4 ms·

Wonderful. You just know that some wag will jump on this and twist this into "It is intelligent to be racist!". Personally, I find the idea of wiring my brain,

Wonderful. You just know that some wag will jump on this and twist this into "It is intelligent to be racist!". Personally, I find the idea of wiring my brain, my self, up to something which zaps it with little to no understanding of the underlying science or function scares the bejesus out of me, and strikes me as a strange at best and stupid at worst thing to do. Ah, let me just pop a leech on this, it'll get my phlegmatic humour rebalanced.

michas 12y ago
It has nothing to do with intelligence, it is just all about being realist. Existence of different races comes from the fact that there are genetic differences between people. It would be stupid to assume that those genetic differences have no other effect than skin color.
ams6110 12y ago
I agree with the sentiment: electrically tinkering with my brain is not something I would think a good idea, but is it really much different from ingesting various chemicals/pharmaceuticals for essentially the same purpose? I'm actually not so surprised by the racial prejudice effect. Many low-IQ people I've encountered are execeptionally friendly, accepting, and non-judgemental. Not to say that is evidence of anything, just my experience.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
zxcvcxz 12y ago
> You just know that some wag will jump on this and twist this into "It is intelligent to be racist!". Not before some wag jumps on it and makes sure anyone who tries to discuss the topic rationally and thoughtfully is already seen as racist and stupid. I dream of a community where everything is up for discussion, even if I disagree with it.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- seivan 12y ago
  Thank you! I was going to say the same thing. "Hurry! Before anyone has a simple thought in their head, brand them as racist and misogynist!"
- madaxe_again 12y ago
  Actually, the first response was from a hellbanned account espousing exactly that point of view. I'm also not sure where you got that I'm trying to censor discussion - you commented, did you not? "michas 3 hours ago [dead] It has nothing to do with intelligence, it is just all about being realist. Existence of different races comes from the fact that there are genetic differences between people. It would be stupid to assume that those genetic differences have no other effect than skin color."
  - omginternets 12y ago
    I don't see anything wrong with the quote you posted. It doesn't imply that people of different races are stupid or inferior. It just implies that you expect genetic differences to correlate with all manner of other measures. Respectfully, I think you're reading into it too much.
    - s_q_b 12y ago
      While there's technically nothing racist about a small variation in intelligence. But this comment leaves a bad taste in my mouth, as we know that. 1. Individual variation in intelligence dwarfs any population level measure with regard to race. 2. The evidence with regard to IQ differences by race is suspect at best, especially because it is unclear that one can accurately control for socioeconomic factors. 3. It would be ignorant to assume that transporting an entire people from one continent to another, forcing them to serve as slaves for much of our history, systemically suppressing their political representation even after granting freedom, and an extremely efficient police-prison-industrial complex that disproportionately targets that minority would leave no lasting ill effects. It suggests to me the motive is a writer's true belief is in racial superiority, which given the hellbanned account, seems the more likely option than an honest attempt to further a scholarly discussion.
      - omginternets 12y ago
        You're probably right with regards to the specific user, and you're probably even correct in saying that most people who bring up this point do it to advance racist ideology. That said, there are a few points I feel need to be made: 1. Your first argument is an insidious form of the "slippery slope" argument, in effect if not by intent. Just because individual difference eclipse racial ones doesn't mean we can't explore the latter. Just as the handicapped are protected by law in civilized countries, so too can racial minorities, even if it were proven that they are less intelligent. 2. The motives of the original poster are irrelevant. He can be both racist and correct, as unpalatable as that thought may be. The subject is that of scholarly discussion, and what you're doing, knowingly or not, is lowering the discourse by imposing guilt by association. Before I'm accused of pedantry, I think these two points are critical because in my experience there are two forms of racism: 1. Die-hard, ideological racism, i.e.: "there is a hierarchy of races and the lower strata barely qualify as human". 2. Racism born out of frustration. I find that the overwhelming majority of racists end up identifying as such because they raise valid concerns about (typically Black) culture, demographics and crime, but find their honest (if not valid) points rebuffed with ad hominem attacks. In the end, these people end up saying "Fine. I'm racist. I also have a point." If we're going to have an honest discussion about race then we need to stop plugging our ears and chanting "racist!" Much of the reasoning behind "Type II" racism is flawed, but it's much more productive to calmly explain why this is the case, than to respond with a knee-jerk "that's racist and therefore wrong". Contentious though it may be, there are many criminal, academic and sociological problems that fall along racial lines, and we need to be able to criticize racial groups in order to move forwards. Denying this, or vilifying those who are frustrated by this state of affairs, creates racists. If I can't say something to the effect of "[Insert Race Here] generally does [insert thing here] and I think it's a problem because [...]", then we're not having a scholarly discussion; we're having a circle-jerk.
DonHopkins 12y ago
I'm sure Eric S Raymond will try to twist this into supporting his racist preconceptions and agenda. "In the U.S., blacks are 12% of the population but commit 50% of violent crimes; can anyone honestly think this is unconnected to the fact that they average 15 points of IQ lower than the general population? That stupid people are more violent is a fact independent of skin color." -Eric S Raymond http://esr.ibiblio.org/index.php?p=129 http://esr.ibiblio.org/index.php?p=129
- dang 12y ago
  "Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - acc54321 12y ago
    Actually, I had never heard this quote before. I would say it is relevant and an interesting quote. It is hard to call something classic if you censor it until it no is no longer seen, heard about, or known.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- marcolinux 12y ago
  Oh the quotes! Same link [1],the next paragraph: "A black man with an IQ of 85 and a white man with an IQ of 85 are about equally likely to have the character traits of poor impulse control and violent behavior associated with criminality — and both are far more likely to have them than a white or black man with an IQ of 110" -Eric S Raymond 1-http://esr.ibiblio.org/index.php?p=129 http://esr.ibiblio.org/index.php?p=129

michas 12y ago

It has nothing to do with intelligence, it is just all about being realist. Existence of different races comes from the fact that there are genetic differences between people. It would be stupid to assume that those genetic differences have no other effect than skin color.

