2 ms·

I don't see why it makes sense to ignore certain areas of racial disparity. If the racial IQ gap can be closed by various means, we should try to do it. Refusin

I don't see why it makes sense to ignore certain areas of racial disparity. If the racial IQ gap can be closed by various means, we should try to do it. Refusing to acknowledge that a disparity exists (not referring to you, but to people like the other guy who replied to me) doesn't help solve anything. I could replace "IQ" with various other metrics like "SAT scores" or "high school graduation rates" or whatever, since they all correlate to some degree. Do you think that would do a better job of getting my point across? People seem to really dislike IQ tests.

gizmo 12y ago
The idea that people who look different are inferior is a racist hypothesis -- now scientifically discredited -- that has been repeated for the past 300 years. People who bring up IQ today use the exact same language people used back in the day and that has racist implications. But when they get called on it they backtrack and claim they never meant to say something racist -- they're just talking about neutral scientific findings! Even though historically IQ tests were used to "prove" the supremacy and inferiority of different races. The entire reason why racism is bad is because it affects the opportunities and quality of life of minorities. If racism had no measurable effect on anything it wouldn't be a real thing. So any thinking person would expect racism to have an effect on SAT scores and high school graduation rates. Talking about race and IQ as if it has no history is like talking about a sauwastika as if it were just a symbol that represents balance. Talking about "SAT scores" or "high school graduation rates" would absolutely help, simply because of historical context. There are many more things to be aware of in order to talk sensibly about race though. First of which is that the concepts of "black" and "white" are cultural inventions, and have no biological meaning. So the very idea of trying to measure the IQs of black/white people is unscientific silliness.
- streptomycin 12y ago
  Point taken on most of that. I still believe that the racial disparity in tech is a much more difficult problem than the gender disparity, because that argument doesn't change if you swap "IQ" with "SAT scores". Definitely do not want to imply racial superiority. However, the concepts of "black" and "white" are cultural inventions, and have no biological meaning That's not true. If you take a look human genetic data, clusters very clearly appear which correspond with races. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/05/why-race-as-a-biological-construct-matters/ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/05/why-race-as-a... To deny that is unscientific silliness.
  - gizmo 12y ago
    Race (as opposed to say, skin color) is a social construct that changes over time. It's an us-vs-them delineation. This puts it better than I can, so I'll just provide the link: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/what-we-mean-when-we-say-race-is-a-social-construct/275872/ http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/what-we-... (And I'm aware of the irony)
    - streptomycin 12y ago
      This kind of argument never seemed very convincing to me. It's the same you see with any kind of fuzzy data. Like what is a "species", when exactly do two groups of animals become different "species"? There's no perfect answer, and attempts at making strict biological definitions often run contrary to popular opinion. Similar to "Is Pluto a planet?", "Is a tomato a fruit?", "Is this blueish-green or greenish-blue?", etc. The answer isn't to just completely discard the concepts of races, species, planets, fruits, colors, and many other things. It's to understand that all of those things are real scientific concepts, but their precise definitions depend on the context of use.
      - gizmo 12y ago
        People get persecuted based on their (perceived) race/ethnicity. The classification of tomatoes or planetary bodies is not a life or death matter. Additionally, the difference is that race is a product of racism, not of science. This is a historical fact. The concept of race has no scientific value. It has historical and sociological importance, though, and we should seek to understand that. In a perfectly rational world researchers could research anything and the world would only pay attention based on the merit of the research itself. We don't live in that world. Research on race and IQ today has predictable consequences: it legitimizes racist prejudices.
        streptomycin 12y ago
        The concept of race has no scientific value. If you want to stop scientists from using the word "race", at least propose an alternative. Like people who don't like that male pronouns are used for gender-neutral cases in English at least propose alternatives such the singular "they", "he/she", etc. If you think scientists need a new word for "race" because other people have poisoned it so much, your cause would probably be more successful if you actually tried to propose and promote that new word. Because scientists aren't going to just stop all research related to "race", that would be ridiculous. "Broad cluster of people with fairly similar genes relative to other broad clusters of people" doesn't quite roll off the tongue. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-specific_and_gender-neutral_pronouns#Invented_pronouns http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-specific_and_gender-neut...

