5 ms·

According to BBC News, in the interview with The Sunday Times, Watson said he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa because "all our social polici

by sxcurry 12y ago

According to BBC News, in the interview with The Sunday Times, Watson said he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours -- whereas all the testing says not really." He went on to say he hoped everyone was equal but that "people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true." Sounds more like racism than political correctness.

Alupis 12y ago
Racist or not, he is still a pioneer in biology and should keep his award for his contributions. I certainly don't agree with Watson's remarks, but I think it was an admirable thing that Usmanov did here.
- peteretep 12y ago
  > Racist or not, he is still a pioneer in biology and > should keep his award for his contributions He wasn't stripped of it. He chose to sell it because he wanted to buy an expensive piece of art.
  - Alupis 12y ago
    > He chose to sell it because he wanted to buy an expensive piece of art. So? Usmanov decided he would rather make a charitable contribution to Watson in a symbolic manner. Does not change the fact that i was an admirable thing to do (it was, after all, $4.7 million of his own money)
trhway 12y ago
>whereas all the testing says not really." sounds like his statement is based on facts known to him (and being Nobel winning scientist he probably has good skills at understanding and analyzing facts) >Sounds more like racism Either you're trying to say what his statement wasn't based on his knowledge and analysis of facts or you're introducing a concept of "racism rooted in facts" I wonder though whether the Watson will accept the medal back from Usmanov's hands.
- peteretep 12y ago
  > > whereas all the testing says not really. > sounds like his statement is based on facts known to him Really? He follows it up by saying "people who have to deal with black employees" will "know" that it's true. My understanding is that IQ correlates to socio-economic background, but once that's adjusted for, all race considerations fall away. If you've got a credible source that says something else, I'm sure we'd find it interesting.
  - smm2000 12y ago
    Income does not really explain white-black gap in IQ. Blacks from families with >$200k/year income do about as well as whites from families with income <$20k/year. SAT test is not IQ test but it's probably highly correlated. http://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/03/2008-sat-scores-by-race-by-income.html http://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/03/2008-sat-scores-by-race-b...
    - peteretep 12y ago
      Did you read the article you linked to? It suggested that socio-economic background is more important than just looking at the income.
      - smm2000 12y ago
        Article speculates about it and does not provide any data. Anyway, it's difficult to argue that kids in black families with 200k+ income have less access to resources than kids in white families living below poverty line. Besides it does not really matter - the fact is that blacks in Africa have much lower average IQ than average in most other countries. It could explain lack of positive examples of countries in Africa developing as fast as China, SKorea or many other countries in other part of the world.
  - throwaway451 12y ago
    > My understanding is that IQ correlates to socio-economic background, but once that's adjusted for, all race considerations fall away Unfortunately, that's not true, but it's a common myth that's repeated. Poor whites do nearly as well as rich blacks, on average. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_achievement_gap_in_the_United_States#Theories_about_the_origin_of_the_racial_achievement_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_achievement_gap_in_the_U... We're still searching for something that would correct for racial differences in testing, but socio-economic background does not correct for it. And even supposing it did, it doesn't directly refute the premise, because it conflates cause/effect, which is why sociologists are searching for other explanations (other than the obvious one, of course, because it goes against our societal values).
smm2000 12y ago
What he said is racist but it's still true - IQ in most countries in Africa is abysmally low. Problem is that saying it loud today in US produces the same effect on your career as saying that communism is not the true path to future would have produced in USSR.
- throwaway451 12y ago
  It's worse than that. The higher up you go, the more bound to standard social-justice tropes you must adhere to or risk losing everything. In that sense, America isn't that different from other countries like China or the former USSR. Dissent from The Party is punished severely, and loyalty is rewarded.
- dubfan 12y ago
  Or for suggesting that capitalism isn't all the bee's knees in 1950s America. How quickly we forget.
andrewchambers 12y ago
If Watson is racist, does that make helping Watson racist? In my opinion, no, it may be politically incorrect, which is what I was talking about.

by sxcurry 12y ago

Alupis 12y ago

Racist or not, he is still a pioneer in biology and should keep his award for his contributions. I certainly don't agree with Watson's remarks, but I think it was an admirable thing that Usmanov did here.

peteretep 12y ago
> Racist or not, he is still a pioneer in biology and > should keep his award for his contributions He wasn't stripped of it. He chose to sell it because he wanted to buy an expensive piece of art.
- Alupis 12y ago
  > He chose to sell it because he wanted to buy an expensive piece of art. So? Usmanov decided he would rather make a charitable contribution to Watson in a symbolic manner. Does not change the fact that i was an admirable thing to do (it was, after all, $4.7 million of his own money)

trhway 12y ago

>whereas all the testing says not really." sounds like his statement is based on facts known to him (and being Nobel winning scientist he probably has good skills at understanding and analyzing facts) >Sounds more like racism Either you're trying to say what his statement wasn't based on his knowledge and analysis of facts or you're introducing a concept of "racism rooted in facts" I wonder though whether the Watson will accept the medal back from Usmanov's hands.

peteretep 12y ago
> > whereas all the testing says not really. > sounds like his statement is based on facts known to him Really? He follows it up by saying "people who have to deal with black employees" will "know" that it's true. My understanding is that IQ correlates to socio-economic background, but once that's adjusted for, all race considerations fall away. If you've got a credible source that says something else, I'm sure we'd find it interesting.
- smm2000 12y ago
  Income does not really explain white-black gap in IQ. Blacks from families with >$200k/year income do about as well as whites from families with income <$20k/year. SAT test is not IQ test but it's probably highly correlated. http://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/03/2008-sat-scores-by-race-by-income.html http://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/03/2008-sat-scores-by-race-b...
  - peteretep 12y ago
    Did you read the article you linked to? It suggested that socio-economic background is more important than just looking at the income.
    - smm2000 12y ago
      Article speculates about it and does not provide any data. Anyway, it's difficult to argue that kids in black families with 200k+ income have less access to resources than kids in white families living below poverty line. Besides it does not really matter - the fact is that blacks in Africa have much lower average IQ than average in most other countries. It could explain lack of positive examples of countries in Africa developing as fast as China, SKorea or many other countries in other part of the world.
- throwaway451 12y ago
  > My understanding is that IQ correlates to socio-economic background, but once that's adjusted for, all race considerations fall away Unfortunately, that's not true, but it's a common myth that's repeated. Poor whites do nearly as well as rich blacks, on average. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_achievement_gap_in_the_United_States#Theories_about_the_origin_of_the_racial_achievement_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_achievement_gap_in_the_U... We're still searching for something that would correct for racial differences in testing, but socio-economic background does not correct for it. And even supposing it did, it doesn't directly refute the premise, because it conflates cause/effect, which is why sociologists are searching for other explanations (other than the obvious one, of course, because it goes against our societal values).

smm2000 12y ago

What he said is racist but it's still true - IQ in most countries in Africa is abysmally low. Problem is that saying it loud today in US produces the same effect on your career as saying that communism is not the true path to future would have produced in USSR.

throwaway451 12y ago
It's worse than that. The higher up you go, the more bound to standard social-justice tropes you must adhere to or risk losing everything. In that sense, America isn't that different from other countries like China or the former USSR. Dissent from The Party is punished severely, and loyalty is rewarded.
dubfan 12y ago
Or for suggesting that capitalism isn't all the bee's knees in 1950s America. How quickly we forget.

andrewchambers 12y ago

If Watson is racist, does that make helping Watson racist? In my opinion, no, it may be politically incorrect, which is what I was talking about.