ams6110 12y ago

I agree with the sentiment: electrically tinkering with my brain is not something I would think a good idea, but is it really much different from ingesting various chemicals/pharmaceuticals for essentially the same purpose? I'm actually not so surprised by the racial prejudice effect. Many low-IQ people I've encountered are execeptionally friendly, accepting, and non-judgemental. Not to say that is evidence of anything, just my experience.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

zxcvcxz 12y ago

> You just know that some wag will jump on this and twist this into "It is intelligent to be racist!". Not before some wag jumps on it and makes sure anyone who tries to discuss the topic rationally and thoughtfully is already seen as racist and stupid. I dream of a community where everything is up for discussion, even if I disagree with it.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
seivan 12y ago
Thank you! I was going to say the same thing. "Hurry! Before anyone has a simple thought in their head, brand them as racist and misogynist!"
madaxe_again 12y ago
Actually, the first response was from a hellbanned account espousing exactly that point of view. I'm also not sure where you got that I'm trying to censor discussion - you commented, did you not? "michas 3 hours ago [dead] It has nothing to do with intelligence, it is just all about being realist. Existence of different races comes from the fact that there are genetic differences between people. It would be stupid to assume that those genetic differences have no other effect than skin color."
- omginternets 12y ago
  I don't see anything wrong with the quote you posted. It doesn't imply that people of different races are stupid or inferior. It just implies that you expect genetic differences to correlate with all manner of other measures. Respectfully, I think you're reading into it too much.
  - s_q_b 12y ago
    While there's technically nothing racist about a small variation in intelligence. But this comment leaves a bad taste in my mouth, as we know that. 1. Individual variation in intelligence dwarfs any population level measure with regard to race. 2. The evidence with regard to IQ differences by race is suspect at best, especially because it is unclear that one can accurately control for socioeconomic factors. 3. It would be ignorant to assume that transporting an entire people from one continent to another, forcing them to serve as slaves for much of our history, systemically suppressing their political representation even after granting freedom, and an extremely efficient police-prison-industrial complex that disproportionately targets that minority would leave no lasting ill effects. It suggests to me the motive is a writer's true belief is in racial superiority, which given the hellbanned account, seems the more likely option than an honest attempt to further a scholarly discussion.
    - omginternets 12y ago
      You're probably right with regards to the specific user, and you're probably even correct in saying that most people who bring up this point do it to advance racist ideology. That said, there are a few points I feel need to be made: 1. Your first argument is an insidious form of the "slippery slope" argument, in effect if not by intent. Just because individual difference eclipse racial ones doesn't mean we can't explore the latter. Just as the handicapped are protected by law in civilized countries, so too can racial minorities, even if it were proven that they are less intelligent. 2. The motives of the original poster are irrelevant. He can be both racist and correct, as unpalatable as that thought may be. The subject is that of scholarly discussion, and what you're doing, knowingly or not, is lowering the discourse by imposing guilt by association. Before I'm accused of pedantry, I think these two points are critical because in my experience there are two forms of racism: 1. Die-hard, ideological racism, i.e.: "there is a hierarchy of races and the lower strata barely qualify as human". 2. Racism born out of frustration. I find that the overwhelming majority of racists end up identifying as such because they raise valid concerns about (typically Black) culture, demographics and crime, but find their honest (if not valid) points rebuffed with ad hominem attacks. In the end, these people end up saying "Fine. I'm racist. I also have a point." If we're going to have an honest discussion about race then we need to stop plugging our ears and chanting "racist!" Much of the reasoning behind "Type II" racism is flawed, but it's much more productive to calmly explain why this is the case, than to respond with a knee-jerk "that's racist and therefore wrong". Contentious though it may be, there are many criminal, academic and sociological problems that fall along racial lines, and we need to be able to criticize racial groups in order to move forwards. Denying this, or vilifying those who are frustrated by this state of affairs, creates racists. If I can't say something to the effect of "[Insert Race Here] generally does [insert thing here] and I think it's a problem because [...]", then we're not having a scholarly discussion; we're having a circle-jerk.

DonHopkins 12y ago

I'm sure Eric S Raymond will try to twist this into supporting his racist preconceptions and agenda. "In the U.S., blacks are 12% of the population but commit 50% of violent crimes; can anyone honestly think this is unconnected to the fact that they average 15 points of IQ lower than the general population? That stupid people are more violent is a fact independent of skin color." -Eric S Raymond http://esr.ibiblio.org/index.php?p=129 http://esr.ibiblio.org/index.php?p=129

dang 12y ago
"Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- acc54321 12y ago
  Actually, I had never heard this quote before. I would say it is relevant and an interesting quote. It is hard to call something classic if you censor it until it no is no longer seen, heard about, or known.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
marcolinux 12y ago
Oh the quotes! Same link [1],the next paragraph: "A black man with an IQ of 85 and a white man with an IQ of 85 are about equally likely to have the character traits of poor impulse control and violent behavior associated with criminality — and both are far more likely to have them than a white or black man with an IQ of 110" -Eric S Raymond 1-http://esr.ibiblio.org/index.php?p=129 http://esr.ibiblio.org/index.php?p=129