Scientific Racism - Gaming World Forums

Topic: Scientific Racism (Read 2926 times)

Print

ThugTears666

#1 May 08, 2008, 08:03:13 am

You probally thought you werent gunna die today suprise!
Group: Member
Joined: Dec 7, 2002
Posts: 3930

Me and my flatmate constantly have arguments, he has made some pretty racist claims but this claim was kinda hard to argue against, it consisted of scientific proof.

I thought this might be an interesting topic to discuss and I actually hope this subject gets alot of replies.
The following link is a scientific article which "proves" that on average a white person geneticially has a bigger IQ than a black person and this is on the majority based on genetics not cultural upbringing. Which means in general he can claim that he is smarter than the average black person?

http://taxa.epi.umn.edu/~mbmiller/journals/pppl/200504/2/235-2.html

What do you guys think?

Logged

Mongoloid

#2 May 08, 2008, 08:18:43 am

Group: Member
Joined: Apr 1, 2002
Posts: 1465

Yea but who'd win in a b-ball match?

Swish.

edit: First.

Logged

Carrion Crow

#3 May 08, 2008, 08:27:18 am

I need to watch things die
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Apr 5, 2006
Posts: 3516

White people don't make stupid generalisations.

Logged

ThugTears666

#4 May 08, 2008, 08:39:06 am

You probally thought you werent gunna die today suprise!
Group: Member
Joined: Dec 7, 2002
Posts: 3930

Quote from: crumply on May 08, 2008, 08:27:18 am

White people don't make stupid generalisations.

But he's saying on average, which according to this scientific document is right.

(I'm not arguing for him here, I'm just stating his opinion cause it kinda stumped me)

Last Edit: May 09, 2008, 05:01:52 am by Afura

Logged

hima

#5 May 08, 2008, 09:49:27 am

Comrade!
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Apr 4, 2005
Posts: 344

Hey, thank you for something very interesting to read.

To answer your question, I don't think he can claim that. The term "smart" is vague and I don't think it can be judge from just IQ , the size of the brain and the number of the cortical neurons alone. Also, I believe it's still in debate today whether intelligence come from genetic alone or it's effected by the environment.

I'd rather wait and see if the differences it's still the same in the next 10 years or so before making any conclusion. (And if they can define intelligence by then. I personally think that being smart is really depend on the situation.)

Right now, I think your friend can claim that he has IQ score, brain size and the number of the cortical neurons more than average black people, supported by the article above. But not smart, no.

Like our games? Want to support? You can support us by making a donation.

My Projects
Click on the userbar to enter the game thread.

Genre : Shooting-RPG Status : Completed
Genre : Bullet Hell Shooting Status : Completed

[/center]

My Blog http://hima.gptouch.com/

Logged

Carrion Crow

#6 May 08, 2008, 09:55:01 am

I need to watch things die
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Apr 5, 2006
Posts: 3516

Quote from: Afura on May 08, 2008, 08:39:06 am

But he's saying on average, which according to this scientific document is right.

(I'm not arguing for him here, I'm just stating his opinion cause it kinda stumped me)

Man I hope some idiot doesn't think I personally am racist.

I was joking (I was making a generalisation about generalisations).

I'm not sure if this is one of those things that you can prove. Intelligence is a lot nurture over nature unless you're born with some kind of brain damaging and that kinda thing is very individual - talking about it on such a general scale is somewhat pointless.

Logged

Wil

#7 May 08, 2008, 10:14:24 am

Premium Member
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Dec 24, 2002
Posts: 394

Why does your flatmate think scientific evidence is reason for making racist claims. Being against racism, and any other kind of bigotry is a moral position.

sorrow is the key that gets our tears out of eye jail.

