4 ms·
There are multiple replies linking you to studies which speak to the contrary. You are of course, free to selectively address them (or ignore altogether) if the
by itsyaboi 3y ago
There are multiple replies linking you to studies which speak to the contrary. You are of course, free to selectively address them (or ignore altogether) if they cause mental discomfort, but please do not make sweeping generalizations that they are "simply and empirically wrong".
In your own words, the truth might be more nuanced than the current falsehood-du-jour.
- tech_ken 3y agoAll the studies linked in this thread agree with what I'm saying, please feel free to provide counterexamples
- itsyaboi 3y ago> All the studies linked in this thread agree with what I'm saying Exhibit A: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37756115 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37756115
- tech_ken 3y agoCan't tell if this is a low effort troll, or if you're just confused about who you're replying to or what this comment was saying. The linked comment has a quote from the article confirming the points I made in my initial post: > Indicators of "concentrated disadvantage" (e.g., racial heterogeneity, poverty, and family disruption) are among the strongest and most stable predictors. Absolutely nothing in the article being discussed in this comment aligns with the comment I was replying to: > It’s no mystery that “guns and drugs on the table” crime is perpetrated by low-IQ psychopaths Moreover, I both saw and discussed this article, so it's absolutely not the case that I'm ignoring inconvenient truths. The truths under discussion are both extremely convenient to my point, and directly addressed by me.