Interesting podcast conversation between Sam Harris and Charles Murray (of "Bell Curve" fame)

The BBQ Pit
1481

My impulse was to retort that EE’s last couple posts are not exactly a sign of high intelligence, but that’s not quite right. I was thrown off the trail for a while by the SN he uses, but I think I’ve got him figured out (I say “him” because this is part of the profile I’ve assembled).

I think he’s actually probably smart for his age, but pretty young—12 to 14 would be my estimate. That would explain why he can string sentences together, yet has such a proclivity for taunting and making juvenile challenges.

Less likely but still possible is that he is like an old friend of mine, who got hit by a bus his freshman year of college. He sustained a serious head injury, which left him childlike in some ways but still intelligent in others. Autism could be another explanation.

Anyway, just FYI: intelligent, sophisticated people don’t believe there are “unbiased third parties” in this universe. Not ones made out of meat, anyway. And my refusing to engage with unsourced numbers does not constitute an assertion that those numbers are wrong, meaning if you can later prove them accurate, you’ve “got me”. It simply means I’m not even going to attempt to evaluate them without sourcing. That’s SOP in any online debate.

1482

Lotta weasel words there.

Coulda just said that you don’t have the balls to stand behind your words.

1483

Yep, the slacker can find support just for his half truth and he pretends that that is the end of it. As the studies cited show, federal money is only a part of it, important, but not the most important one. Leaving the conclusion of the studies cited to remain standing. Other reports and researchers reach very similar conclusions:

(PDF file: )

Bruce D. Baker, Rutgers University
Danielle Farrie, Education Law Center
David Sciarra, Education Law Center

1484

Yes, having fifty state education systems and then all the myriad local districts sucks. I said from the beginning that I would prefer a national education system as in France. (Although that could be scary right now; that looks a lot better in a country where you have no chance of getting a leader like Trump.). But the original disputed assertion that got us into this extremely boring sidebar was only ever about funding “within the same district”, and not limited to state and local money. Period.

1485

Again, it was a half truth to claim that minority students had almost the same funding. As pointed, that is close to the truth when comparing the same district, but a misleading statement that ignored the big picture. It was clear that you wanted later to claim that minorities or the poor were getting basically the same funding. Hence you were wrong by insisting that Federal funding was missing from the studies, it implied that the missing federal funding was enough to support your overall point. It was not.

As it turns out, it was not for reasons to annoy you, but because federal funding by its nature is less discriminatory when supporting students. But it is not the main funding source, again: state and local funding has the lion’s share.

So you were indeed wrong, what others like me told you is the whole truth. In the USA there are many districts that are short-changing large percentages of low-income and minority students.

And Murray and their ilk are not only racists, but wilful ignorants by ignoring data that does not support their solutions.

1486

This is some bang up detective work, especially considering that he’s a member and his join date of 2009 is on the right side of every one of his posts. Truly you’re showing off your superior northern European genes for intelligence.

1487

Maybe check again, Sherlock. Your posts say “Member”; his say “Guest”. Neither of you have a join date anywhere on your posts on my iPhone screen. Maybe those appear on a desktop browser or Android; on my iOS Chrome browser, they do not.

And I did advance other hypotheses. Something has to explain his immaturity, after all. There are plenty of unpleasant people kicking about this thread, but none I can think of other than EE who engage in such juvenile antics.

ETA: Punching out for the weekend. Back Monday evening.

1488

Oops, you’re right, he’s a Guest, but his join date is still clear on computer browsers, and easy to find on phones for those actually interested in looking. Of course, if you were just trying to mock EE (and inadvertently made yourself look very stupid by missing the join date), then carry on.

1489

Ehh, I got sucked into the silliness yet again. Never mind.

Please stop advocating for the inherent superiority of some ethnic groups over others. It’s not only based on pseudoscience (only cranks like Murray, not actual reputable scientists, are advocating the average superiority of specific ethnic groups over others), but it’s hurting the world, just a little bit at a time.

1490

Sometimes, that’s the feature.

1491

To be fair, “**EE **started posting here when he was 3 years old” *is *one of SlackerInc’s better theories.

1492

So many excuses, but Occam’s razor says you know you’re full of shit.

At what point do we lower the stakes enough that you’re willing to stand behind your words? How about:

[ul]
[li]2 separate posters have to agree that I have a reasonable basis for the numbers in my post–how about **Monty **(he’s a mod) and **Kimstu **(you’ve run to her for help before). If either of them doesn’t want to do it, **iiandyiii **has argued with you, but he has a pretty good reputation[/li][li]I have to support every number in my post, instead of just the one you pick[/li][li]I have to support *both *my word usage in the first post and every number in my second post[/li][li]If you lose all you have to do is make a single post that says “I admit that I have a below-average IQ”[/li][/ul]

Those are some pretty low stakes, don’t you think? Hard for you to justify not taking the bet.

1493

Long weekend, is it?