gizmo 12y ago

The idea that people who look different are inferior is a racist hypothesis -- now scientifically discredited -- that has been repeated for the past 300 years. People who bring up IQ today use the exact same language people used back in the day and that has racist implications. But when they get called on it they backtrack and claim they never meant to say something racist -- they're just talking about neutral scientific findings! Even though historically IQ tests were used to "prove" the supremacy and inferiority of different races. The entire reason why racism is bad is because it affects the opportunities and quality of life of minorities. If racism had no measurable effect on anything it wouldn't be a real thing. So any thinking person would expect racism to have an effect on SAT scores and high school graduation rates. Talking about race and IQ as if it has no history is like talking about a sauwastika as if it were just a symbol that represents balance. Talking about "SAT scores" or "high school graduation rates" would absolutely help, simply because of historical context. There are many more things to be aware of in order to talk sensibly about race though. First of which is that the concepts of "black" and "white" are cultural inventions, and have no biological meaning. So the very idea of trying to measure the IQs of black/white people is unscientific silliness.

streptomycin 12y ago
Point taken on most of that. I still believe that the racial disparity in tech is a much more difficult problem than the gender disparity, because that argument doesn't change if you swap "IQ" with "SAT scores". Definitely do not want to imply racial superiority. However, the concepts of "black" and "white" are cultural inventions, and have no biological meaning That's not true. If you take a look human genetic data, clusters very clearly appear which correspond with races. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/05/why-race-as-a-biological-construct-matters/ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/05/why-race-as-a... To deny that is unscientific silliness.
- gizmo 12y ago
  Race (as opposed to say, skin color) is a social construct that changes over time. It's an us-vs-them delineation. This puts it better than I can, so I'll just provide the link: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/what-we-mean-when-we-say-race-is-a-social-construct/275872/ http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/what-we-... (And I'm aware of the irony)
  - streptomycin 12y ago
    This kind of argument never seemed very convincing to me. It's the same you see with any kind of fuzzy data. Like what is a "species", when exactly do two groups of animals become different "species"? There's no perfect answer, and attempts at making strict biological definitions often run contrary to popular opinion. Similar to "Is Pluto a planet?", "Is a tomato a fruit?", "Is this blueish-green or greenish-blue?", etc. The answer isn't to just completely discard the concepts of races, species, planets, fruits, colors, and many other things. It's to understand that all of those things are real scientific concepts, but their precise definitions depend on the context of use.
    - gizmo 12y ago
      People get persecuted based on their (perceived) race/ethnicity. The classification of tomatoes or planetary bodies is not a life or death matter. Additionally, the difference is that race is a product of racism, not of science. This is a historical fact. The concept of race has no scientific value. It has historical and sociological importance, though, and we should seek to understand that. In a perfectly rational world researchers could research anything and the world would only pay attention based on the merit of the research itself. We don't live in that world. Research on race and IQ today has predictable consequences: it legitimizes racist prejudices.
      - streptomycin 12y ago
        The concept of race has no scientific value. If you want to stop scientists from using the word "race", at least propose an alternative. Like people who don't like that male pronouns are used for gender-neutral cases in English at least propose alternatives such the singular "they", "he/she", etc. If you think scientists need a new word for "race" because other people have poisoned it so much, your cause would probably be more successful if you actually tried to propose and promote that new word. Because scientists aren't going to just stop all research related to "race", that would be ridiculous. "Broad cluster of people with fairly similar genes relative to other broad clusters of people" doesn't quite roll off the tongue. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-specific_and_gender-neutral_pronouns#Invented_pronouns http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-specific_and_gender-neut...