2 ms·

Absolutely not what Murray said in the bell curve. It's not a very hard book to attack, so I'm not sure why people always go for strawmen. Please post anything

• ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  I didnt say they said it was 100% genetic. I said: > A big part of "The Bell Curve" was arguing that no interventions could change IQ except genetics So its like a "climate change denier" who says "oh I dont deny climate change, its just that I oppose every commonly accepted way to combat it and therefore am in complete policy alignment with actual climate change demiers (who all love my work despite a literal reading being that I’m saying they are wrong)."
  • HDThoreaun 4y ago
    "no interventions could change IQ except genetics" and "IQ is 100% genetic" are the same statement.
    • ZeroGravitas 4y ago
      And yet here we are discussing The Bell Curve, a book that simultaneously claims that "it is agnostic" as to whether racial IQ gaps are environmental or genetic, but thinks that there's no point in any interventions to reduce or eliminate low IQs. I think they're liars that at the very least want you to believe the gap is mostly genetic. But they've carefully avoided ever directly stating that, because of the Nazi eugenics vibe that would give off. So to try to avoid being accused of misrepresenting these disingenuous liars, I stated not that they believe it's 100% genetic, but rather that they believe no interventions would help. It's their logical inconsistency, not mine.