Can we ever understand each other?

[GoneA]

Originally posted by madame_zora@Oct 23 2005, 02:09 AM
See, that's the problem with so many things we discuss, even here. Personally, I am not offended by this study or it's results. There aren't too many such studies I care enough to be offended by, but it's the dolts who think that their results mean more than they do that irritate me.

As soon as someone can produce an IQ test that measures intelligence irrespective of education, I'll be interested to see the implied differences in whatever sub-categories of human beings they decide to separate from the pack. As long as it's groups of predominantly white, well educated men out to prove that their own sub category is still superior (and here's why&#33, I'm bored shitless. Not OFFENDED, just bored.

[post=354375]Quoted post[/post]​

**Professor reads excerpt from Madame Zora's paper aloud**

A+. Fantastic job

 

[DC_DEEP]

Some parts of some IQ tests DO accurately measure some aspects of intelligence, but most instruments are strongly biased by the person or team that developed it. Recognition of patterns is a good measure, but it is not the only measure. Items such as "what number follows: 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, ___" work well, but questions like "what is missing in this drawing?" are entirely subjective. I have seen the "missing item" question in the Stanford-Binet instrument. I could see many different things missing in the drawing, and chose one, but it was not what the designer of the instrument was looking for - so although in a sense, my response WAS correct, it was marked as an incorrect response. I had never taken an intelligence survey before, but did it for a friend who was working on her Master's degree in psychology and counseling. We discussed my correct and incorrect answers, and she agreed that the drawing was misleading, but had to score it as incorrect anyway. (My response was that in the line drawing of the woman, the ears were missing. The "correct" response was eyebrows.) Another portion of the test involved her reading a sequence of numbers, which I was to repeat back, sometimes backward. That really tests memory and "field dependence/field independence", not really a measure of intelligence but of information processing style. I doubt there is really any objective way to measure intelligence accurately.

 

[steve319]

Exactly. What good is a testing instrument where the examinee must be from the same ethnic, cultural, gender, and socio-economic subgroup as the designer?

Not much.

 

[madame_zora]

I've taken a multitude of tests. There has yet to be developed an IQ test that can measure the intelligence of a person, that is the capacity to hold knowledge, separately from the amount of knowledge the person has accumulated. A person's education cannot be a part of their innate intelligence, by definition! Therefore, in view of the flimsiness of the instruments being used, I must view with suspicion any conclusions drawn from such a study.

Before I even get there, I have a need to ask why. Why was the study done, what was the intention? I am not offended by a scientists "need to know" but why wasn't it an Ethiopian woman scientist who was interested in why white men do better on iq tests?
Was there any interest in social contributors to test results? Was it a straight assumtion that higher iq equals some sort of social superiority? I know they claim that's not the case, but then what was it? It stinks of desperation that a group of white men get together and issue tests using an instrument already well known to yeild better results for white men and then claim that presenting said results yet again has some relevance. I just want to know what that relevance might be.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Originally posted by madame_zora@Oct 24 2005, 02:22 AM
I've taken a multitude of tests. There has yet to be developed an IQ test that can measure the intelligence of a person, that is the capacity to hold knowledge, separately from the amount of knowledge the person has accumulated. A person's education cannot be a part of their innate intelligence, by definition! Therefore, in view of the flimsiness of the instruments being used, I must view with suspicion any conclusions drawn from such a study.

Before I even get there, I have a need to ask why. Why was the study done, what was the intention? I am not offended by a scientists "need to know" but why wasn't it an Ethiopian woman scientist who was interested in why white men do better on iq tests?
...I just want to know what that relevance might be.

[post=354760]Quoted post[/post]​

You should add to your response that IQ is the capacity to hold, and process knowledge.

Expanding on my earlier example of mathmatical progressions in IQ tests: even those can seem pretty objective on the surface, but have a bias. If the progression were "what is the next number in this series? 1, 3, 5, 7, ___?" there are two answers - if you are thinking odd numbers, the answer would be "9". If you are expecting prime numbers, the answer would be "11". Neither answer is WRONG, but the tests only permit ONE correct answer, and if you looked at the progression differently than did the author of the test, you would be SCORED as wrong.

I also see this as a problem with putting so much emphasis on achievement testing in the schools. Such testing in necessary, but the results are weighed too heavily and used improperly. I scored very highly on the NTE when I took it, both in the general knowledge and specialty areas, but I saw many many questions which truly could have had more than one correct answer. Fortunately, I suppose, I chose enough of the "expected" answers. Those who chose the other "correct" answers were not necessarily "less knowledgable", just seeing something from a different point of view.

