6 ms·

Uh Scott also says he believes poverty is not a result of exploitation but culture or genetics soooooo

by toiletfuneral 6y ago

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
karaterobot 6y ago
His arguments are always interesting to read, even when I disagree with them -- in that spirit, could you link to the essay where he says this?
coldtea 6y ago
Uh, he can believe whatever he wants on the matter, that doesn't make him a racist, sooooo.... When was it a "solved" finding that poverty is a result of exploitation? Or that culture and/or genetics don't also play a role, perhaps a big one? That's how science works, by making hypothesis, examining things, and coming to conclusions, popular or not. And a scientist/thinker is allowed to have different conclusions than others, if they can point to specific theories and numbers that support their thesis.
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
> Uh Scott also says he believes poverty is not a result of exploitation but culture or genetics soooooo Regardless of whether he said this, what gives you the impression that it isn't true? There are several studies showing a link between genetics and intelligence. This absolutely does not imply that all black people are less intelligent than all white people. It tends to imply that Ashkenazi Jews have some statistical genetic advantage over other "white people" and that if you then average them into the group "white people" the correlation persists against other arbitrarily defined groups. This is obviously about as far from the argument that Nazis want to make as you can imagine. Meanwhile, how could culture not affect outcomes in the aggregate? Would you really expect that all of the same outcomes would obtain for people who make different choices?
- simondw 6y ago
  > This is obviously about as far from the argument that Nazis want to make as you can imagine Without wading in too far here, I want to point out that picking a slightly different "master race" is no better.
  - tuesdayrain 6y ago
    Science shouldn't be politicized like that. It bothers me how no one has an issue accepting the fact that different ethnic groups have different average heights, blood types, propensity for diseases, etc. But if someone dares suggest that not every group in the world has exactly equal average IQ scores, their career is over.(https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/01/science/watson-dna-genetics-race.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/01/science/watson-dna-geneti...). It's not about picking a master race. It's about objectively observing the world as it is, not how you might want it to be.
    - yesenadam 6y ago
      Watson in that article seems to be doing more than merely suggesting "that not every group in the world has exactly equal average IQ scores": > In 2007, Dr. Watson, who shared a 1962 Nobel Prize for describing the double-helix structure of DNA, told a British journalist that 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.” > Moreover, he added, although he wished everyone were equal, “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true.”
      - tuesdayrain 6y ago
        Your first point is not that far from claiming not every group in the world has exactly equal average IQ scores. Different growth prospects are an inevitable consequence of that.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    > Without wading in too far here, I want to point out that picking a slightly different "master race" is no better. Except that there's nothing there to imply that we should ever do anything the Nazis did, even if you substitute one group for another, because racism is still stupid even if you can find a statistical correlation between some set of phenotypes and some arbitrarily defined racial group. Remember "the differences within a race are larger than the differences between races"? Still true. All it does is provide a possible explanation for aggregate statistical measurements. It tells you nothing about any individual of any race and it justifies no policy of taking race into account when evaluating merit. Just because a thing correlates with another thing doesn't mean the first thing is the second thing. The real problem was that if you measure "race" instead of intelligence, and consequently did not hire a black person who was just as intelligent, that's not fair. It's racism. If you're measuring intelligence directly and not using race for anything at all, that's completely different. It doesn't discriminate against all of the black people who are intelligent, which was the original problem with using race.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Tenoke 6y ago
>Uh Scott also says he believes poverty is not a result of exploitation but culture or genetics soooooo You sure he didn't say that poverty is part-hereditary rather than what you are saying? First, most if not all of the left believe it is hereditary - rich people's kids staying richer and vice versa. Second, he definitely never says exploitation or culture do not come into it.

Uh Scott also says he believes poverty is not a result of exploitation but culture or genetics soooooo

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

karaterobot 6y ago

His arguments are always interesting to read, even when I disagree with them -- in that spirit, could you link to the essay where he says this?

coldtea 6y ago

Uh, he can believe whatever he wants on the matter, that doesn't make him a racist, sooooo.... When was it a "solved" finding that poverty is a result of exploitation? Or that culture and/or genetics don't also play a role, perhaps a big one? That's how science works, by making hypothesis, examining things, and coming to conclusions, popular or not. And a scientist/thinker is allowed to have different conclusions than others, if they can point to specific theories and numbers that support their thesis.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

> Uh Scott also says he believes poverty is not a result of exploitation but culture or genetics soooooo Regardless of whether he said this, what gives you the impression that it isn't true? There are several studies showing a link between genetics and intelligence. This absolutely does not imply that all black people are less intelligent than all white people. It tends to imply that Ashkenazi Jews have some statistical genetic advantage over other "white people" and that if you then average them into the group "white people" the correlation persists against other arbitrarily defined groups. This is obviously about as far from the argument that Nazis want to make as you can imagine. Meanwhile, how could culture not affect outcomes in the aggregate? Would you really expect that all of the same outcomes would obtain for people who make different choices?

simondw 6y ago
> This is obviously about as far from the argument that Nazis want to make as you can imagine Without wading in too far here, I want to point out that picking a slightly different "master race" is no better.
- tuesdayrain 6y ago
  Science shouldn't be politicized like that. It bothers me how no one has an issue accepting the fact that different ethnic groups have different average heights, blood types, propensity for diseases, etc. But if someone dares suggest that not every group in the world has exactly equal average IQ scores, their career is over.(https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/01/science/watson-dna-genetics-race.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/01/science/watson-dna-geneti...). It's not about picking a master race. It's about objectively observing the world as it is, not how you might want it to be.
  - yesenadam 6y ago
    Watson in that article seems to be doing more than merely suggesting "that not every group in the world has exactly equal average IQ scores": > In 2007, Dr. Watson, who shared a 1962 Nobel Prize for describing the double-helix structure of DNA, told a British journalist that 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.” > Moreover, he added, although he wished everyone were equal, “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true.”
    - tuesdayrain 6y ago
      Your first point is not that far from claiming not every group in the world has exactly equal average IQ scores. Different growth prospects are an inevitable consequence of that.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  > Without wading in too far here, I want to point out that picking a slightly different "master race" is no better. Except that there's nothing there to imply that we should ever do anything the Nazis did, even if you substitute one group for another, because racism is still stupid even if you can find a statistical correlation between some set of phenotypes and some arbitrarily defined racial group. Remember "the differences within a race are larger than the differences between races"? Still true. All it does is provide a possible explanation for aggregate statistical measurements. It tells you nothing about any individual of any race and it justifies no policy of taking race into account when evaluating merit. Just because a thing correlates with another thing doesn't mean the first thing is the second thing. The real problem was that if you measure "race" instead of intelligence, and consequently did not hire a black person who was just as intelligent, that's not fair. It's racism. If you're measuring intelligence directly and not using race for anything at all, that's completely different. It doesn't discriminate against all of the black people who are intelligent, which was the original problem with using race.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Tenoke 6y ago

>Uh Scott also says he believes poverty is not a result of exploitation but culture or genetics soooooo You sure he didn't say that poverty is part-hereditary rather than what you are saying? First, most if not all of the left believe it is hereditary - rich people's kids staying richer and vice versa. Second, he definitely never says exploitation or culture do not come into it.