3 ms·

I was actually warned by the HN administrator for saying something "True" and slightly negative about a race/culture. I threw a bit of "privilege" around becaus

I was actually warned by the HN administrator for saying something "True" and slightly negative about a race/culture. I threw a bit of "privilege" around because that race was basically my race. Perhaps it was also an example of "orthodox privilege." I'm Chinese, the topic was about educational fraud in China and I made a negative comment associating corruption and Chinese culture in general: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23781696 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23781696 I felt the reaction by dang was out of hand and overblown especially given the fact that he likely has no actual first hand knowledge about the topic. It's also a reaction that I feel is unique to the culture in the United States. Definitely, there are racial issues in the United States with issues like Floyd, but I'm not commenting about that issue, I'm talking about freedom of speech and when it's appropriate to say things that are the result of "orthodox privilege." The united states is one of the least racist countries in the world. This is a very commendable trait that every citizen should be proud of but every citizen should also be aware that in being the least racist country in the world, the United States, as a result, also has one of the most irrational opinions on race and equality. A black person is generally bigger, taller and stronger than an asian person. Black people are so much further to the right with the bell curve on these traits that the olympic gold medals in strength based sports are typically taken by people of African descent while even rich countries like China with targeted programs to win gold medals rarely bring home gold for strength based sports. These are just biological generalities that are true and that are accepted that not all people/races are equal from a physical standpoint. However if I say an one race generally has higher biological IQ then another race... I crossed a line. What black magic allows people to be biologically different physically but doesn't allow them to be biologically different behaviorally or mentally? Sure, maybe none of the IQ differences are real and there might be research somewhere that normalizes racial IQ scores when you account for things like socioeconomic background... However, the backlash for even bringing up a topic on biological and racial IQ is outright vicious and as I said before: unique to the United States in terms of the level of intensity. There's definitely government oppression in China in terms of what you can and cannot talk about, but there's none of this irrational touchy touchy equality stuff you get in the United States. Speech in the united states is regulated by culture and society rather than centrally like in China.. It Changes the overall nature of what is censored and what you can and cannot talk about... For example if you're born with a big nose in China, that basically becomes your nickname in China. I literally have a friend with a big nose and everyone just calls him "Big Nose." I also have a friend in China who's fat and his Chinese nickname is Fatass. People just call him "Fatass" by name and it's considered slightly derogatory, inline with "Big Nose" but otherwise not a big deal because it's also the physical reality. This is in stark contrast to the states where there's a whole Body positivity movement is trying to change reality as we know it. I'm not going to comment on whether being obese is healthy or not, it could or it could not be... but I will say that the Body positivity movement exists not because of there's scientific proof that being obese can be healthy... it exists because people are so scared of being insensitive and having their precious feelings hurt that they want to rewrite reality into viewing fat obese people as culturally normal. Again this phenomenon is uniquely prevalent in the United States and not only unique to race and weight. Another example of this occurs in gender pronouns but let's not get into that, I'm sure you already get the point. I have a different conclusion than Paul. I would say that you're conventional minded if you're afraid to talk about or think about very real yet hard to stomach taboo topics that are True. Cultural biases caused by guilt from past injustices in the United States has taken hysteria and fear to unreasonable levels. I would tell Paul and anyone in a similar situation to take a good look at themselves. If you can't comfortably have a scientific conversation about biological IQ, weight, gender and race without fear of losing your job or offending someone how is that different from the christian religion making you feel uncomfortable talking about evolution and natural selection? The cultural biases and conventional thinking exists in the people who are incapable of talking about truth, not the other way around.

