performance in individuals across all groups, and they show that the prevalence of these genes varies significantly among various groups, then it might be time to start this discussion anew. > > But that would take a lot of hard work. For the blatherers who proclaim their unsupported ‘race realism’ bullshit, that hard work doesn’t seem to be in the cards. > > Maybe it’s because of their genes. You may know nothing about the genes for intelligence, but I’ve given you a Princeton review article on it. We are learning a greatt deal about the genes for intelligence, and among other things we know that variations in specific genes can create intelligence differences. For example, [here](http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/mp2013197a.html) is a study showing how single nucleotide polymorphisms can affect gray matter thickness, in turn associated with intelligence. What we are learning is all pointing us toward, and not away from, the notion that the function of our brains is governed by our genes just the way the rest of our physiology is. _“Genetic factors have a significant contribution in defining brain structure and cognition. In particular, cortical thickness is heritable, with the strongest genetic influences (heritability range, 0.50–0.90) showing region- and age-specific variations1 that seem to follow patterns of brain maturation from childhood to early adulthood. Cortical thickness also closely correlates with intellectual ability in normally developing children and adolescents.2,3 Yet, little is known about the genetic factors accounting for interindividual differences in both of these traits.”_ [Here is a report on how variations in the KL gene can affect intelligence and aging.](http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21601809-potent-source-genetic-variation-cognitive-ability-has-just-been) [Want more? There’s plenty to be had…](http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v16/n10/abs/mp201185a.html) \*“We estimate that 40% of the variation in crystallized-type intelligence and 51% of the variation in fluid-type intelligence between individuals is accounted for by linkage disequilibrium between genotyped common SNP markers and unknown causal variants. These estimates provide lower bounds for the narrow-sense heritability of the traits.” \* (underlining for emphasis by CP) ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/531 "2014-07-21T17:53:20Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > You may know nothing about the genes for intelligence, but I’ve given you a Princeton review article on it. > > We are learning a greatt deal about the genes for intelligence, and among other things we know that variations in specific genes can create intelligence differences. For example, [here](http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/mp2013197a.html) is a study showing how single nucleotide polymorphisms can affect gray matter thickness, in turn associated with intelligence. What we are learning is all pointing us toward, and not away from, the notion that the function of our brains is governed by our genes just the way the rest of our physiology is. > _“Genetic factors have a significant contribution in defining brain structure and cognition. In particular, cortical thickness is heritable, with the strongest genetic influences (heritability range, 0.50–0.90) showing region- and age-specific variations1 that seem to follow patterns of brain maturation from childhood to early adulthood. Cortical thickness also closely correlates with intellectual ability in normally developing children and adolescents.2,3 Yet, little is known about the genetic factors accounting for interindividual differences in both of these traits.”_ > > [Here is a report on how variations in the KL gene can affect intelligence and aging.](http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21601809-potent-source-genetic-variation-cognitive-ability-has-just-been) > > [Want more? There’s plenty to be had…](http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v16/n10/abs/mp201185a.html) > \*“We estimate that 40% of the variation in crystallized-type intelligence and 51% of the variation in fluid-type intelligence between individuals is accounted for by linkage disequilibrium between genotyped common SNP markers and unknown causal variants. These estimates provide lower bounds for the narrow-sense heritability of the traits.” > \* > (underlining for emphasis by CP) More irrelevant sideshow. I’ve never claimed that genes don’t have anything to do with intelligence. Perhaps rather than “nothing”, perhaps I should say “virtually nothing”, with regards to what we know about the genes for high and low intelligence, but this doesn’t support your conclusion about black people’s intelligence _at all_. It’s just sidestepping. Your quote from the link even highlights how little we know: “Yet, little is known about the genetic factors accounting for interindividual differences in both of these traits”. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/532 "2014-07-21T18:02:04Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Post #472: > > (bolding mine) > > It’s the “either” that clinches it. You’re pretty sure that white people are inherently genetically smarter than black people, but we don’t know the genes responsible (and with this in mind, it’s a very foolish conclusion to reach). And you’re sure that humans are inherently genetically smarter than cockroaches, but you’re “not sure we know which genes are responsible for that, **either** ”. And thus you said that whatever non-genetic reasons show us that cockroaches are dumber than people also show us that black people are dumber than white people. Otherwise, why bring up the comparison at all? > > Oh I don’t think you did it on purpose. And I don’t think that, deep within your psyche, you believe black people are comparable to cockroaches. > > But I think you truly believe that black people’s (as a group) inferior intelligence, on average, is pretty self-evident to all, just as cockroaches’ inferior intelligence is self-evident to all. > > Because otherwise, I don’t see how the comparison is at all relevant to the discussion. So… We don’t know which genes, precisely, cause intelligence differences among human populations, including the race groupings of black and white. From this, iiandyiii asserts that there is zero evidence the difference is genetic. We don’t know, either, which genes, precisely, cause intelligence differences between human populations and cockroaches. From this, CP derives a conclusion that the idea that we have to know an exact gene to draw a conclusion that genes drive differences in organisms is wrong. But iiandyiii derives a conclusion that the Pedant has (inadvertently, based on iiandyiiii’s excellent insight into motivations of others) compared blacks to cockroaches. You, sir, are not worthy of being called a cockroach. You are a cockroach reject. A boob of a cockroach. You are a disgrace to cockroaches everywhwere. You do not rise to being called a dullard. Twits out-think you even when they are busy pleasuring themselves. Calling you an ignorant, slobbering, stinkpile of ad hominem, low-blowing, tangent-grasping, inept, inconsequential, desperate and confused nincompoop would elevate your status by an order of magnitude. