RE: Peterson's 12 Rules For Life, have you heard of this?
August 31, 2018 at 10:38 am
(This post was last modified: August 31, 2018 at 10:50 am by bennyboy.)
(August 31, 2018 at 10:12 am)Khemikal Wrote: Indeed, and "we" are noting that the problems of employment vis-a-vis racism in america are an inability to network in segregation, racial biases that lead to uneven selection, and disparate pay if selected.I don't know this for sure, and you haven't produced facts about it, but I think it's very likely true.
Quote:IQ is irrelevant to all of that. It's not as if good jobs sit you down for an IQ test. They have no fucking clue what your IQ is.When I do face-to-face interviews, I can determine very quickly indeed who's smart. Language skills, the ability to comprehend tricky questions and answer them well-- even the manner in which someone admits they don't KNOW the answer shows where people stand.
Quote: It may be true that a smarter person operating within privilege can navigate that privilege to a greater extent - and this is why studies that look for a correlation between the two isolate for that effect by removing demographics known to be disadvantaged for social or institutional reasons. Fun fact, even within those controlled groups....things like smoking, or having been divorced...or possessing a credit card..entirely cancel out whatever professional benefit there is to having a high IQ as it relates to wealth or earnings.I'm not quite sure what you're saying, here. What do you mean by "controlled groups?" I don't think that you normally look "within" controlled groups-- you control variables so that you can discount their influence in producing data.
Quote:I wish IQ had a more pronounced and resilient effect, I really do, your boy here aint exactly a dummy...even though I am miscegenated. Guess I must've got the good brain -and- the good hair.

Not gonna lie, I'm a little jealous. Black girls are hawt. Wait-- that IS what you're saying, right?
Quote:Because racism is a thing regardless of whether or not there are "differences", and those "differences" do not support or justify racism.No, of course not. I wouldn't say either intelligence or income are the best measures of a human being. But they certainly provide a metric for the alt-right in claiming white superiority (over blacks at least); and they do challenge the idea that black people's circumstances are entirely a product of oppression by whites.
Quote:Racism is also the fact that networking is difficult in segregation, black sounding names don't get calls back, and black people get paid less at every education level. IQ in't a factor in any of that, they're just the wrong shade of lipstick.Yeah, and it depends on the job, too. Not everyone is applying to be a lawyer or a doctor all the time. But I wouldn't depend too strongly on education level. In English teaching, I've found a negative correlation between degree and competence-- that extra 4 years of social skills and real-life experience really don't look good when you throw an adult in with a bunch of noisy kids. What I need is someone who's literate, but still has two feet planted on the ground. Given a guy with a humanities degree vs. a guy with a MSc degree in linguistic developmental neurology or something, I'm taking the basket-weaver 90% of the time.
Quote:You're starting to toe the line of my ability to take you seriously, or as a non racist who's ingested racist talking points. How do you suggest that an employer determine he has the most intelligent candidate, look at their skin and say.."well, we all know that blacks are dumber than whites so imma go for Phillip." No, ofc not..right...but that's all that could be drawn from your white supremacist shitpost.I pretty much AM saying that. If I had a position for which IQ was relevant-- like difficult computer programming, and I had two comparable college graduates, I'd be right to go with the probability that the Asian guy is smarter. Now, I may be giving up black Bill Gates and kick myself later, but on average, given two equally qualified candidates, why wouldn't I consider the statistical realities when I make my decision.
(Although what I'd actually do, in fact, would be to give a test, and choose the candidate who performed better.)