3 ms·

> 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

> 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.

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.