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/533 "2014-07-21T18:08:26Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > More irrelevant sideshow. I’ve never claimed that genes don’t have anything to do with intelligence. > > Perhaps rather than “nothing”, perhaps I should say “virtually nothing”, with regards to what we know about the genes for high and low intelligence, but this doesn’t support your conclusion about black people’s intelligence _at all_. It’s just sidestepping. Your quote from the link even highlights how little we know: “Yet, little is known about the genetic factors accounting for interindividual differences in both of these traits”. A quote which I included on purpose, since I do not distort. The direction in which we are headed in research is toward finding out the extent to which genes–and not just environment–drive the ability to think. And then you’ll be left with babbling like a cockroach about how that STILL doesn’t show the difference in intelligence among any population is still likely to be substantially driven by genes. Your fingernail grasp on the cliff which overlooks the chasm yawning below is slipping…slipping. It must be terrifying to hold so tightly to a position of “zero genetic evidence” when every single study about genes and intelligence reaffirms the primacy of genes in driving intelligence. Let it go, Luuuuuke. Let it go. Drop into that chasm and accept the truth that mother nature forgot to wire us all the same. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/534 "2014-07-21T18:15:29Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > So… > We don’t know which genes, precisely, cause intelligence differences among human populations, including the race groupings of black and white. > > From this, iiandyiii asserts that there is zero evidence the difference is genetic. Obviously. We have no data whatsoever on the prevalence of the genes responsible for high and low intelligence (of which we know virtually nothing) in various groups of humans. > [@](#): > > We don’t know, either, which genes, precisely, cause intelligence differences between human populations and cockroaches. > > From this, CP derives a conclusion that the idea that we have to know an exact gene to draw a conclusion that genes drive differences in organisms is wrong. Which is nonsense, especially the “differences in organisms” part. Black people and white people aren’t ‘different organisms’ – we’re all humans. We’re all in the same species. The only way a comparison with cockroaches might be useful at all in this case is to compare two different ‘races’ of cockroach within the same species. And in that case, to determine conclusively which ‘race’ of cockroach is inherently genetically more intelligent, _we would need to know the genes responsible for intelligence in cockroaches_. > [@](#): > > But iiandyiii derives a conclusion that the Pedant has (inadvertently, based on iiandyiiii’s excellent insight into motivations of others) compared blacks to cockroaches. This has nothing to do with motivation, because you weren’t motivated to do it. It was inadvertent – that is, against what you intended (or were ‘motivated’ to do). You did it anyway, inadvertently. And I’m not deriving a conclusion, I’m stating a fact – you inadvertently compared black people to cockroaches in one particular characteristic – how their intelligence compares to (white) people. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/535 "2014-07-21T18:19:21Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > A quote which I included on purpose, since I do not distort. > > The direction in which we are headed in research is toward finding out the extent to which genes–and not just environment–drive the ability to think. > > And then you’ll be left with babbling like a cockroach about how that STILL doesn’t show the difference in intelligence among any population is still likely to be substantially driven by genes. So you recognize you have no evidence for your assertion about black people’s genes? All you’ve got is “just you wait… they call me crazy now, but just you wait…”? It’s laughable. > [@](#): > > Your fingernail grasp on the cliff which overlooks the chasm yawning below is slipping…slipping. It must be terrifying to hold so tightly to a position of “zero genetic evidence” when every single study about genes and intelligence reaffirms the primacy of genes in driving intelligence. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! You just can’t get over your own distortions. You just can’t get it through your thick, thick skull that _I don’t dispute that intelligence is or may be largely driven by genes_. You just can’t understand that _this has nothing to do with whether black people might be dumber_. It doesn’t matter if genes drive intelligence. Whether this is so or not, it says _absolutely nothing_ about the genes of black people. Nothing whatsoever! Zero genetic evidence for your claims about black people. This is not about genes and intelligence, it’s about _your claims about black people_. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/536 "2014-07-21T18:23:12Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > Actually, it’s the Feds who are obsessed with self-identification groups, in service of protecting reporting interests. The federal government isn’t the one dicking up this board with racist theories about intelligence. That’s your thing. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/537 "2014-07-21T18:25:01Z")