 

[B_HappyHammer1977]

Originally posted by ChimeraTX+Oct 22 2005, 01:22 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ChimeraTX &#064; Oct 22 2005, 01:22 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-HappyHammer1977@Oct 21 2005, 08:06 AM
Nearly all of us through our lineage have been immigrants of some sort.  To insult another is to insult yourself.

[post=353866]Quoted post[/post]​

That is a ridiculous statement. Blood transends migratory status; thus is would not be self-deprecating to favor immigrants of a similar ancestry over those without.

Also, quite a simple way to ignore and deny the situation.

[post=354047]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]


So by saying that, I presume you are 100% Texan and can trace all your heritage back hundreds of years? How?&#33; (Pun intended)

 

[jonb]

Rather simply, look at ANY DNA study. DNA&#39;s all over the map. Gambians are closer to Japanese than they are to Ethopians or other east Africans, for example.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Originally posted by jonb@Oct 24 2005, 10:30 PM
Rather simply, look at ANY DNA study. DNA&#39;s all over the map. Gambians are closer to Japanese than they are to Ethopians or other east Africans, for example.

[post=355021]Quoted post[/post]​

Not to mention that, unless you actually have a family wreath instead of a family tree, tracing one ancestor recursively and paternally, is really of little use in trying to determine one&#39;s racial purity.

 

[jonb]

Originally posted by HappyHammer1977@Oct 24 2005, 06:23 AM
So by saying that, I presume you are 100% Texan and can trace all your heritage back hundreds of years? How?&#33; (Pun intended)

[post=354839]Quoted post[/post]​

Interesting aside; hau seems to be derivative of another, probably dead, language. The evidence is the use of the diphthong. Lakota has eight vowels: a, e, i, o, u, ã, &#297;, and &#361;. And no diphthongs, other than that one use of au.

Okay, maybe not so interesting.

 

[jonb]

Originally posted by DC_DEEP+Oct 24 2005, 06:33 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DC_DEEP &#064; Oct 24 2005, 06:33 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-jonb@Oct 24 2005, 10:30 PM
Rather simply, look at ANY DNA study. DNA&#39;s all over the map. Gambians are closer to Japanese than they are to Ethopians or other east Africans, for example.

[post=355021]Quoted post[/post]​

Not to mention that, unless you actually have a family wreath instead of a family tree, tracing one ancestor recursively and paternally, is really of little use in trying to determine one&#39;s racial purity.

[post=355022]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]
Very true. I had a citation somewhere about the Y-chromosome. Had all kinds of data, but I can&#39;t find it now. I do remember that, though.

Another problem is of course population bottlenecks. There have been Y-chromosomes and mtDNAs found in precolumbian America which don&#39;t exist now. Like half the haplotypes.

 

[Dr. Dilznick]

Originally posted by ChimeraTX
Inasmuch as religiosity has often shown a negative correlation with I.Q. (a common measure of "stupidity" to many) and Texas has one of the highest manifestations of religiosity of any state, it would be logical to assume that Texans are more stupid than other Americans.

If you even want to put it into a worldly view, Western culture really began to blossom scientifically as it became more secular, while the opposite is true for Islamic societies, which were very innovative in science in the days of old theocratic states.

 

[Dr. Dilznick]

Originally posted by Dr. Dilznick+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dr. Dilznick)</div><div class='quotemain'>

Originally posted by Dr. Dilznick+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dr. Dilznick)</div><div class='quotemain'>

Originally posted by Jonb
There&#39;s also the fact that modern DNA studies go against your belief in a correlation between race and IQ.

If you have evidence, present it. Doubt it, though.
[/b]

JonB, answer please.
[/b]

Once again, JonB ducks out an argument he starts but can&#39;t be bothered to defend. Running scared when someone requests a little documentation. If you&#39;re going to act this childish, don&#39;t masquerade around as something more than a street corner clown juggling Corona bottles for pennies.



<!--QuoteBegin-ChimeraTX@
<!--QuoteBegin-jonb
Rather simply, look at ANY DNA study. DNA&#39;s all over the map. Gambians are closer to Japanese than they are to Ethopians or other east Africans, for example.

