Race and IQs

[Angrboda]

You took issue with me exposing the obvious bias in the research conducted on racial IQ, why?

You specifically made their bias an issue when their bias isn't the issue, but rather the validity of their work.

Now If you have information proving the 'Bell Curve' scientifically sound, provide it, otherwise your objections have no merit.

That doesn't follow, but by all means continue making fallacious arguments if it makes you feel better.

---

ETA: The OP asked two questions. 1) Is believing the research of these men itself racist? and 2) Is there an objection to teaching these ideas?

If you feel that the authors' bias is relevant to either question, I'd like to hear in what way it is relevant?

[ohreally]

Pretty sure that average IQ has little to do with genetics (except for actually having the genes of a human being) and everything to do with education level, health conditions, crime levels, stable government/society and so on.  Specific individuals with abnormal high or low IQ might have a gift or curse passed on from their parents, sure.  I'm sure that length of life, level of education, and income correlate with IQ on average and would bear out in a similar order.

[Huggy Bear]

You took issue with me exposing the obvious bias in the research conducted on racial IQ, why?

You specifically made their bias an issue when their bias isn't the issue, but rather the validity of their work.

Now If you have information proving the 'Bell Curve' scientifically sound, provide it, otherwise your objections have no merit.

That doesn't follow, but by all means continue making fallacious arguments if it makes you feel better.

---

ETA: The OP asked two questions.  1) Is believing the research of these men itself racist? and 2) Is there an objection to teaching these ideas?

If you feel that the authors' bias is relevant to either question, I'd like to hear in what way it is relevant?

Let's take Richard Lynn whom the OP references and the 'Bell Curve' cites as a source.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1994/12/...ell-curve/

Lynn is an associate editor of Mankind Quarterly, and has received $325,000 from the Pioneer Fund. One of his articles expressed support for the view that “the poor and the ill” are “weak specimens whose proliferation needs to be discouraged in the interests of the improvement of the genetic quality of the group, and ultimately of group survival.” He has also written that the genetic mental superiority of the Jews may be a happy Darwinian byproduct of “intermittent persecutions which the more intelligent may have been able to foresee and escape.”

Lynn’s work is cited twenty-four times in The Bell Curve’s bibliography. It is used to support three important claims: that East Asians have a higher average IQ than whites; that most immigrants come from groups with subpar IQs; and that the IQ score of blacks in Africa is “substantially below” the American black average.

https://www.samtiden.com/tbc/las_artikel.php?id=66

Lynn chose to ignore the substance of Crawford-Nutt's paper, which reported that 228 black high school students in Soweto scored an average of 45 correct responses on the Matrices--HIGHER than the mean of 44 achieved by the same-age white sample on whom the test's norms had been established and well above the mean of Owen's coloured pupils.

Let me bring up a quote of yours from another thread

That's confirmation bias plain and simple.  You count the hits but ignore (or rationalize away) the misses.  That's only proof that you want so badly to believe that you're willing to distort the evidence to fit.  That only leads to unreliable conclusions based on fallacious reasoning.  If you're willing to distort the evidence because of such strong, irrational bias, why should we believe anything you have to say about NDEs?

So now all of a sudden confirmation bias isn't an issue? I've pointed out that ONE; I repeat ONE racist organization is behind the research of IQ based on race, but noooo Jormungandr, there's nothing fishy about that at all.  

Furthermore it has been shown that IQ's were an ESTIMATION based upon Lynns faulty data.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1994/12/...ell-curve/

Nevertheless, Murray and Herrnstein venture an estimate of African IQ, drawn mainly from an article by Lynn that appeared in Mankind Quarterly in 1991.

https://www.samtiden.com/tbc/las_artikel.php?id=66

To answer the question they have posed, Herrnstein and Murray call on the authority of Richard Lynn of the University of Ulster in Ireland, described as "a leading scholar of racial and ethnic differences," from whose advice they have "benefited especially." They state that Lynn, who in 1991 reviewed 11 African IQ studies, "estimated the median black African IQ to be 75...about 10 points lower than the current figure for American blacks."

Since you seem to be in acceptance of this shoddy research work, can you explain to me why out of ALL the immigrant groups that come to the US, the most educated are African?

African immigrants are more educated than most — including people born in U.S.

Immigrants from Africa Boast Higher Education Levels Than Overall U.S. Population

Therefore based on the evidence the answers to both questions are as follows:

1) Is believing the research of these men itself racist?

Seeing how the research is based on no real science, the answer is yes.

2) Is there an objection to teaching these ideas?

Seeing how the research is based on no real science, the answer is yes.

---

It would seem the OP is too much of a coward to have any further discourse...

