3 ms·

Do you honestly believe that all differences are due to privilege?

• sago 12y ago
  No, not at all. I think a large amount of diversity among individuals has nothing to do with privilege. Privilege is an inherently probabilistic bias, it doesn't determine anything. When you find achievement highly correlated with a cultural group, however, it is pretty likely to be a function of privilege (in the social science sense). The alternative hypothesis is that, for example, Jews are just innately better at science. I think the research that has been done into racial differences in intellectual abilities has generally failed to find anything that suggests the latter is likely.
  • moultano 12y ago
    We won't be able to tease apart the two hypotheses for certain until we can trace the attribution to individual genes, but at least at an individual level, IQ has been shown to be mostly genetic. It seems inplausible that individual differences are mostly genetic but group differences are entirely cultural. The mean IQ of Ashkenazi Jews is a standard deviation higher than the European average. In a group so genetically isolated that it has its own set of endemic genetic diseases, I'm not willing to assume without evidence that privilege is the primary contributor.
    • sago 12y ago
      Here's where I'm not an expert, so I'm happy to defer to others who know about this research. So this is a genuine question. IQ has been shown to be mostly genetic Can you give a citation that controls for cultural privilege? I'm not willing to assume without evidence that privilege is the primary contributor. Why would one need to assume it is the primary contributor. If there was a genetic advantage, isn't is equally if not more morally important to not add social advantages on top? I know this wasn't the point I made, which I'm not yet conceding, but is another statement that sounds black-and-white all-or-nothing.