4 ms·

I’ve seen and read extensive reviews, but yeah I have not read it. I agree that’s a blind spot, so I’ll go ahead and read the book then get back to you after. G

I’ve seen and read extensive reviews, but yeah I have not read it. I agree that’s a blind spot, so I’ll go ahead and read the book then get back to you after. Give me like a week.

peterfirefly 2y ago
[flagged]
- ConspiracyFact 2y ago
  >lots of places have high-IQ subpopulations who look a lot like their background populations Can you rephrase this?
  - peterfirefly 2y ago
    [flagged]
- tptacek 2y ago
  It is wildly untrue that these bullets are all broadly accepted in the actual literature or among modern practitioners. This is more like a list of things you happen to believe. Which is fine, but be clearer about it.
  - peterfirefly 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - tptacek 2y ago
      No, I don't think psychometrics and heritability research is like stereotype threat or "sky fathers", whatever that is. But I think we're clearer at this point where that list came from, and probably don't need to take this further.
      - peterfirefly 2y ago
        Will you at least retract "wildly untrue"?
        tptacek 2y ago
        No? You provided a list of things you personally believe to be supported by the balance of evidence (in several different fields of study), and many of them --- maybe more than half --- are things that are unsettled, or even unlikely to be true. Why would I retract anything?
        peterfirefly 2y ago
        Half? Seriously? I could understand believing a handful of them are "unsettled, or even unlikely to be true" given the current debate climate. Honest question, no attempt at rhetorical jiu-jitsu or anything -- why do you believe "maybe more than half"? You must base that estimate on something.
        tptacek 2y ago
        Yes: I read papers and keep up with stuff. It's cute that you think we're going to dig into this rigorously after "Communism, sky fathers, and crystals", but we obviously will not. Again, no, I will not be "retracting" anything.
    - rat87 2y ago
      Right and many people believe in Phrenology/Genetic racial IQ differences/Human Biodiversity or whatever euphemism they're using these days. That doesn't make them any more true or any less harmful then when they were measuring skulls
  - itsyaboy123 2y ago
    Why do you think it’s “fine” that the parent commentator thinks “ yes, some population groups really are more intelligent than others”? What do you think he means by the “truly taboo comparisons” and why do you think he’s too chickenshit to say what he means? Why is that “fine” instead of “grounds for immediate ostracism”?
    - peterfirefly 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - defrost 2y ago
        Are you ascribing that to innate genetic IQ inferiority or to social and environmental causes? Eg: Resource starved German schoolchildren in WWII scored almost two std deviations lower than the same demographic from the same classes and schools five years earlier.
        tptacek 2y ago
        There's pretty decent odds this person is coming to this conversation with "IQ and the Wealth Of Nations"-level data. Lots of little tells.
        defrost 2y ago
        little tells? I figured the direct quotes from The Bell End were a bit of a give away.
        tptacek 2y ago
        I mostly just want to preempt the inevitable citation to IQ & The Wealth Of Nations; it's a little squicky for me to predict it's coming (but it was definitely coming).
        itsyaboy123 2y ago
        But apparently being a barely-concealed white supremacist is “fine”. Reasonable people can agree to disagree, in your view.

I’ve seen and read extensive reviews, but yeah I have not read it. I agree that’s a blind spot, so I’ll go ahead and read the book then get back to you after. Give me like a week.

peterfirefly 2y ago

[flagged]

ConspiracyFact 2y ago
>lots of places have high-IQ subpopulations who look a lot like their background populations Can you rephrase this?
- peterfirefly 2y ago
  [flagged]
tptacek 2y ago
It is wildly untrue that these bullets are all broadly accepted in the actual literature or among modern practitioners. This is more like a list of things you happen to believe. Which is fine, but be clearer about it.
- peterfirefly 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - tptacek 2y ago
    No, I don't think psychometrics and heritability research is like stereotype threat or "sky fathers", whatever that is. But I think we're clearer at this point where that list came from, and probably don't need to take this further.
    - peterfirefly 2y ago
      Will you at least retract "wildly untrue"?
      - tptacek 2y ago
        No? You provided a list of things you personally believe to be supported by the balance of evidence (in several different fields of study), and many of them --- maybe more than half --- are things that are unsettled, or even unlikely to be true. Why would I retract anything?
        peterfirefly 2y ago
        Half? Seriously? I could understand believing a handful of them are "unsettled, or even unlikely to be true" given the current debate climate. Honest question, no attempt at rhetorical jiu-jitsu or anything -- why do you believe "maybe more than half"? You must base that estimate on something.
        tptacek 2y ago
        Yes: I read papers and keep up with stuff. It's cute that you think we're going to dig into this rigorously after "Communism, sky fathers, and crystals", but we obviously will not. Again, no, I will not be "retracting" anything.
  - rat87 2y ago
    Right and many people believe in Phrenology/Genetic racial IQ differences/Human Biodiversity or whatever euphemism they're using these days. That doesn't make them any more true or any less harmful then when they were measuring skulls
- itsyaboy123 2y ago
  Why do you think it’s “fine” that the parent commentator thinks “ yes, some population groups really are more intelligent than others”? What do you think he means by the “truly taboo comparisons” and why do you think he’s too chickenshit to say what he means? Why is that “fine” instead of “grounds for immediate ostracism”?
  - peterfirefly 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - defrost 2y ago
      Are you ascribing that to innate genetic IQ inferiority or to social and environmental causes? Eg: Resource starved German schoolchildren in WWII scored almost two std deviations lower than the same demographic from the same classes and schools five years earlier.
      - tptacek 2y ago
        There's pretty decent odds this person is coming to this conversation with "IQ and the Wealth Of Nations"-level data. Lots of little tells.
        defrost 2y ago
        little tells? I figured the direct quotes from The Bell End were a bit of a give away.
        tptacek 2y ago
        I mostly just want to preempt the inevitable citation to IQ & The Wealth Of Nations; it's a little squicky for me to predict it's coming (but it was definitely coming).
        itsyaboy123 2y ago
        But apparently being a barely-concealed white supremacist is “fine”. Reasonable people can agree to disagree, in your view.