4 ms·
Where in the link is "race-realism" mentioned? "These guys", who are you talking about? It seems to me like you took one look at the guys name and decided you
by ac2u 9y ago
Where in the link is "race-realism" mentioned?
"These guys", who are you talking about?
It seems to me like you took one look at the guys name and decided you were going to leave a "here be dragons" style comment to sully the conversation. The only problem is that your comment came across as lazy.
You might not like certain followers that you may have come across, you might even be right about them, but it's cheap and nasty to lump someone in with such a disgusting accusation (and done so casually) based on that rather than his own words.
I doubt you'd like to be held to account if someone of questionable character liked a blog post of yours and then someone else plastered you with an identity because of it.
- jgh 9y agoI edited my comment above to make my point more relevant.
- ac2u 9y agoI don't see how it's more relevant at all. The posted submission simply makes the argument of invalidating EQ while showing the rigor behind IQ as a general predictor. You decided to turn that into "some horrible people use this to back up some horrible beliefs, therefore this guy is one of them", and then in your edit you went "here is an example of one of those horrible beliefs". Not to mention the fact that he specifically addresses in his text that IQ is not the only predictor, just an incredibly strong one. However, nothing you said addresses that. Which makes me think that you either didn't read it, or you hoped that your comment would be enough to influence other people to avoid reading his quora answer for themselves. You're basically still lumping him in with horrible people just because some horrible people might use a subset of his argument out of context to try to back up shitty beliefs. It's an incredibly disingenuous practice to take a subset of someone's argument, correlate it with a horrible group of people and their arguments and then try to apply that identity to that person. Again, you'd be disgusted if someone did it to you.
- fenomas 9y agoIf it makes things any clearer, the author of the quora comment is apparently a figure in various culture wars, so I imagine GP's opinions about him are coming from things he's said elsewhere, not just what's in TFA. (I only know this because there was a brief furore about him the other day - he got locked out of his youtube account, purportedly for his conservative views, or somesuch.)
- ac2u 9y agoPersonally, I'm aware of the debates that he's been engaged in outside of the scope of the EQ/IQ topic. However, even taking that into consideration, you have to take an oceanic leap to get from that to branding someone a "white nationalist". Also, through self-admission: not to mention any time I hear about Jordan Peterson it's in the context of alt-right nonsense. ...their opinions have more been informed by what they've been told to think about him rather anything they've claimed he's said or done. My passioned response to this is to call-out the behavior of how trivially people like to lob these accusations without any empathy as to how it could easily be done to themselves.
- fenomas 9y agoFair enough, just checking. I don't think the guy's very widely known, but from what I saw the other day people who have opinions about him seem to have very strong ones.
- sheepmullet 9y agoThe author states basic scientific facts and the regressive left hate him for it. They are the lefts equivalent of the rights climate change deniers.