Re: The Bell Curve globally viewed
- From: NoName <NoName@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 11:44:41 -0700
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 11:25:59 -0700, El Castor <NotAnyone@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
NoName <NoName@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 09:56:29 -0700, El Castor <NotAnyone@xxxxxxxxxxxx>So what? Whites ARE inherently more intelligent then Blacks. Koreans,
wrote:
You can drag out Jensen if you like -- and I will also.
NoName <NoName@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 29 Apr 2007 04:18:40 -0700, Jake <jcbepstein@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:And their work is supported by some of the most distinguished
On 29 avr, 03:39, NoName <NoN...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:17:02 -0700, El Castor <NotAny...@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Israel 94
This particular number caused more comment than any other in
Lynn's book. Nearly every IQ study I have seen in the past
rated Jewish IQs above average, although most of the studies
have been on European (Ashkenazis). There is wikipedia
article "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_intelligence";
which also warns us "This article or section may contain original
research or unverified claims." The table shown cites
IQ estimates between 117 to "1.2 below non-Jewish whites".
So the 94 figure for Israel is out of line with these estimates.
The difference between the population of Israel
and an all-Ashkenazi sampling is that Israel has
both an Arab population and and Oriental Jewish population
(Sephardics).
The same professor Lynn recently published a paper
INTELLIGENCE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EUROPEAN AND ORIENTAL JEWS IN ISRAEL
with Hanna David (an Israel Tel Aviv University in a peer reviewed
journal whose
abstract is available
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=523520
******
A number of studies have found that Ashkenazi Jews in the United
States have a
high average IQ. It has been proposed by Cochran, Hardy and Harpending
(2006)
that this can be explained by the occupational constraints imposed on
the Ashkenazi
for many centuries in Europe, when they were largely confined to money-
lending.
They propose that this selected for the high verbal and mathematical
intelligence
that has several times been found in American Ashkenazim. The current
study
investigates how far this theory holds for European and Oriental Jews
in Israel.
A review of studies shows that Oriental Jews in Israel have an average
IQ 14 points l
ower than that of European (largely Ashkenazi) Jews. It is proposed
that this
difference can be explained in terms of the Cochran, Hardy and
Harpending theory
because Oriental Jews were permitted to engage in a much wider range
of
occupations and hence did not come under the selection pressure to
develop
the high verbal and mathematical intelligence that was present for
Ashkenazim.
******
I find the explanation "hand wavy", not uncommon in the social
"sciences".
I don't see any way of scientifically way of verifying the proposed
mechanism.
And is that mechanism genetic (Darwinian selection) or social? I have
seen other explanations, like the tradition of scholarship (rabbis
etc),
(which is social) to having to be more intelligent to survive the
periodic
pogroms in Europe (Darwinian = genetic selection) . But nobody
really
knows why, I have seen no science, just speculation.
The other factor is as I have pointed out, similar IQ gaps exist
between
upper and class groups throughout the world. If so, the gaps are more
likely to have social rather than genetic origins. In Northern
Ireland,
Catholics score 15 points lower than the Protestants. I'd guess
that both groups have about the same genetic composition,
so we can't grab and run with a racist argument.
One aspect about the Bell Curve book is that it sold 400,000 or
so copies. If it were truely an academic book, it would sell
to a limited group of academics, total sales around 1,000-2,000.
Where did all this interest in sociology come from? It didn't.
The book is not an academic contribution, it is not schlolarship.
It appealed to a fairly large number of racists in the USA.
The difference between Lynn and Murray is that the former is
an academic and the latter not. When Lynn publishes
in peer review journals he is playing the game correctly
and scientifically. Books tend not to be peer reviewed
and can be intellectually dishonest.
His own orientation towards neo-eugenics is disturbing,
however (Murray edges close to that also but never
reaches that far).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lynn
"Often left unmentioned by champions of Richard Lynn is that he has
also been known to argue based on eugenic principles for the
extinction
of entire cultures based on their "incompetence."
In Lynn's own words,
"What is called for here is not genocide, the killing off of the
populations of
incompetent cultures.[14] But we do need to think realistically in
terms of
"phasing out" of such peoples. If the world is to evolve more better
humans,
then obviously someone has to make way for them. ...
To think otherwise is mere sentimentality."
Those are conceptually dangerous comments. It essentially allows us
to phase out what we determine to be "incompetent cultures".
Who decides that? In the 1920s-1945 period "we've been there, done
that". The problem with the road to eugenics is that there are no
traffic lights, nothing to say "stop".
The most bothersome things bout The Bell Curve are first the
backgrounds of the authors and ties to the eugenics
movement. This says to me they started out with a bias they
then set out to "prove".