[I_am_not_mafia]

Why are so many people taking IQ tests.  I thought they were pretty much for identifying children with developmental disabilities.  With all of the standardized test scores (SAT, ACT, GRE) it doesn't seem like it has a point, again, outside of identifying special needs kids.

I went to a job interview once and the only thing they did was to give me an IQ test.

Many years later I was approached by a job agent about a job. I realised it was the same company so got him to ask whether they were still doing IQ tests. When he came back and said they were I told him I wouldn't bother.

[ignoramus]

After an exhaustive study of youtube videos, I feel I am confident enough now to claim the following:

Cats are definitely funnier than dogs!
Women are not as good as men when it come to parking a B Double or operating a 250 ton tower crane!
Women are much better at breast feeding!
Black people are better (higher paid) athletes
White people are better (higher paid)  wankers bankers
Non religious people believe in one less God than their religious counterparts!
Huggy enjoys serious discussions more than humorous ones and that I should take this nonsense somewhere else.

[Huggy Bear]

We're trying to have a serious discussion, take that nonsense somewhere else.

[Angrboda]

There's an additional sense in which you were shooting the messenger, Huggy. Discounting the work of these researchers is not the same thing as refuting their hypothesis that there are inherent differences in intelligence between the races. I'd have to go back and reread your rant about eugenics and nazism, but it seemed obvious that your point was as much a dispute with that hypothesis as it was a dispute about the research of these individuals. Alex was quite right that if one wants to assert that there are no inherent differences in intelligence, one is equally burdened. Refuting the evidence for the hypothesis that there are inherent differences is not the same as showing that there aren't. I suspect that the latter is ultimately your aim, and so knocking the specific researchers and research of these men in a very real sense is shooting the messenger instead of killing the message.

---

Let me bring up a quote of yours from another thread

That's confirmation bias plain and simple.  You count the hits but ignore (or rationalize away) the misses.  That's only proof that you want so badly to believe that you're willing to distort the evidence to fit.  That only leads to unreliable conclusions based on fallacious reasoning.  If you're willing to distort the evidence because of such strong, irrational bias, why should we believe anything you have to say about NDEs?

So now all of a sudden confirmation bias isn't an issue? I've pointed out that ONE; I repeat ONE racist organization is behind the research of IQ based on race, but noooo Jormungandr, there's nothing fishy about that at all.  

I don't see how confirmation bias is the issue. But apparently you'll grab at any straw. One third of your quotes focused solely on the question of bias, and your little rant about eugenics and nazism only seemed to support my point that this goes beyond an issue with the specific research for you, and instead is an attack on the very hypothesis of inherent differences in intelligence itself. Speaking of things from other threads, regarding the question of abiogenesis and atheism, you've made clear that you have trouble accepting the validity of answering such questions with "I don't know." This appears to be yet another example where your prejudice against agnosticism concerning an issue is expressing itself (see next).

Since you seem to be in acceptance of this shoddy research work, can you explain to me why out of ALL the immigrant groups that come to the US, the most educated are African?

This is outright slander. I took great pains to point out my agnosticism on the issue. That you choose to turn around and claim otherwise just makes you out to be a liar.

1) Is believing the research of these men itself racist?

Seeing how the research is based on no real science, the answer is yes.

2) Is there an objection to teaching these ideas?

Seeing how the research is based on no real science, the answer is yes.

I disagree with you on the first, and agree with you on the second. More importantly, I don't think your digression about the research was aimed at the OP's questions but rather at the hypothesis that there are inherent differences between the races in intelligence. I can understand your concern about the question, but shooting down particular researchers' work is not the same as addressing that hypothesis. Nor does it address what I think was an unvoiced question which was what it ultimately means if there are inherent differences, to which I think Tiberius' answer was a good start.

[Huggy Bear]

So basically what you're stating that even though the methods the research is based upon has been proven to be flawed, it still has to be proven that there are no differences in IQ racially?

That's not how it works.

Have you proven there is no God?

There was a time when blacks were thought to be inherently cowards, and were not allowed to serve in combat units.

The Harlem hellfighters proved that theory wrong.

There was a time when blacks were thought as not intelligent enough to fly planes.

The Tuskegee airmen proved that theory wrong.

How about not making up racist theories based on absolutely nothing in the first place?

You've also ignored my question posed that if Africans are so inferior in intellect, why are the the most educated immigrant group and more educated than US citizens overall?

I've shown you that the methods used in the 'bell curve' has been thoroughly debunked. Yet you refuse to acknowledge it, and better yet, you refuse to post any contradicting evidence to support you position.

I'm looking at you sideways right now...

[Sal]

As CL wrote, it's not racist pointing out a fact.

However, I question how valid this work is, which was noted elsewhere in this thread.

[ignoramus]

^^ Jesus Christ Huggy...
How many fucking persecution complexes can one person possibly have? Unbelievable!