Logged

XxNemesis29xX

#8 May 08, 2008, 10:17:37 am

Homer >> (_8(l)
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 428

Haha, I bet a white guy thought of doing this experiment... cause if it was a black oh, OH MAN IT's AWOEN! (...on)

-Official Progress + REVAMP II Release Thread-
http://www.gamingw.net/forums/index.php?topic=72013.msg1316278#msg1316278
-Mirror 1-
http://dmatter.org/demos/the%20legend%20of%20the%20philosophers%20stone.rar

Logged

thecatamites

#9 May 08, 2008, 12:12:25 pm

clockamite
Group: Premium Member
Joined: May 6, 2007
Posts: 1445

Quote from: hima on May 08, 2008, 09:49:27 am

Hey, thank you for something very interesting to read.

To answer your question, I don't think he can claim that. The term "smart" is vague and I don't think it can be judge from just IQ , the size of the brain and the number of the cortical neurons alone. Also, I believe it's still in debate today whether intelligence come from genetic alone or it's effected by the environment.

I'd rather wait and see if the differences it's still the same in the next 10 years or so before making any conclusion. (And if they can define intelligence by then. I personally think that being smart is really depend on the situation.)

Right now, I think your friend can claim that he has IQ score, brain size and the number of the cortical neurons more than average black people, supported by the article above. But not smart, no.

This. The IQ test is hardly what you'd call a failsafe method for measuring intelligence... In fact, the entire idea of numerically measuring intelligence is still disputed by many scientists. The IQ test just measures the subjects ability to do an IQ test, after all, so it shouldn't be taken as word of god or whatever, especially as applies to something as subjective as intelligence.

http://harmonyzone.org

Logged

Kaworu

#10 May 08, 2008, 12:17:16 pm

kaworu*Sigh*Isnt he the cutest person ever
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Oct 12, 2002
Posts: 5755

I thought it was already universally accepted that IQ tests are pointless/stupid?
You can be like REALLY FUCKING SMART yet not know as much as a dumbo, because they had better education opportunities etc.

Logged

Frankie

#11 May 08, 2008, 12:19:15 pm

Phylactère Colaaaaaa!
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Jan 25, 2002
Posts: 473

see, when you hear about something that sounds dubious, search for its wikipedia article, and read the "criticism" section. Heres what it says. Poof, you got your answer :

Outdated methodology
(in a nutshell: the studies are based on a now outdated view of how intelligence works)

Hidden content (Click to reveal)

A 2006 paper by Professor Denny Borsboom argues that mainstream contemporary test analysis does not reflect substantial recent developments in the field and "bears an uncanny resemblance to the psychometric state of the art as it existed in the 1950s."[145]It also claims that some of the most influential recent studies on group differences in intelligence, in order to show that the tests are unbiased, use outdated methodology. In particular the reliance on classical test theory rather than more sophisticated measurement models as found in item response theory.

Utility of research
(not really an argument about whether or not race impacts intelligence, but stil

Hidden content (Click to reveal)

Theories of race and intelligence have been challenged on grounds of their utility. Critics want to know what purpose such research could serve and why it has been an intense an area of focus for a few researchers. Some defend the research, saying it has egalitarian aims or that it is pure science; others say that the true motivation for the research is the same as that of the eugenics movement and other forms of scientific racism.[146][147] Even supporters of intelligence research have described such research as analogous to "working with dynamite" or "dangerous play" in sports.[148]

As to whether research in this area is desirable, John C. Loehlin wrote in 1992, "Research on racial differences in intelligence is desirable if the research is appropriately motivated, honestly done, and adequately communicated." [emphasis original] Defenders of the research suggest that both scientific curiosity and a desire to draw benefits from the research are appropriate motivations.[citation needed] Researchers such as Richard Lynn have suggested that conclusions from the research can help make political decisions, such as the type of educational opportunities and expectations of achievement policy makers should have for people of different races.[citation needed] Charles Murray, a political scientist of the American Enterprise Institute has used their conclusions to criticize social programs based on racial equality that fail, he claims, to recognize the realities of racial differences.[citation needed]

Test construction
(in a nutshell: the tests cant make a difference between "nature" and "nurture" in the first place)

Hidden content (Click to reveal)

