3 ms·

What comments did he make and what type of fact-based concerns do you have with them?

pazimzadeh 1y ago
if you read the article: "he ignited an uproar by suggesting, in an interview with The Sunday Times in London, that Black people, over all, were not as intelligent as white people. He repeated the assertion in on-camera interviews for a PBS documentary about him, part of the “American Masters” series."
- catigula 1y ago
  That’s actually a correct belief. That’s what the testing says. Note that I’m not saying the cause, merely that’s simply what the testing indicates and is a statement with a pure basis in fact. There are different group averages in intelligence measurement and people have many feelings about why that is, but nobody credible disputes the mere existence of those data. Anyways, that’s not in quotes so doesn’t answer the question.
  - pazimzadeh 1y ago
    First of all, what tests? Second, you’d need to prove it’s genetic and not due to socio-economic factors. I’m assuming you’ve thought of this?
- inglor_cz 1y ago
  Taboos are very culture-specific. I suspect that the above statement would cause approximately zero uproar in China, or the Arabic world.
  - pazimzadeh 1y ago
    And that means that black people are inherently less intelligent?
    - inglor_cz 11mo ago
      Maybe they are, maybe they are not, but that was not the point of my comment. The point of my comment was that the current Western Civilization is so afraid of this hypothesis and its possible ramifications if it turned out to be even semi-correct, that it will try to destroy anyone who even dares to say it aloud, instead of approaching it without prejudice and studying it. That is a political taboo, on the same level as saying "Allah probably does not exist" in Iran, "Ukraine is a separate nation which deserves sovereignty and our war against them is unjust" in Russia, or "Our government is neither very benevolent nor very capable and makes stupid mistakes" in China. And this taboo is mostly caused by US history of slavery and Western European history of colonialism and/or eugenics, but also by the current structure of politics. Much like the abovementioned taboos from Iran, Russia and China, its breach would undermine some political foundations. It also has some consequences. We invest crazy amounts of money into artificial intelligence, but natural intelligence (and stupidity) is relatively underinvested, with the most interesting results coming from studies of corvids or octopuses. IMHO this is low-hanging fruit that we choose not to pluck, thus probably shooting ourselves in the foot when developing our own human potential.
      - pazimzadeh 11mo ago
        I think the reason western civilization is afraid of the idea of inherent genetic limitations to intelligence is because the logical next step would not be focusing on education, but probably restarting some form of eugenics or genetic engineering of our progeny, and the last time that happened it didn't go very well. Also, much of 'western civilization' is founded on treating people as if they are equal, so the idea that one subgroup of humans is superior to another obviously rubs us the wrong way. I can't even tell what your suggestion is, what is the low-hanging fruit you are talking about? If you come out and say what your stance is (maybe you think we should genetically engineer babies to score higher on IQ tests?) then we could have a debate about the merits of those ideas. As it stands I have no idea what you're suggesting, which has the side effect of making you irrefutable I guess. Your general analysis seems way off. Secular skepticism goes back a long time in Iran (way before the European Enlightenment), and few Iranians would be shocked to hear "Allah probably does not exist". Here are some quatrains by Omar Khayyam (1048 CE) which are well known by everyone in Iran: They say that in paradise there will be maidens with beautiful eyes, There will be wine, milk, and honey. If we have chosen wine and a beloved here, what’s the harm? Since in the end, the outcome is the same. The secrets of eternity neither you know nor I; The solution to the riddle neither you find nor I. There are inscriptions on the Tablet of Fate; But when it comes to reading them, neither you can nor I. Same goes for Russia and China, I'm very skeptical that the general population has a taboo about those ideas. A social taboo is not <whatever the government has banned you from talking about>.

if you read the article: "he ignited an uproar by suggesting, in an interview with The Sunday Times in London, that Black people, over all, were not as intelligent as white people. He repeated the assertion in on-camera interviews for a PBS documentary about him, part of the “American Masters” series."

catigula 1y ago
That’s actually a correct belief. That’s what the testing says. Note that I’m not saying the cause, merely that’s simply what the testing indicates and is a statement with a pure basis in fact. There are different group averages in intelligence measurement and people have many feelings about why that is, but nobody credible disputes the mere existence of those data. Anyways, that’s not in quotes so doesn’t answer the question.
- pazimzadeh 1y ago
  First of all, what tests? Second, you’d need to prove it’s genetic and not due to socio-economic factors. I’m assuming you’ve thought of this?
inglor_cz 1y ago
Taboos are very culture-specific. I suspect that the above statement would cause approximately zero uproar in China, or the Arabic world.
- pazimzadeh 1y ago
  And that means that black people are inherently less intelligent?
  - inglor_cz 11mo ago
    Maybe they are, maybe they are not, but that was not the point of my comment. The point of my comment was that the current Western Civilization is so afraid of this hypothesis and its possible ramifications if it turned out to be even semi-correct, that it will try to destroy anyone who even dares to say it aloud, instead of approaching it without prejudice and studying it. That is a political taboo, on the same level as saying "Allah probably does not exist" in Iran, "Ukraine is a separate nation which deserves sovereignty and our war against them is unjust" in Russia, or "Our government is neither very benevolent nor very capable and makes stupid mistakes" in China. And this taboo is mostly caused by US history of slavery and Western European history of colonialism and/or eugenics, but also by the current structure of politics. Much like the abovementioned taboos from Iran, Russia and China, its breach would undermine some political foundations. It also has some consequences. We invest crazy amounts of money into artificial intelligence, but natural intelligence (and stupidity) is relatively underinvested, with the most interesting results coming from studies of corvids or octopuses. IMHO this is low-hanging fruit that we choose not to pluck, thus probably shooting ourselves in the foot when developing our own human potential.
    - pazimzadeh 11mo ago
      I think the reason western civilization is afraid of the idea of inherent genetic limitations to intelligence is because the logical next step would not be focusing on education, but probably restarting some form of eugenics or genetic engineering of our progeny, and the last time that happened it didn't go very well. Also, much of 'western civilization' is founded on treating people as if they are equal, so the idea that one subgroup of humans is superior to another obviously rubs us the wrong way. I can't even tell what your suggestion is, what is the low-hanging fruit you are talking about? If you come out and say what your stance is (maybe you think we should genetically engineer babies to score higher on IQ tests?) then we could have a debate about the merits of those ideas. As it stands I have no idea what you're suggesting, which has the side effect of making you irrefutable I guess. Your general analysis seems way off. Secular skepticism goes back a long time in Iran (way before the European Enlightenment), and few Iranians would be shocked to hear "Allah probably does not exist". Here are some quatrains by Omar Khayyam (1048 CE) which are well known by everyone in Iran: They say that in paradise there will be maidens with beautiful eyes, There will be wine, milk, and honey. If we have chosen wine and a beloved here, what’s the harm? Since in the end, the outcome is the same. The secrets of eternity neither you know nor I; The solution to the riddle neither you find nor I. There are inscriptions on the Tablet of Fate; But when it comes to reading them, neither you can nor I. Same goes for Russia and China, I'm very skeptical that the general population has a taboo about those ideas. A social taboo is not <whatever the government has banned you from talking about>.