Well, we pretty much all agree that Downs Syndrome exists, so I think we knew going into this thread that there was some genetic component. It's not begging th

Well, we pretty much all agree that Downs Syndrome exists, so I think we knew going into this thread that there was some genetic component. It's not begging the question, if you're going to concede the point that it's not a question of if, but how much. Are you also in denial of genetic, epigenetic, and in-utero biological factors affecting behavior in large mammals and highly intelligent animals? I should hope not. Are you in denial of biological factors affecting social organization behaviors in such animals? Are you asking for a special exception to all the above for Homo sapiens for reasons of ideology? In that case, I'm not the one begging the question here. I'm just not interested in your politics, sorry. If you're politicizing science, then you are interested in such politics. So is your position now that the effect is nonzero, but it can't be much larger because of ideological/aesthetic reasons? What I'm asking for is less politicization of science. Science has gotten politicized in the US and much of the west, to the point where people can be un-personed for wrongthink. Ideas should be tested and bad ideas should be debunked. Suppressing words and ideas for the sake of feelings is the real danger. Incitement and other real harms are ultimately fueled by strong feelings combined with de-personalization, not by cold rationality.