While the existence of average IQ test score differences has been a matter of accepted fact for decades, a great deal of controversy exists among scholars over the question of whether these score differences reflected real differences in cognitive ability. Some claim that there is no evidence for test bias since IQ tests are equally good predictors of IQ-related factors (such as school performance) for U.S. Blacks and Whites.[149] The performance differences persist in tests and testing situations in which care has been taken to eliminate bias.[149] It has also been suggested that IQ tests are formulated in such a way as to disadvantage minorities.[149] Controlled studies have shown that test construction does not substantially contribute to the IQ gap.[149] However, some psychometricians are not satisfied that the question of test bias is fully answered by these results.[150][151][152] Also, all commenters reject the common misconception that IQ is meant to measure "innate" differences in intelligence, and they agree that average IQ scores on their own say nothing about the cause of the differences.

The preponderance of evidence indicates that IQ tests measuring general intelligence are crossculturally valid. There is little or no evidence of population-specific cultural effects apart from the obvious example of language bias.[153] For example, Robert Sternberg et al. found that the IQ of 12- to 15-year-old Kenyans predicted school grades at about the same level as they do in the West.[154] IQ also predicted university performance equally well in African and non-African engineering students in South Africa in a 2004 study.[155] Salgado et al. (2003) demonstrated the international generalizability of general mental ability across 10 member countries of the European Community and differences in a nation’s culture, religion, language, socioeconomic level or employment legislation did not affect the predictive validity of IQ tests.[156]

However, other studies have found evidence for bias. A 2005 study finds some evidence that the WAIS-R is not culture-fair for Mexican Americans.[157] Other recent studies have questioned the culture-fairness of IQ tests when used in South Africa.[158][159]

Source of funding
(in a nutshell: the people who started these race vs. IQ studies in the first place were tied to numerous white supremacist groups, so obvious bias)

Hidden content (Click to reveal)

Proponents of genetic explanations of race/IQ correlation, such as Rushton, Lynn, and Jensen, have often been criticized for their intimate links with groups that have historic ties to Nazis and eugenics of the early 19th century, such as the Pioneer Fund. It has been characterized by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group. Rushton is the current head of the Pioneer Fund and has spoken at conferences of the American Renaissance magazine, in which he has also published articles.[3] Anti-racist Searchlight Magazine described one of these as a "veritable 'who’s who' of American white supremacy."[4]. Beverly Daniel Tatum writes that dominant cultures often set the parameters by which minority cultures will be judged. Minority groups are labeled as substandard in significant ways: for example, blacks have historically been characterized as less intelligent than whites. Tatum suggests that the ability to set these parameters is a form of white privilege.[160]

Proponents of genetic explanations of race/IQ correlation have in turn accused their critics of suppressing scientific debate in the name of political correctness. They claim harassment and interference with both their work and funding. The Pioneer Fund, whose stated purpose is "to advance the scientific study of heredity and human differences", makes "no grants to individuals but only to research institutions, mainly universities, mostly for specialized 'niche' projects, which have difficulty attracting funds from government sources or from larger foundations".[161]

there you go.

Last Edit: May 08, 2008, 12:22:40 pm by Psychoskull

Bloggin' | Website | Tubin'|Tweetin'

Logged

Luvdisc

#12 May 08, 2008, 01:48:17 pm

Who the hell is Bono?
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Nov 28, 2005
Posts: 342

IQ doesn't neccessarily equate into intelligence, or even being smart for that matter...

One of my neighbor's kids scored extremely high in an IQ test, but the little fucker can't even tie his own shoes..

I think he's autistic, but my point stands...

Logged

Lars

#13 May 08, 2008, 02:46:27 pm

Fuck off!
Group: Member
Joined: Apr 7, 2003
Posts: 2360

hey

I thought IQ depended on stimulation when young and not so much on genes?

Logged

Marmot

#14 May 08, 2008, 03:35:15 pm

i can sell you my body
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 1243

ask him if he believes the world is controlled by shapeshifting jewish lizardmen.

those beliefs always come in a package

-

Logged

Mince Wobley

#15 May 08, 2008, 05:33:52 pm

None of them knew they were robots.
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Nov 5, 2006
Posts: 3242

What Psychoskull said.