[post=355021]Quoted post[/post]​

[/quote] What in the heck are you talking about?

Maps:
Y-Chromosome (Global)
MTDNA (Global)
[/quote]
Seriously, what the fuck. That was without a doubt the worst post in forum history.

 

[B_Hung Muscle]

The worst?&#33; Ever?

Yikes&#33;

And, hey, don&#39;t juggle those Coronas before you give one to me.

 

[Dr. Dilznick]

He makes some pretty big claims but never supports them with evidence. Rips statements out of context and presents them as an indication of a scientist&#39;s opinion. Lacks the ability to seriously look at any information that doesn&#39;t conform with his views. Exaggerates. That, and his love of the ad hominem argument.

If I posted information that modern DNA studies show no correlation between race and IQ, I&#39;d sure as hell document my sources. Without verifiable, academically accepted documentation it might as well be made up (which it probably is).


Another one of his gems:

Originally posted by jonb
Greeks are closer to Kalahari bushmen than they are to Englishmen. Englishmen themselves are closer to Selkups than they are to Greeks.

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

So, you have access to &#39;all&#39; the scientific literature available now?

Any scientist worth his/her salt wants to get personal recognition for writing papers and so publish them officially. However, the authors get their money through PAID SUBSCRIPTION. See the problem? All the sites that actually have information worth talking about need users to be members of a university body or have an Athens password or paid subscription (I ain&#39;t giving away mine&#33

 

[B_HappyHammer1977]

Originally posted by ChimeraTX+Oct 25 2005, 01:36 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ChimeraTX &#064; Oct 25 2005, 01:36 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-HappyHammer1977@Oct 24 2005, 09:23 AM
So by saying that, I presume you are 100% Texan and can trace all your heritage back hundreds of years? How?&#33; (Pun intended)

[post=354839]Quoted post[/post]​

LOL, not quite.

I am of English ancestry and I can trace my ancestry back hundreds of years though.

[post=354992]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]

There are many, of course, who instantly despise the English and all we stand for...

 

[Dr. Dilznick]

Originally posted by ORCABOMBER
So, you have access to &#39;all&#39; the scientific literature available now?

Any scientist worth his/her salt wants to get personal recognition for writing papers and so publish them officially. However, the authors get their money through PAID SUBSCRIPTION. See the problem? All the sites that actually have information worth talking about need users to be members of a university body or have an Athens password or paid subscription (I ain&#39;t giving away mine&#33

He&#39;s still in college if I recall correctly. How hard is it to copy/paste something?

If he doesn&#39;t have access he could at least list his sources. Did your teachers allow you to turn in research papers without documenting your sources? Mine didn&#39;t, in fact any paper turned in without accurate notes was considered plagiarized.

 

[Dr Rock]

Originally posted by HappyHammer1977@Oct 25 2005, 02:11 PM
There are many, of course, who instantly despise the English and all we stand for...

[post=355141]Quoted post[/post]​

what do the english stand for, just out of interest?

 

[B_HappyHammer1977]

Originally posted by Dr Rock+Oct 25 2005, 04:28 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dr Rock &#064; Oct 25 2005, 04:28 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-HappyHammer1977@Oct 25 2005, 02:11 PM
There are many, of course, who instantly despise the English and all we stand for...

[post=355141]Quoted post[/post]​

what do the english stand for, just out of interest?

[post=355157]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]

As in those who hate the inventors of Democracy. Those without a sense of humour. :hi:

 

[B_Hung Muscle]

Originally posted by Dr. Dilznick+Oct 25 2005, 09:42 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dr. Dilznick &#064; Oct 25 2005, 09:42 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-ORCABOMBER
So, you have access to &#39;all&#39; the scientific literature available now?

Any scientist worth his/her salt wants to get personal recognition for writing papers and so publish them officially. However, the authors get their money through PAID SUBSCRIPTION. See the problem? All the sites that actually have information worth talking about need users to be members of a university body or have an Athens password or paid subscription (I ain&#39;t giving away mine&#33

He&#39;s still in college if I recall correctly. How hard is it to copy/paste something?

If he doesn&#39;t have access he could at least list his sources. Did your teachers allow you to turn in research papers without documenting your sources? Mine didn&#39;t, in fact any paper turned in without accurate notes was considered plagiarized.

[post=355147]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]

I always love the kids who just make up sources out of whole cloth. I guess that&#39;s like inventing a new persona here...