the neoliberal vision of the future

[Johnny Canuck3]

On that point I repeat my question for the third time: if massive incontrovertible evidence beyond a shred of doubt was presented to you that a) intelligence is a real and heritable phenomen and b) that there are some structural statistical differences in intelligence between ethnic groups, how would YOU react to this? Would you then conclude that you would have to become a racist? A white supremacist? Would it change the way you behaved towards individuals? Your political views?

It's hard to say how I'd react. But given that such massive incontrovertible evidence beyond a shred of doubt doesn't exist, it's sort of a moot point, isn't it?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I find it extremely revealing that you regard people of lower intelligence as subhuman.

Oh, fuck off with your amateurish, clownlike misrepresentations.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

And what does it mean to be human? Does it mean to be able to create nuclear reactors and fly to the moon? Nope. It means the ability to live peacefully together and use our intelligence to produce what we need to live and prosper, using language and reason.

 

[Idris2002]

Oh, fuck off with your amateurish, clownlike misrepresentations.

That's the spirit old man!

Anyway, in a wee while I have to go and get my papers sorted out. But in the meantime here's a few papers worth reading:

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/cap/31/1/1.pdf

Weizzman et al ('Weizmann', eh?) pull Rushton's model down and throw salt on the remains.

Rushton then gets his right of reply:

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/cap/32/1/29.pdf

And his critics come back and give him a well deserved stomping:

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/cap/32/1/43.pdf

From that last one:

Rushton defends the anonymous author of
Untrodden Fields of Anthropology, whose work
he also refers to as "the ethnographic record,"
and accuses us of denigrating him. Davis and
Whitten (1987), however, state in the Annual
Review of Anthropology, that the author of the
Untrodden Fields of Anthropology, and those of
similar works, "...perpetuated a long standing
tradition of anthropological pornography, in
which cross-cultural data on sexual practice is
presented to titillate a Western audience. Titles
or publishing houses may even contain 'anthropology,'
'ethnography,' or 'ethnopornography' in
their names. (Davis and Whitten, 1987, p. 70)."

We had no intention of denigrating the anonymous
pornographer, however; rather our comments
were directed at Rushton's standards of
scholarship. His use of the "ethnographic
record" is not simply to "show the congruence
with systematic studies done today, (Rushton,
1990)," but is an important source for "data"
on racial differences in females genitalia and
comparative penis length for Rushton's three
races (Rushton and Bogaert, 1987). It is also the
only source of "data" on people "of black
admixture." Data from such hybrids is important
for claims of genetic determination because
hybridizing individuals who differ quantitatively
in a polygenic trait should generate offspring
with an intermediate level of that trait.

Vidmar (1990) has also called attention to
another curious reference on penis size cited by
Rushton and Bogaert (1987). This is an article
by P. Nobile (1982) which is identified in their
bibliography as an article which appeared in
Forum: International Journal of Human Relations.
Professor Vidmar's colleague, Michael
Atkinson, could find no library listing of this
journal (nor could we), but he finally tracked it
down. As Professor Vidmar writes: "it is more
commonly known as the Penthouse Forum, and
can be purchased from the covered display rack
at your neighborhood Mac's Milk Store
(Vidmar, 1990)."

Additional evidence of Rushton's standards of
scholarship is provided by his treatment of the
"ethnographic" data. Rushton and Bogaert (1987)
state "...in the French West Indies, the size of
the penis and the vagina covaried with the amount
of black admixture; Arab men, who were often
mixed with black had larger penises than Europeans."
In fact there is absolutely no evidence
that the Arabs described in the Untrodden Fields
had any black ancestry at all. They are simply
described as criminals transported from the
French colonies of Algeria and Morocco.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Ok so far you've had a too easy time. Time to reverse the questions. You are making a very, very strong claim here. You're not just saying that there is no evidence of systemic differences in intelligence between groups, and no evidence that intelligence is heritable in any way. No, you're making a POSITIVE claim. You're claiming that it has been positively proved that ALL people are of equal intelligence and that NO groups of people are more intelligent than others. So when Jews are so dramatically overrepresented among the rich and in other cultural areas it requires some other explanation than intelligence.