Also what do you guys think when people say that jews are more intelligent than other people just because they got more nobel prizes, etc? For example:

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/14150.htm

Play Raimond Ex (if you haven't already)

I'll not TAKE ANYTHING you write like this seriously because it looks dumb

Logged

dada

#16 May 08, 2008, 05:37:11 pm

VILLAIN
Group: Administrator
Joined: Dec 27, 2002
Posts: 5538

Look, if your study says "it's because of genetics, not because of nurture", it should make some good arguments to prove that this is, in fact, true. Because it really isn't as easy as it may seem.

Quote from: Lars on May 08, 2008, 02:46:27 pm

I thought IQ depended on stimulation when young and not so much on genes?

As far as I'm aware, the consensus is that genetics do play a role, but stimulation is also extremely important, like you say. If you grow up in Africa, you have very few possibilities. Your mind doesn't get to grow up in a stimulating environment. That's what's likely to make the difference.

Logged

Farren

#17 May 08, 2008, 05:39:40 pm

I fear and I tremble
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Aug 21, 2005
Posts: 6165

Quote

Also what do you guys think when people say that jews are more intelligent than other people just because they got more nobel prizes, etc?

Well I know for a fact all Brazilians are stupid as shit and you continue to support my hypothesis

DEUCE: MEETING THE URINE UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL AND REALIZING IT'S JUST LIKE ME AND MY PREJUDICES THIS WHOLE TIME WERE COMPLETELY FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF PTTTTHTHTHH GOD IT'S EVERYWHERE<br />DEUCE: FUCK THIS TASTES LIKE PISS<br />PANTS: WHERE IT SHOULD TASTE LIKE COTTON CANDY OR PICKLES<br />DEUCE: OR AT LEAST LIKE URINE NOT PISS

Logged

ase

#18 May 08, 2008, 05:42:11 pm

It's A Short Eternity... live with it
Group: Premium Member
Joined: May 23, 2003
Posts: 4526

Quote from: Wikipedia

Evidence suggests that family environmental factors may have an effect upon childhood IQ, accounting for up to a quarter of the variance. On the other hand, by late adolescence this correlation disappears, such that adoptive siblings are no more similar in IQ than strangers.[12] Moreover, adoption studies indicate that, by adulthood, adoptive siblings are no more similar in IQ than strangers (IQ correlation near zero), while full siblings show an IQ correlation of 0.6. Twin studies reinforce this pattern: monozygotic (identical) twins raised separately are highly similar in IQ (0.86), more so than dizygotic (fraternal) twins raised together (0.6) and much more than adoptive siblings (~0.0). [13] Consequently, in the context of the "nature versus nurture" debate, the "nature" component appears to be much more important than the "nurture" component in explaining IQ variance in the general adult population of the United States.

woah. I find this hard to believe!

Logged

Mince Wobley

#19 May 08, 2008, 05:56:49 pm

None of them knew they were robots.
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Nov 5, 2006
Posts: 3242

Quote from: Harry Manback on May 08, 2008, 05:39:40 pm

Well I know for a fact all Brazilians are stupid as shit and you continue to support my hypothesis

But everyone is stupid

Play Raimond Ex (if you haven't already)

I'll not TAKE ANYTHING you write like this seriously because it looks dumb

Logged

Artis Leon Ivey Jr

#20 May 08, 2008, 06:01:47 pm

Insane teacher
Group: Premium Member
Joined: Oct 8, 2002
Posts: 10515

Quote from: ASE on May 08, 2008, 05:42:11 pm

woah. I find this hard to believe!

IQ tests are bullshit though. I think Sredni's got a higher IQ than me but he's got awful grades, and I know lots of people below my IQ who are graduating early and shit and even I think they are dumb as a bag of rocks. I don't think any of us have had official tests though FACEBOOK QUIZ but if I had to guess I'd say a lot of the people with really high IQs are dumb mother fuckers. look at Fishmech.

there's always a degree of biology attached to intelligence but it's pretty clearly been proven to not be on racial lines and anyone that thinks so is a fucking retard who should go back to high school bio because they learned nothing.

brian chemicals

Logged