Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by smallman, Aug 28, 2005.
especially those inclined to racist/sexist beliefs
This has been discussed before, darling. Click on any other Et Cetera, Et Cetera thread with "race" or "Affirmative Action" in the title, and feel free to up them.
Scientific research should not be discouraged merely because we dont necessarily like the answers it provides. Please remember that it is the duty of scientists to ask impertinent questions and find answers to those questions using the scientific method. At this time, I dont adopt the authors views, but neither do I reject them. I argue for more research. We dont have enough evidence to come to a conclusion as to whether there are any group differences or not. The point the author was trying to make is that this is a genuine line of inquiry that is being stifled by left leaning academics merely because the hypothesis is politically incorrect. The author has a point when he rejects the Lefts absolute rejection of the possibility of genuine differences between the races and sexes based purely on the ideology of absolute equality. In the same breath, however, I must reject the Rights desire to impose creationism, or in general, religious ideology, in academia. They are both strands of the same nonsense; the imposition of ideology over science. Once again I must emphasize that it is the duty of scientists to ask impertinent questions. Darwins theories, in his time, must have seemed just as shocking and offensive, but they have served us well. I suggest that we should allow scientists to investigate this line of inquiry and ultimately if the scientific method is properly applied and reviewed, and if politics is put aside, the truth, whatever it may be, shall prevail.
...no matter how those "average properties" arise.
When I was in college, Arthur Jensen did a speaking tour of campuses in Australia. When I say "speaking tour", that was an overstatement--a rowdy group of protesters hired a bus to follow him from place to place and disrupt his lectures, which they did successfully in all places but one. I studied at the university where he was able to speak; Jensen took a plane and the protesor's bus was left behind. The crowd was still pretty hostile, though.
In all, what he said was unremarkable. There are differences in all kinds of measures amongst genders and races. He refrained from political comment.
What he didn't say at the time was what Murray so sensibly points out in his article. The differences within groups outweigh the differences between them. So we need to be careful to allow opportunities for the best to rise, no matter where they come from.
That said, for whatever reason, the elites may never represent the true mix of the population. So what?
We spend far too much time in America focussed on the elites and not enough time tending to our own backyards.
Which is more important--more women in the Harvard math faculty, or equal pay for equal work? The stats show we don't have either, and I don't think reforming the Harvard math faculty helps, say, a black female manager in a supermarket get the same opportunity as a white male to run the store.
On the shop floor, any modest difference in the natural abilities of either gender are far overshadowed by other factors. Like hard work, diligence, wisdom. Things which ARE affected by the environment in which you live and grow up. So let's fix that.
Bell curves show us this. Differences at the extreme are proportionally the greatest. Differences between averages are proportionally the smallest. As civilised nations, let's start acting like the average is more important than the extreme. And let it drive public policy.
I remember Murray's The Bell Curve. I love some of the citations, including:
*Bouchard's MZA study which proved that not only is intelligence hereditary, but also religiosity, political orientation, and leisure-time interests. Of course, Bouchard doesn't let anyone in on his twins' life stories, but so goes.
*Many out-of-their-field types like Shockley.
*Psychologists discredited over 50 years ago, such as Burt.
*Rushton, who actually argued for a negative correlation between penis size and intelligence. (And other things, but he demonstrably lies about those other things. His penis size study was self-measured samples from a Toronto mall, and he provided no data for IQ.)
He's not as bad as this guy I found on usenet who actually claimed black IQs were 8 standard deviations below whites. Yes, that's right: The average black student has a negative IQ.
I don't find the acknowledgement of differences to be "racist" or "sexist."
I know, I just wanted to raise some people's blood pressure.