Posted on 10/17/2007 1:36:52 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
What possible testing can he be talking about? There are too many variables involved in any comparison to draw any rational conclusion. Another buffoon with a nobel prize.
Which Black people is he talking about. Science tells us that there is more genetic diversity within Africa than there is in the entire remainder of the world. This article does not make much sense.
“What field is AlGore an expert in?”
Any field where you’ve spread a lot of manure.
That is as old as the hills.
No disrespect intended.
BUMP
In general, German Shepherd dogs are “more intelligent” than Welsh Springer Spaniels...
...until you ask them both to hunt. The former thinks it is a game and will have great fun chasing the game. The latter takes it as a profession and will reliably flush game for Master to shoot. And if Master is too stupid to do the job, the latter will gladly bring home a few for him.
Comparisons like “intelligence” are unhelpful because it is an unfair and incomplete measure, and is always set within a given context.
I would rather be stuck in the Outback with an illiterate Aborigine than with a Doctor of Philosophy from Finland. Something tells me I’d eat more often and stay alive longer with the former than with the latter.
I like that one!
“Hello,” lied the politician.
You posted: Even if Watson is correct, and no one can even define intelligence so I dont know how he can be, knowing someones ethnicity tells you very little about the individual.
***
You have made the important point here. There are certainly enough highly intelligent blacks and stupid whites that intelligence is a matter that has to be assessed on an individual and not a racial basis.
That said, I don’t know what the science may prove, but it seems to me that in the absence of evidence on either side, we should wait for the science to determine the answer.
Finally, why should science be concerned with social perceptions? If it turns out to be true that, as a race, blacks are less intelligent, as proven by valid scientific methods, should that science be censored?
Sort of like saying that we shouldn't reject the hypothesis that perhaps men have an inherent advantage in math, physics and peeing across the room?
Group differences in pigmentation, leaping ability and susceptibility to certain diseases are widely accepted. Such differences (e.g., pigmentation) are often the defining characteristics of different groups.
Suppose (not at all counter-factually) that Blacks (with equal incomes) save less than Whites and are more likely to default on mortgages. This is a perfectly valid empirical statement. It doesn't mean that some Whites aren't deadbeat spendthrifts or that many Blacks are not frugal and responsible. Given the validity of the supposition posed, what should the public policy implications be?
Fortunately, in our personal day to day lives, we don't have to act on suppositions like this: in fact it would be unwise to do so. Rather we should treat people as individuals, rather than as the embodiment of racial, ethnic, sexual or other stereotypes. I, for one, think the government should act the same way. In a democracy, the political pressures to create favors for certain groups, however, is overwhelming.
I remember during the 1969 World Series, the JDL was picketting Shea Stadium, "demanding" that since one fifth of the population of New York City was Jewish, five of the members of the 25 man rooster of the New York Mets should be Jewish. (Oy!). They were lampooning the demand of certain media selected Black leaders, that since (whatever fraction was valid at the time) of the students in New York City schools were (select your minority) the same fraction of school teachers should be also.
Winning teams don't pick baseball players that way, and we shouldn't be picking teachers, doctors or engineers that way either.
Echos of “The Bell Curve”. Bill Cosby has been speaking out against the self imposed non-development of intelligence but it’s falling on def ears.
I find it funny that politicians who probably have at most maybe 24 credit hours of undergraduate science think they can comment on the scientific findings that Watson has access to on a groundbreaking and daily level.
The 79-year-old geneticist said he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really".
The interesting part here is, there is no need to actually test the population's IQ or any intelligence related "Q" of choice, you can soundly make some of these arguments simply knowing the available nutrition levels of the population as a geographic group, and the population's ancestor's access to nutrition. It's only a matter of time now before what Watson said here is confirmed in some more definitive manner, that is if the PC politicians don't shut down any facility that gets close to this issue. I doubt the PC brigades will be able to hold the line here, parents/customers of designer babies will require that in vitro IQ testing be performed, and the gene sequences will have to be studied thoroughly. The market will find the answer,the genie will be out of the bottle.
That was my point. He's not an expert in anything other than politics (and in that he's a loser). So why did he get a Nobel prize? Why should anyone listen to him?
It’s an old argument of nature or nurture. I would tend towards the nurture argument and with the black race in total collapse (from the “nurture” and societal angle) which ends up producing the kinds of societal misfits in which one sees such a significant number (i.e., “percentage”) of their males in prison, as compared to the rest of the population.
Apparently Watson thinks it’s in a gene. It appears to be (to me) in their (sub) society and its total collapse.
Regards,
Star Traveler
So, how about who functions better in today’s society as contributing and functioning human being, operating within our given societal norms. You could start by asking the large population (percentage) of blacks in prison why they got there...?? Is it “white oppression”? Is that it?
And would you be choosing people of that group, “race-wise” to use as an example of how to function well in our society?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.