I know, **CP** , that you really, really want this to be about the “primacy of genes in driving intelligence”, or any topic at all except your claims about the genetics of black people’s intelligence. But that’s what it’s about – it’s about what you claim regarding black people’s genes for intelligence. You’ve made claims about the genetics of black people – specifically, about the genes for high and low intelligence in black people as a group. _These claims have no supporting evidence_. I’m not arguing with claims about the “primacy of genes in driving intelligence”, or any other assertion you’re making in this thread, except for your claims about the the genes for intelligence among black people. So own it. Just say it – even though you have no data on which genes for high or low intelligence black people are more or less likely to have, you believe that black people, on average, have inferior genes for intelligence. Say this one sentence. I dare you. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/538 "2014-07-21T18:38:05Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > He did in post #479, insisting that I “hope that mother nature has somehow exempted all functionally signficant genes from being maldistributed among human populations”. There have definitely been many people in these exchanges who have insisted that “nature has somehow exempted all functionally signficant genes from being maldistributed among human populations”. That’s why these disputes about possible differences in intelligence have so frequently involved disputes about whether other apparent differences - e.g. athletics - might also be genetic. Though I don’t specifically recall your position about those matters. That said, there is also a difference between “believe” and “hope”. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > You consistently defend one side making arguments on this issue, attacking claimed errors of the other side, and without attacking the same sorts of claimed errors that are made by the side you seem to have chosen to defend. As previous, I don’t agree that the errors have been of the same magnitude and frequency by the two sides. I’ve been consistent in expressing my skepticism with CP’s conclusions, for reasons given, but having said that there’s no much more to say. The over-the-top arguments have been from the other direction. [That said, I’ll allow that there is also a smidgeon of truth in what jsgoddess has been saying as well. **Not** that I would pick a position based on a need to defend the minority. But I’m not going to bother saying things that many other people are already saying anyway. The positions that very few are defending are what interest me. So for example, if in a given discussion I agree with 60% of what the majority are saying and 40% of what the minority are saying, I’ll tend to focus on the 40%, rather than just join a massive crowd saying the other 60%. But I say what I think.] ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/539 "2014-07-21T18:43:26Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > There have definitely been many people in these exchanges who have insisted that “nature has somehow exempted all functionally signficant genes from being maldistributed among human populations”. Who? And whoever they are, I’m not one of them. > [@](#): > > That’s why these disputes about possible differences in intelligence have so frequently involved disputes about whether other apparent differences - e.g. athletics - might also be genetic. Though I don’t specifically recall your position about those matters. I’ve never argued with the notion that some difference in particular _might_ be based on genes. There are lots of gaps in our knowledge of the causes of various outcome discrepancies. I’ve argued with conclusions that certain differences, with no genetic evidence whatsoever, are based on genes – these conclusions are not based on good science, they are wildly premature at best, and in many cases, _these conclusions are racist_. > [@](#): > > That said, there is also a difference between “believe” and “hope”. He also misrepresented my position in post #533, again in a way that he’s done _over and over again_. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2014, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519/540 "2014-07-21T18:47:42Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > As previous, I don’t agree that the errors have been of the same magnitude and frequency by the two sides. You don’t think that making claims about the genetics of black people for intelligence, considering that we have pretty much no data whatsoever on the genes for intelligence in black people, is an error of high magnitude? It certainly has a high frequency! > [@](#): > > I’ve been consistent in expressing my skepticism with CP’s conclusions, for reasons given, but having said that there’s no much more to say. The over-the-top arguments have been from the other direction. It’s not over the top to say that black people are inherently genetically less intelligent than other races, considering that (again) we have pretty much no data whatsoever on the genes for intelligence in black people? > [@](#): > > [That said, I’ll allow that there is also a smidgeon of truth in what jsgoddess has been saying as well. **Not** that I would pick a position based on a need to defend the minority. But I’m not going to bother saying things that many other people are already saying anyway. The positions that very few are defending are what interest me. So for example, if in a given discussion I agree with 60% of what the majority are saying and 40% of what the minority are saying, I’ll tend to focus on the 40%, rather than just join a massive crowd saying the other 60%. But I say what I think.] What exactly are you defending, with regards to what **CP** is saying? He distorts my position (either deliberately or ignorantly), consistently sidesteps with irrelevant information about the “primacy of genes for intelligence” (or other unrelated assertions), and makes racist claims about black people’s genes that are unsupported by any actual genetic data! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519.md?page=26) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-you-a-racist-warning-signs/692519.md?page=28)