Herrnstein was an experimental psychologist working with
rats and pigeons. Murray has strong ties to various unsavory
characters in the eugenics movement. Neither has the appropriate
background or training in either psychology or any of the
social sciences. It is not enough to laud Herrnstein as
a respected Harvard professor. You have to look at what he
did there and published on. We used some of his material
in a class in experimental psychology which consisted of
experiments with pigeons to illustrate the principles of
reinforcement. It has been impossible to apply these
experiments to humans, because one can't control all the
variables as one can with a pigeon in a cage.
Charles Murray has been supported for years from large
financial grants from right wing foundations -- most
notably the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.
What it that foundation about?
With $706 million in assets (2005), the Lynde and Harry Bradley
Foundation of Milwaukee, Wisconsin is the country's largest and most
influential right-wing foundation. As of the end of 2005, it was
giving away more than $34 million a year [Bradley Foundation 2005 IRS
99-PF].
Lion's House - home of the Bradley Foundation in Milwaukee Its
financial resources, its clear political agenda, and its extensive
national network of contacts and collaborators in political, academic
and media circles has allowed it to exert an important influence on
key issues of public policy. While its targets range from affirmative
action to social security, it has seen its greatest successes in the
areas of welfare "reform" and attempts to privatize public education
through the promotion of school vouchers.
Here is a site that lists the grants Murray has received over
the years. They add up to $3,600,500. Someone was getting
something for supporting a so-called "scholar".
And secondly their refusal to first publish their thesis
in peer journals for review.
psychologists of the 20th century. Besides, what is there to disagree
with?
1. Income and intelligence are connected. Proved beyond a shadow of a
doubt.
2. Intelligence is inherited. Proved beyond a shadow of a doubt.
3. Intelligence varies between racial and ethnic groups. Proved beyond
a shadow of a doubt.
Please don't make me drag out Arthur Jensen and Thomas Bouchard, two
of the most distinguished researchers in intelligence of the 20th
century. The sad fact is that science and economics often trump your
political view of the world. Even liberals have to face reality now
and then.
Jensen receives funding from the Pioneer Fund.
The Pioneer Fund has changed little since its inception. A December
11, 1977 New York Times article characterized it as having "supported
highly controversial research by a dozen scientists who believe that
blacks are genetically less intelligent than whites." In the 1960s
Nobel Laureate Wiliam Shockley (1910-1989), a physicist at Stanford
University who advocated programs of voluntary sterilization of people
with lower than the average IQ score of 100, received an estimated
$180,000 from the Pioneer Fund. Dr. Jensen, an educational
psychologist who was recruited to the racist cause in 1966, garnered
more than a million dollars in Pioneer grants over the past three
decades. The investment yielded early dividends. Three years later, in
an article published by the prestigious Harvard Education Review
Jensen attacked Head Start programs, claiming the problem with black
children is that they have an average IQ of only 85 and that no amount
of social engineering would improve their performance. Jensen urged
"eugenic foresight" as the only solution.
The Pioneer Fund, a tax-exempt foundation incorporated in 1937 for the
express purpose of research into "racial betterment," was worth more
than $2 million, according to its 1975 Internal Revenue Service
return. Yet several officers of the leading geneticists profession- al
organization say they never heard of it. A month-long study of the
Pioneer Fund's activities by The New York Times shows it has given at
least $179,000 over the last 10 years to Dr. William B. Shockley, a
leading proponent of the theory that whites are inher- ently more
intelligent than blacks.
Japanese, and Chinese are likewise more intelligent than Whites, and
Ashkenazi Jews are more intelligent than all the rest. Watusis are
taller, pygmies are smaller, and Samoans are fatter. Too bad. That's
just the way it is, and all the left wing wailing hand wringing will
never change it. Perhaps our new congress needs to pass a law
forbidding me to say these things? What do you think?
You are free to believe what you wish.
Very little is proved "beyond a shadow of a doubt" but if you wish
1. Income and intelligence are connected. Proved beyond a shadow of a
doubt.
2. Intelligence is inherited. Proved beyond a shadow of a doubt.
3. Intelligence varies between racial and ethnic groups. Proved beyond
a shadow of a doubt.
to accept the views of people supported by racist eugenicists feel
free.
.
- References:
- The Bell Curve globally viewed
- From: Jake
- Re: The Bell Curve globally viewed
- From: NoName
- Re: The Bell Curve globally viewed
- From: Jake
- Re: The Bell Curve globally viewed
- From: NoName
- Re: The Bell Curve globally viewed
- From: NoName
- The Bell Curve globally viewed
- Prev by Date: Re: computer question Windows XP
- Next by Date: Re: The Bell Curve globally viewed
- Previous by thread: Re: The Bell Curve globally viewed
- Next by thread: Re: The Bell Curve globally viewed
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