tomhoward 6y ago
> What black magic allows people to be biologically different physically but doesn't allow them to be biologically different behaviorally or mentally? I hear this line of argument repeated all the time, delivered as if it's a bona fide mic-drop discussion-closer. Apparently those making the argument don't even consider that it's not-at-all established that behavioural/psychological/mental aptitude qualities are exclusively or even majority biologically predetermined. It's well known that human qualities very significantly in their degree of heritability. There's nothing remarkable about the suggestion that qualities of the mind will have a different level of heritability to physical traits like height and facial shape. We've all observed that siblings can be far more different behaviourally and cognitively than they are in appearance. And we should expect this to be the case, if we assume that the very purpose of consciousness is to enable us to adapt to the conditions we experience. Here's a different hypothesis to consider: for the majority of people, physical brain function is pretty consistent, the way eye, nose, kidney, liver, heart and spleen function is pretty consistent, particularly at birth, before the wear and tear of life has had an impact. But behaviour becomes more variable as a person develops, due to different conditions and experiences, causing certain kinds of emotion and cognitive function to be enhanced, and others to be diminished. E.g., somebody who grows up living with fear and anxiety due to lacking a sense of security will develop enhanced amygdala activity and chronic sensitivity to threat, and thus a reduced development of other brain parts and forms of cognition. Extrapolate all the kinds of differences in conditions a developing person will experience, and you end up with great variability in people's cognitive "tuning", and resultant personality and aptitudes, that has little to do with their genetics.
- leafboi 6y ago
  The mic dropper here is that environment influences behavior but so do genetics. BOTH are factors. The problem with society and you is that you choose to ignore the genetic factor and only choose to examine the environmental factor because it fits with your social construct of how the world should be. Science and reality exist separate to your ethical constructs, and there is scientific evidence that proves it. You view the world as a two sided hypothesis. Either nature or nurture with nature being racist so nurture is better. But you are aware that this isn't true on some level. You know that genetics influences differences in behavior between men and women so much so that men and women across the globe can be fit into certain behavioral stereotypes that are sexist to talk about but at the same time exist as a permanent part of the fabric of reality. Anecdotally it is literally impossible to ignore the masculine behavioral traits of a trans woman because the genetics influencing behavior are so prevalent. That's not evidence however. Let's not get into that because anecdotal arguments can become circular: When I present an example and you rewrite reality so that it fits your ethical world view or vice versa. Let us consider scientific studies. Is behavior caused nature or nurture or both? Obviously both, but let us see what happens when we control the nature part by only looking at twins or triplets separated at birth. What are the behavioral differences?: https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/genetic/5-true-stories-twins-separated-at-birth2.htm https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/genetic/5-true-storie... I have long discovered that there's no such thing as a "mic dropper" the extent that humans will go to bend the evidence and examine improbable possibilities to maintain their ethical and moral world view is extensive. A logical argument will not convert a christian to an atheist and it will not change you. What follows from you, if you read this, is a long and involved break down to discredit my evidence a reexamination of the context from biased angles until you use the logic to construct a universe that fits the world how you see it rather than the world as it truly is. The bottom line is: genetics made your brain therefore it influences your brain and in turn, your behavior. If such genetic differences exist between twins and between sexes then it must exist between race. And keep in mind... never ever did I say environment is not a major influence for behavior. I never said otherwise i am only saying that to ignore genetics and say that genetics do not influence race is scientific folly and irrationality.

tomhoward 6y ago

> What black magic allows people to be biologically different physically but doesn't allow them to be biologically different behaviorally or mentally? I hear this line of argument repeated all the time, delivered as if it's a bona fide mic-drop discussion-closer. Apparently those making the argument don't even consider that it's not-at-all established that behavioural/psychological/mental aptitude qualities are exclusively or even majority biologically predetermined. It's well known that human qualities very significantly in their degree of heritability. There's nothing remarkable about the suggestion that qualities of the mind will have a different level of heritability to physical traits like height and facial shape. We've all observed that siblings can be far more different behaviourally and cognitively than they are in appearance. And we should expect this to be the case, if we assume that the very purpose of consciousness is to enable us to adapt to the conditions we experience. Here's a different hypothesis to consider: for the majority of people, physical brain function is pretty consistent, the way eye, nose, kidney, liver, heart and spleen function is pretty consistent, particularly at birth, before the wear and tear of life has had an impact. But behaviour becomes more variable as a person develops, due to different conditions and experiences, causing certain kinds of emotion and cognitive function to be enhanced, and others to be diminished. E.g., somebody who grows up living with fear and anxiety due to lacking a sense of security will develop enhanced amygdala activity and chronic sensitivity to threat, and thus a reduced development of other brain parts and forms of cognition. Extrapolate all the kinds of differences in conditions a developing person will experience, and you end up with great variability in people's cognitive "tuning", and resultant personality and aptitudes, that has little to do with their genetics.

leafboi 6y ago
The mic dropper here is that environment influences behavior but so do genetics. BOTH are factors. The problem with society and you is that you choose to ignore the genetic factor and only choose to examine the environmental factor because it fits with your social construct of how the world should be. Science and reality exist separate to your ethical constructs, and there is scientific evidence that proves it. You view the world as a two sided hypothesis. Either nature or nurture with nature being racist so nurture is better. But you are aware that this isn't true on some level. You know that genetics influences differences in behavior between men and women so much so that men and women across the globe can be fit into certain behavioral stereotypes that are sexist to talk about but at the same time exist as a permanent part of the fabric of reality. Anecdotally it is literally impossible to ignore the masculine behavioral traits of a trans woman because the genetics influencing behavior are so prevalent. That's not evidence however. Let's not get into that because anecdotal arguments can become circular: When I present an example and you rewrite reality so that it fits your ethical world view or vice versa. Let us consider scientific studies. Is behavior caused nature or nurture or both? Obviously both, but let us see what happens when we control the nature part by only looking at twins or triplets separated at birth. What are the behavioral differences?: https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/genetic/5-true-stories-twins-separated-at-birth2.htm https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/genetic/5-true-storie... I have long discovered that there's no such thing as a "mic dropper" the extent that humans will go to bend the evidence and examine improbable possibilities to maintain their ethical and moral world view is extensive. A logical argument will not convert a christian to an atheist and it will not change you. What follows from you, if you read this, is a long and involved break down to discredit my evidence a reexamination of the context from biased angles until you use the logic to construct a universe that fits the world how you see it rather than the world as it truly is. The bottom line is: genetics made your brain therefore it influences your brain and in turn, your behavior. If such genetic differences exist between twins and between sexes then it must exist between race. And keep in mind... never ever did I say environment is not a major influence for behavior. I never said otherwise i am only saying that to ignore genetics and say that genetics do not influence race is scientific folly and irrationality.