17 comments
Before pitchforks get sharpened, I don't necessarily agree with the author. Without investing much time in this, I agree in principle with the comment from Richard Haier:
"I prefer to let the papers and the data speak for themselves.”
Before pitchforks get sharpened, I don't necessarily agree with the author. Without investing much time in this, I agree in principle with the comment from Richard Haier:
> "I prefer to let the papers and the data speak for themselves.”
The article is a poorly written attack piece that tries to equate anyone that asks race related questions with 'Eugenics'. It sees no difference between someone who asks if biology and race are related, and a Nazi.
That's typical of The Guardian.
Some of that shit is racist, some of it is not. The truly racist stuff is mostly outliers that don't represent any significant numbers.
The stuff that is 'creeping into mainstream' is people taking an honest look at reality. We're not all the same. That is not a judgment of worth, or value, but there are clear genetic based differences. How is science supposed to progress if they can not acknowledge that because feelings.
An example from the article:
“Jews have a higher average level of verbal intelligence than non-Jewish whites”.
Is given as an example of a racist comment. But that is a known fact, not racism.
I'd like to see the facts speak for themselves also, but believing in facts means you're racist.
Even believing in race makes you racist.
The article is a poorly written attack piece that tries to equate anyone that asks race related questions with 'Eugenics'. It sees no difference between someone who asks if biology and race are related, and a Nazi.
That's typical of The Guardian.
Some of that shit is racist, some of it is not. The truly racist stuff is mostly outliers that don't represent any significant numbers.
The stuff that is 'creeping into mainstream' is people taking an honest look at reality. We're not all the same. That is not a judgment of worth, or value, but there are clear genetic based differences. How is science supposed to progress if they can not acknowledge that because *feelings*.
An example from the article:
> “Jews have a higher average level of verbal intelligence than non-Jewish whites”.
Is given as an example of a racist comment. [But that is a known fact, not racism.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jewish_intelligence)
I'd like to see the facts speak for themselves also, but believing in facts means you're racist.
Even believing in race makes you racist.
The article is a poorly written attack piece that tries to equate anyone that asks race related questions with 'Eugenics'.
Well, the title certainly is terrible, hence my abbreviation of it. While I agree that the author does attempt to smear anyone who asks race-related questions, I think they did a pretty poor job of it. While presenting the other sides point of view I think she ended up writing an interesting piece that, in my eyes, tends to support the other side more than hers.
It's pleasing to see that scientific articles based on race-related questions are apparently becoming less taboo. Of course it all depends on the articles themselves: if they are of reasonable quality and data based then all good. The author does have a point about poor papers getting published and prejudices tainting the process, however in the academic climate she presents, it seems more likely that those prejudices will work against quality race-related science. @Justintoxicated
> The article is a poorly written attack piece that tries to equate anyone that asks race related questions with 'Eugenics'.
Well, the title certainly is terrible, hence my abbreviation of it. While I agree that the author does attempt to smear anyone who asks race-related questions, I think they did a pretty poor job of it. While presenting the other sides point of view I think she ended up writing an interesting piece that, in my eyes, tends to support the other side more than hers.
It's pleasing to see that scientific articles based on race-related questions are apparently becoming less taboo. Of course it all depends on the articles themselves: if they are of reasonable quality and data based then all good. The author does have a point about poor papers getting published and prejudices tainting the process, however in the academic climate she presents, it seems more likely that those prejudices will work against quality race-related science. @Justintoxicated
Don't know why you're getting downvoted, this place is usually good at only downvoting spam and crap like that.
I just thought I'd say one more thing here. When you say things like 'It's a racist fact', you're falling into the exact trap racists want to find you in. Either you agree with them on all their horrible ideas about white supremacy, the forced expropriation of all non-whites to their native lands, etc etc, or you have to deny reality.
Those aren't your only choices. You can accept reality without embracing it. If in the real world, Jews have more IQ points on average than other racial groups, then that's just another horrible part of the world we're given. I don't like it, I wish it weren't so, and it certainly doesn't make me feel any different towards my fellow man than I otherwise would, but it's the truth. The horrible truth that we have to accept because whether or not I, you, or anyone else feels it's racist doesn't change shit about the actual facts.
We can't control reality, but we can certainly control how we react to it. Don't let anyone confuse you away from that.
Don't know why you're getting downvoted, this place is usually good at only downvoting spam and crap like that.
I just thought I'd say one more thing here. When you say things like 'It's a racist fact', you're falling into the exact trap racists want to find you in. Either you agree with them on all their horrible ideas about white supremacy, the forced expropriation of all non-whites to their native lands, etc etc, or you have to deny reality.
Those aren't your only choices. You can accept reality without embracing it. If in the real world, Jews have more IQ points on average than other racial groups, then that's just another horrible part of the world we're given. I don't like it, I wish it weren't so, and it certainly doesn't make me feel any different towards my fellow man than I otherwise would, but it's the truth. The horrible truth that we have to accept because whether or not I, you, or anyone else feels it's racist doesn't change shit about the actual facts.
We can't control reality, but we can certainly control how we react to it. Don't let anyone confuse you away from that.
So it is a racist fact. Still means it is a fact.
So it is a racist fact. Still means it is a fact.
It's a racist fact.
You've said some stupid things.
But that's the dumbest.
I'm quoting it due to your habit of deleting the stupid shit you say.
> It's a racist fact.
You've said some stupid things.
But that's the dumbest.
I'm quoting it due to your habit of deleting the stupid shit you say.
This is actually an opinion piece and it notes at the end that author is promoting a book seemingly related to the subject.
Her case is also built on 1 paper and 2 studies (which are social science based and not necessarily empirical in their methods).
She also references a magazine and book that are obviously not peer reviewed papers and psychological study from 1969
Her claim that "racism is creeping back into main stream science" has been presented in a rather weak manner (which is the sort of thing scientifically ignorant eat right up, the types of folks that are always looking for something to grab on to so they can feel intellectually superior with out actually having to do any intellectual work).
Of course it is important to understand that the purpose of this article is to sell books, and I think the author has been successful in garnering attention, so marketing wise it's not a bad article.