5 ms·

Ignoring reality is the worst possible option. Regarding your assertion, judging an individual by their collective group average is wrong. I'm a big proponent o

by mrmffh 10y ago

Ignoring reality is the worst possible option. Regarding your assertion, judging an individual by their collective group average is wrong. I'm a big proponent of research in this area - because I want to change it. For e.g. Black Americans have an IQ, on average, 15 points lower than white Americans. I want more research on this area, so it can be improved. Calling people racists (without evidence) shuts down any meaningful conversation, and hurts those who need the most help.

peteretep 10y ago
> I want more research on this area, so it can be > improved Somehow it sounds more obviously ridiculous when you rephrase it and start looking for "solutions" to improving the intelligence of all white people. Small differences between very large, heterogenous populations gives you virtually no predictive power about individuals or how to help them, but do facilitate subtle and overt racism, however well-meaning it might be.
- mrmffh 10y ago
  On what evidence can you say that more research won't/can't help? [1 SD is not a 'small difference'. (2 SD's if you compare to Ashkenazic Jews).]
  - peteretep 10y ago
    > On what evidence can you say that more research > won't/can't help On what basis can you say it will? These studies have known drawbacks in that they serve as a rallying point for all sorts of discrimination masquerading as high-minded discourse, and we're yet to see a benefit so far, so the burden of proof here is on you. At least part of the problem here is given two children / job-applicants / defendants / whatever, who are absolutely identical in every way except for a specific cosmetic phenotype, what possible justification is there for treating them differently based on correlation between that phenotype and some other characteristic over a large population?
    - nitrogen 10y ago
      You are all over this thread putting words in people's mouths instead of discussing what they are actually saying. You are even painting an entire class of study with a broad brush in a guilt-by-association way. Are you sure that's actually helping your case and the conversation here?
      - peteretep 10y ago
        What's an example of words I'm putting in someone's mouth? Perhaps you could reply specifically to a case where you believe I'm doing that?
    - wtbob 10y ago
      > These studies have known drawbacks in that they serve as a rallying point for all sorts of discrimination masquerading as high-minded discourse, and we're yet to see a benefit so far, so the burden of proof here is on you. You're arguing for deliberate ignorance because reality is uncomfortable. > At least part of the problem here is given two children / job-applicants / defendants / whatever, who are absolutely identical in every way except for a specific cosmetic phenotype, what possible justification is there for treating them differently based on correlation between that phenotype and some other characteristic over a large population? If two people are identical in every observable way, and that single observable way indicates a strong difference between them, why wouldn't one differentiate based on that single observation? They are, after all, indifferentiable in every other way. Indeed, mathematically speaking if one ignores the single useful datum you posit, then one will make worse decisions: if you have no other data and just flip a coin between greens and blues in your thought experiment a few posts back, then you will choose worse than if you bias your coin towards greens. That's just a fact; whether you choose to ignore it based on the discomfort it causes you is up to you.
      - peteretep 10y ago
        A 10% difference between the populations they're chosen from does not indicate a strong difference between them.

by mrmffh 10y ago

peteretep 10y ago

> I want more research on this area, so it can be > improved Somehow it sounds more obviously ridiculous when you rephrase it and start looking for "solutions" to improving the intelligence of all white people. Small differences between very large, heterogenous populations gives you virtually no predictive power about individuals or how to help them, but do facilitate subtle and overt racism, however well-meaning it might be.

mrmffh 10y ago
On what evidence can you say that more research won't/can't help? [1 SD is not a 'small difference'. (2 SD's if you compare to Ashkenazic Jews).]
- peteretep 10y ago
  > On what evidence can you say that more research > won't/can't help On what basis can you say it will? These studies have known drawbacks in that they serve as a rallying point for all sorts of discrimination masquerading as high-minded discourse, and we're yet to see a benefit so far, so the burden of proof here is on you. At least part of the problem here is given two children / job-applicants / defendants / whatever, who are absolutely identical in every way except for a specific cosmetic phenotype, what possible justification is there for treating them differently based on correlation between that phenotype and some other characteristic over a large population?
  - nitrogen 10y ago
    You are all over this thread putting words in people's mouths instead of discussing what they are actually saying. You are even painting an entire class of study with a broad brush in a guilt-by-association way. Are you sure that's actually helping your case and the conversation here?
    - peteretep 10y ago
      What's an example of words I'm putting in someone's mouth? Perhaps you could reply specifically to a case where you believe I'm doing that?
  - wtbob 10y ago
    > These studies have known drawbacks in that they serve as a rallying point for all sorts of discrimination masquerading as high-minded discourse, and we're yet to see a benefit so far, so the burden of proof here is on you. You're arguing for deliberate ignorance because reality is uncomfortable. > At least part of the problem here is given two children / job-applicants / defendants / whatever, who are absolutely identical in every way except for a specific cosmetic phenotype, what possible justification is there for treating them differently based on correlation between that phenotype and some other characteristic over a large population? If two people are identical in every observable way, and that single observable way indicates a strong difference between them, why wouldn't one differentiate based on that single observation? They are, after all, indifferentiable in every other way. Indeed, mathematically speaking if one ignores the single useful datum you posit, then one will make worse decisions: if you have no other data and just flip a coin between greens and blues in your thought experiment a few posts back, then you will choose worse than if you bias your coin towards greens. That's just a fact; whether you choose to ignore it based on the discomfort it causes you is up to you.
    - peteretep 10y ago
      A 10% difference between the populations they're chosen from does not indicate a strong difference between them.