1494

Update - article in the NY Times Meet the Renegades of the Intellectual Dark Web: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/opinion/intellectual-dark-web.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Harris is featured, along side a few other intellectuals, but just as many bomb throwers.

1495

I will check it out! Thanks.

1496
  1. Josh Marshall on twitter.

[INDENT][INDENT] I know everyone’s been dragging this clownish/preening Intellectual Dark Web piece. I was struck by Weiss’s description of the group’s exploding audience and how it’s making an end run around the “msm”. Now when she says that she’s at least partly talking about the groups …

2/ Individual audiences. But the premise is that the group itself and the website is really taking off. I looked at it and it looked to me like another vanity site no one looks at but obviously I’m not the audience. So I looked it up on Alexa, a good public measure of audience.

3/ Now Alexa is far from perfect. But it’s a decent apples to apples comparison, to give you at least a broad sense. Okay. So TPM, the site where I work, has an audience we’re very proud of. But it’s a boutique site. It’s not mass audience.

4/ Were listed as the 1406th most popular site in the US. So then I was thinking what’s a really low traffic site but one that still has people come to it. I thought of @GradysColdBrew the folks who make the cold brew ice coffee I’m addicted to and who also is the sponsor …

5/ of our podcast. Go Grady’s! They’re 283,000th most popular site in the US. Now Grady’s aint Folgers. It’s a high end coffee for people who need the awesomest coffee. So you don’t expect them to have a really intensely trafficked website. I mean, you go on and find out about…

**6/ Grady’s and your done or you go on to order. You’re not like going to be checking the site a few times a day to get the latest news. Okay, so we’re number 1406. They’re number 283k. And where the http://Intellectualdark.website ? They’re number 731k! Good lord, no one is visiting …
**

7/ that site. And this is after a few days of traffic from that silly NYT piece. Now, I’m not trying to traffic shame anyone. There are lots of great sites that only have a tiny audience or are growing or whatever else. But a little truth in advertising maybe.

8/ They’ve done such an endrun around the MSM that no actual person has ever visited this site, even though the article makes it like it’s the hot new thing everyone is checking out. [/INDENT][/INDENT] Emphasis added. x.com

BTW Alexa ranks the dope at 16,311 globally and 4,980 in the US. Not quite TPM levels. But way above the 731,000 IDW rank.

https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/straightdope.com

  1. Sheesh, I’ll see if I can redo my earlier analysis, now that some time has opened up. Curse you Wordman for reopening this thread!! :smiley:
1497

I’ve never heard of that site. But how does Sam Harris rate by these measures? I know his podcast was at least at one time one of the top ranked in the science category.

1498

https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/samharris.org

samharris.org is 10,789 in the US.

1499

Not that facts matter in this thread, but just an example on how stupid the racist labels are, even “Celt” isn’t a genetic descriptor.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14230.epdf

Not that it will change the minds of people who are convinced that “white” is really a thing, even if they can’t define it.

1500

Nathan J. Robinson at Current Affairs: Pretty Loud For Being So Silenced ❧ Current Affairs Emphasis in original, go to article for links:

[indent][indent]Weiss uses the nation’s paper of record to introduce audiences to a group of people whose voices are supposedly being kept out of mainstream institutions, but who for some reason I seem to hear about all the damn time. …

In fact, all of the persecuted intellectuals appear constantly in major outlets with huge reach. Whether it’s Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson appearing on HBO’s Real Time, Christina Hoff Sommers writing for Slate, The Atlantic, and the New York Times, Milo going on CNN, Bret Weinstein being interviewed on FOX News, Andrew Sullivan being racist in New York magazine, Peterson getting invited on the NBC Nightly News, or Ben Shapiro being profiled in the New York Times, not one of these individuals ever seems to lack for a mainstream perch from which to squawk. …

Here’s another reason why I’m skeptical that our national Martyrs for Free Speech and Rational Debate are interested in actually debating ideas: I’ve tried to get them to do it. … [/indent][/indent] Author has written critical pieces of these clowns and receives snarky twitter responses. Author is invited to debates and has them fall through when opponents demand $15,000 speaker fees. Also: [indent][indent]We can also tell how little they care about serious debate from their total refusal to rationally engage with advocates of the social justice/ identity politics position that so horrifies them. In his debate with Sam Harris, Ezra Klein made an important observation: in 120 episodes, Harris had only ever had two African American guests. Harris then replied that he had had former Reagan administration official Glenn Loury on specifically to discuss racism, but suggested that he chose Loury specifically because he wanted someone who didn’t hold the views Harris disdains. That’s so often the case with critics of social justice: I pointed out recently that when David Brooks attempted to “engage” with the campus activist position, he didn’t do so by reading a book or speaking to an actual human being, but by inventing an imaginary caricature in his head and then arguing with it. [/indent][/indent]
To be fair, this doesn’t demonstrate that Sam Harris is wrong, merely that he’s a self-pitying asshole who lives in a bubble.