So obviously you must then have a very clear notion of what intelligence IS since you can make such definitive statements. What IS intelligence? And why is a) intelligence in principle impossible to measure? b) why is intelligence NOT heritable? and c) how do you know this positively? d) if you can't measure intelligence, how do you know that all ethnic groups are equally intelligent?

If intelligence has ZERO heritability as you claim and can not be measured, how do you explain the evolution of humans from small brains and low intelligence from apes to those bigbrained, "smart" creatures we are today? Did intelligence evolve slowly and gradually? Or did intelligence just come fully formed some 100.000 years ago or more and then remained absolutely identical for all groups?

Show me where anybody on this thread has said that.

Louis MacNeice

p.s. still waiting for replies to the dogs and porn qusetions (not a sentence I've ever typed before...or again hopefully).

 

[littlebabyjesus]

time really has come now for onan to explain his sources, retract his claims or fuck off.

 

[Athos]

I would have to be a very strange white supremacist that thinks that Orientals and Jews are more intelligent than whites. Maybe I'm a Jewish supremacist?

Edit: given your malevolence in deliberately distorting and misrepresenting my view I should point out that this was sarcasm, and NOT meant as an admission that I am a supremacist. Racial supremacy is a collectivistic way of thinking that is alien to an individualist as me. I judge individuals, not their skin colors. But it doesn't surprise me that a socialist believes that the only way to handle the existence of race differences is to become a racist. You are after all collectivist whose second nature it is to think in terms of groups, not individuals.

On that point I repeat my question for the third time: if massive incontrovertible evidence beyond a shred of doubt was presented to you that a) intelligence is a real and heritable phenomen and b) that there are some structural statistical differences in intelligence between ethnic groups, how would YOU react to this? Would you then conclude that you would have to become a racist? A white supremacist? Would it change the way you behaved towards individuals? Your political views?

If my aunty had balls she'd be my uncle.

It hasn't happened. There is no such evidence.

You've got some odd and deeply unpleasant ideas, dressed in some thoroughly discredited psuedo-science.

Maybe you should have a little think. And fuck off.

 

[diptera]

I expect this:

 

[Idris2002]

Now we see the violence inherent in the system.

 

[Idris2002]

I'm a socialist/collectivist now, am I?

It's the NDP who always get their man, right?

Or did I get that one wrong?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Ok so far you've had a too easy time. Time to reverse the questions. You are making a very, very strong claim here. You're not just saying that there is no evidence of systemic differences in intelligence between groups, and no evidence that intelligence is heritable in any way. No, you're making a POSITIVE claim. You're claiming that it has been positively proved that ALL people are of equal intelligence and that NO groups of people are more intelligent than others. So when Jews are so dramatically overrepresented among the rich and in other cultural areas it requires some other explanation than intelligence.

<snip>

You're fucked mate. Trying to get people to bite on stupid strawmen won't cut it here.

You need to produce facts and logic to back up your case, not logical fallacies and links to weirdos who use dodgy ethnoporn as source material and who get their stuff published via purveyors of white supremacist propaganda.

If we're having an easy time, shooting the onarfish in its barrel, it's because while your rhetoric and flat assertions of nonsense might be successful in libertarian circles, that shit really doesn't meet the standards of evidence and logic we expect.

So you either need to raise your game, or crawl off and hide, perhaps in a bunker full of drunk skinheads where your rhetoric might receive less critical scrutiny, if you don't want this humiliation to continue.

 

[frogwoman]

I would have to be a very strange white supremacist that thinks that Orientals and Jews are more intelligent than whites. Maybe I'm a Jewish supremacist?

Not really. A lot of your kind do.

