RE: Peterson's 12 Rules For Life, have you heard of this?
September 1, 2018 at 6:04 am
(This post was last modified: September 1, 2018 at 6:20 am by bennyboy.)
To be honest, I expected to find that IQ differences were within the statistical margin, and that when controlled for economic background or other social issues (single parenthood etc.), they'd disappear completely. I was perfectly read to talk about how clearly black people were oppressed with regard to salary and job opportunities, and how to force white people to stop that oppression. I was kind of moving in that direction when google reared its ugly head.
The results I found are a worst case scenario for me. The strong correlation between IQ and income might actually BE the main reason for differential income. But even if it's not, it creates one hell of a confounding variable. Poverty, you can potentially solve. Quality of education, ditto. But IQ? The options are truly grim: 1) we find a way to remove IQ from the income curve-- i.e. establish a true forced outcome (Hello, communism. . . I'm sure you'll work out great this time!); 2) improve the IQ of black people.
With regard to (2), it's shown that while childhood boosts can be gotten by environment, heritability after puberty is at about 75% - 80%. It's a monster. So even though we create special programs and so on (and we should, if just for the enrichment of those children's lives), the effect on IQ in adulthood is going to be fairly negligible. What are we left with? Eugenics? I'm quite depressed about it actually-- I literally don't see a practical way out of this situation.
Luckily, there is at least SOME hope for improvement. I don't know what % of black children are faced with health issues so serious that they will retard development, but:
At least there's something we can actually work on. Twin studies and adoption studies are a little bit contradictory, which is actually very good news-- because the normal results are really unambiguously bad.
It seems to me, rob, that the PC left is pretty much all about committing wholesale to extreme labels, and that it IS in fact very much akin to religion-- disagreement, even in part, isn't just an academic point for them-- it amounts to heresy.
The results I found are a worst case scenario for me. The strong correlation between IQ and income might actually BE the main reason for differential income. But even if it's not, it creates one hell of a confounding variable. Poverty, you can potentially solve. Quality of education, ditto. But IQ? The options are truly grim: 1) we find a way to remove IQ from the income curve-- i.e. establish a true forced outcome (Hello, communism. . . I'm sure you'll work out great this time!); 2) improve the IQ of black people.
With regard to (2), it's shown that while childhood boosts can be gotten by environment, heritability after puberty is at about 75% - 80%. It's a monster. So even though we create special programs and so on (and we should, if just for the enrichment of those children's lives), the effect on IQ in adulthood is going to be fairly negligible. What are we left with? Eugenics? I'm quite depressed about it actually-- I literally don't see a practical way out of this situation.
Luckily, there is at least SOME hope for improvement. I don't know what % of black children are faced with health issues so serious that they will retard development, but:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ Wrote: Recent studies suggest that family and parenting characteristics are not significant contributors to variation in IQ scores; however, poor prenatal environment, malnutrition and disease can have deleterious effects.
At least there's something we can actually work on. Twin studies and adoption studies are a little bit contradictory, which is actually very good news-- because the normal results are really unambiguously bad.
(September 1, 2018 at 6:03 am)robvalue Wrote: I would hope that most people are able to rationally consider each issue on its own merits, rather than committing wholesale to one extreme "label" or another. It almost becomes religious at that point.
It seems to me, rob, that the PC left is pretty much all about committing wholesale to extreme labels, and that it IS in fact very much akin to religion-- disagreement, even in part, isn't just an academic point for them-- it amounts to heresy.
