That’s all irrelevant ad hominem attacks. The point still stands that science demonstrates that intelligence is an inheritable trait and that different groups have different distributions. That’s what the article says. Along with how to frame the debate since denial can’t work forever.
It is kind of hilarious that you regard a British newspaper’s report on a British psychology study of “radicals” with “extreme political views” as somehow explanatory concerning “left wingers like andy”.
The positions of mainstream American left-liberals like iiandyiiii are emphatically not what political cultures with a serious Left (including the UK, although to a lesser extent than other European societies) categorize as “extreme political views”.
If you or Sam Harris encountered an example of what British politicians consider an actual radical “left winger” you would probably faint from the shock.
No it does not demonstrate that, as the geneticists, antropologists and historians from the University of Alabama and many others explained to Reich too, what he did was to post an opinion, not an study. What Reich also said was unequivocally is that it is unfounded and irresponsible to claim that his research is suggesting that genetic factors explain traditional stereotypes that racists use.
What remains is what you stupidly missed. The experts did not disagree when Reich said that Wade and his ilk (Muray) are racists.
No, the article doesn’t say that. The article is largely strawmanning an alleged “orthodoxy” of blanket denialism about genetic differences in populations, without identifying any actual proponents of such an “orthodoxy”.
What the article says about intelligence is basically this:
That description is so broad and vague that it could apply to almost any claim about genes and intelligence. It doesn’t make any specific claim about the actual ways in which genes influence intelligence. Nor does it provide any justification for asserting that the entire constellation of complex traits that contribute to what we call “intelligence” will necessarily show population-based differences in the aggregate, even if there will inevitably be some population-based genetic differences in individual traits.
I see the fallback is to “blacks are genetically inferior” - racists really only know the one tune, don’t they, regardless of how “paternalistic” they are or how benevolent they think themselves (referring to Slacker there, octopus doesn’t even have that minimum amount of shame.)
Yes, you are such a brilliant boy, and any disagreement is someone “caught flat footed”! What a brilliant, always right boy you are! Such a good, smart boy. Never wrong, my good boy! Never making a bad argument. I’m so proud of you!
I didn’t think you were part of the “blacks are inherently genetically inferior, on average” crowd. Have you changed your tune?
It’s gotta be tough being racist - holding a hateful opinion so closely, and so strongly, that any and every disagreement must be dismissed as delusional, or disingenuous… That one’s own psyche can’t even consider that you might be wrong or misunderstanding the facts, and that you might be relegating millions of decent people to an inferior status just based on your own bias.
That would suck. You have my sympathy, Slacker (and octo too, if that’s how you feel). Though not enough to keep me from mocking you when you say something really, really dumb.
For shits and giggles I decided to see how /r/slatestarcodex was handling the Sargon ban, and got a face full of someone unironically offering “first they came for…” in his defense.
What the ever loving fuck.
Yep, better than what I said.
As an aside, I have to sincerely thank you for your support in this tread. I do try to write better in English, but it is really sad to see “natives” failing on reading comprehension (not of my writing, I’m referring here about the articles that me and even they cite) and to see that they depend on misleading sources of information, from non peer reviewed articles, or opinions that are not from experts even.
Kimstu, it looks to me like it is you who is not terribly familiar with the American Left. I am, because my kinship group is swarming with them.
Looking at our bookshelf right now, I see my wife (Masters in sociology) has a tome on there titled Capitalism and Social Theory.
My father, a Marxist anthropologist, owned every volume of Kapital and read them regularly, along with behaviorist screeds like Walden Two. He and my mother had great sympathy for groups like the Weather Underground.
My mom voted for Nader in ‘96 (most people don’t even realize he ran then) and of course ‘00 and ‘04. In 2016 she voted for looney Jill Stein, calling Hillary Clinton a “dangerous war monger” and insisting that “Much of what is happening in the Middle East (including ISIS) is due to our interventions there.” :rolleyes:
Just this week, my 18yo son emailed me a screed (even though I keep telling him we shouldn’t talk about politics) that included this: “neoliberal trade agreements, us-backed regime change (both propped up by bipartisan consensus), and climate crises induced by the us over the past few decades have disrupted life in central america and have been a major cause of the economic devastation that has led to massive immigration and refugee crises at our border.” About a year ago, halfway through his senior year of high school, he told me he had changed his mind on Sam Harris (whom he had previously liked due to my influence), saying “He seems like a bit of a pretentious, racist pseudo-intellectual. Chomsky rekt him.” :smack:
Then there’s my Facebook feed. Constant barrages of Democracy Now! and truthout links. My friends seem to spend more time bemoaning the “neoliberal” Democrats who are beholden to the “donor class” than the GOP, which—call me crazy—strikes me as the actual clear and present danger. Somehow they are STILL excoriating Hillary Clinton as evil incarnate. (As Bill Maher wryly noted, anyone who hates Hillary so much must have been molested by a realtor.)
It’s true we don’t have anyone like that prat Jeremy Corbyn in a high political position in this country, thank goodness; but all the aforementioned ADORE him and desperately wish we did.
Wait, hang on - aren’t you in the “stupidity is genetic” camp?
Touche 
I don’t think the dynamic here is particularly hard to understand. Everyone these people talk to already knows that the republicans are a real and present danger. What they don’t often understand is that in the typical leftist framing, the democrats are also really bad for a lot of the same reasons. Name a really shitty policy in the US, and chances are that the democrats aren’t exactly angels on it. Mass incarceration? War on drugs? “Regime change”? Financial deregulation? The republicans are worse on all of those issues by a wide margin, but their position is so far from “good” that there’s still plenty of room to differentiate yourself from them and still look pretty awful. “Better than the republicans” is a painfully low bar to clear. One recent example: a democratic congresswoman (can’t recall which one or find the tweet at the moment) who said “Healthcare is a right and should be affordable for everyone who works”. Which is just… :smack: Fucking christ, this is our best and brightest hope?
(All that said, though - if they can’t wrap their heads around the reality that the lesser evil is still a moral imperative and the greens don’t stand a fucking chance of winning, they’re still pretty fucking dumb, make no mistake.)
Right, but it’s a special kind of “dumb”. My dad had a Ph.D. from Stanford. My mom has a Ph.D. from a top tier Research I public university. My son scores in the 98th percentile on standardized tests. My Facebook friends are almost all highly educated as well. But they all suffer from a certain sort of “ivory tower stupidity”, and that research finding is quite interesting in that regard.
At least they don’t suffer from your “Nordic ethnic warrior/white man’s burden” stupidity. And glad to see that your son hasn’t (apparently) inherited your racist beliefs.
I knew you’d love that asinine “rekt” comment, which was a dagger to my heart. :smack:
You’re probably an equal embarrassment to your kid. Maybe, you should tell him you’ve upped your Sam Harris donations “to own the libs.”
Yeah, that’s a phrase I’ve used approximately never.
:rolleyes: Holding “radical far-left” views by non-US political standards doesn’t mean simply having read Marxist books or using some Marxist social-science methodologies. It means actually endorsing the positions of a genuinely radical leftist party, such as a Communist or anarchist group.
And even the mild Marxist sympathies you describe in your parents sound much more extreme than the views we see here from mainstream left-liberals such as iiandyiiii. So again, it is kind of ridiculous that you think a British psychology study of “radicals” with “extremist political views” has any bearing on what iiandyiiii says.
Once again, it’s hilarious that you believe this sort of thing qualifies as in any way representative of “radicals” with “extremist political views” by non-US standards.