 

[rekil]

Not only have I read history books, I also happen to know which parts of that history isn't told properly in the standard story. For instance, how many history books say that The German National SOCIALIST Worker's Party was as their name indicates, socialist? How many people know that Mussolini and Hitler were immensely popular on the left before WWII?

What history books are you referring to, and how have you come to the conclusion that the authors haven't researched fascism 'properly'.

Can you get a move on and answer this, I've got thousands of people to kill today.

 

[Idris2002]

Actually, what I was going to post was in too poor taste. . .

 

[SpineyNorman]

It's hard to say how I'd react. But given that such massive incontrovertible evidence beyond a shred of doubt doesn't exist, it's sort of a moot point, isn't it?

Made me think of this:

 

[ViolentPanda]

Ok so far you've had a too easy time. Time to reverse the questions. You are making a very, very strong claim here. You're not just saying that there is no evidence of systemic differences in intelligence between groups, and no evidence that intelligence is heritable in any way. No, you're making a POSITIVE claim. You're claiming that it has been positively proved that ALL people are of equal intelligence and that NO groups of people are more intelligent than others. So when Jews are so dramatically overrepresented among the rich and in other cultural areas it requires some other explanation than intelligence.

So obviously you must then have a very clear notion of what intelligence IS since you can make such definitive statements. What IS intelligence? And why is a) intelligence in principle impossible to measure? b) why is intelligence NOT heritable? and c) how do you know this positively? d) if you can't measure intelligence, how do you know that all ethnic groups are equally intelligent?

If intelligence has ZERO heritability as you claim and can not be measured, how do you explain the evolution of humans from small brains and low intelligence from apes to those bigbrained, "smart" creatures we are today? Did intelligence evolve slowly and gradually? Or did intelligence just come fully formed some 100.000 years ago or more and then remained absolutely identical for all groups?

You really haven't been reading what other people have written in reply to your unsupported claims, have you?

No=one has claimed that intelligence has zero heritability, you nudnik.

 

[Idris2002]

This just in:

If I loved a novel like Objectivists love Atlas Shrugged I would be mortified to see such a shitshow released on the big screen bearing the same name. But if I loved a novel as horrendously written as Atlas Shrugged I very well might like movies this bad. More to the point, if I adhered to a cult-like philosophical movement that simultaneously celebrates the individual and tolerates absolutely no criticism of The Way and The Great Leader, I would follow all of the other lemmings off the cliff and applaud this film too.

http://www.ginandtacos.com/2011/04/17/battlefield-train-an-atlas-shrugged-movie-review/

 

[ViolentPanda]

Is no one else listening to this clown?

We've dealt with his assumptions about Jews already, oh great protector of the Jewish race. His cuntitude on the subject is already a matter of public record on this thread.

Why is this being tolerated?

Because he keeps hanging himself from the rope given him.

 

[Idris2002]

We've dealt with his assumptions about Jews already, oh great protector of the Jewish race. His cuntitude on the subject is already a matter of public record on this thread.



Because he keeps hanging himself from the rope given him.

And as his corpse twists slowly in the wind, we can use it as a pinata.

 

[ViolentPanda]

If my aunty had balls she'd be my uncle.

It hasn't happened. There is no such evidence.

I hate to break it to you, nephew....

You've got some odd and deeply unpleasant ideas, dressed in some thoroughly discredited psuedo-science.

Maybe you should have a little think. And fuck off.

Not going to happen, though. He's thoroughly indoctrinated himself with these scientifically-dubious views, so he's got 2 choices - stick with the views and get the warm glow that comes with being a martyr, or suck it up and admit he's a dim-bulb who's just bright enough to synthesise ideas, but not bright enough to explicate the synthesis.

Do you really think someone with an ego like the one so far displayed is going to take the latter choice?

 

[SpineyNorman]

And as his corpse twists slowly in the wind, we can use it as a pinata.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I expect this:

Well, the last cries of oppression brought him support from...hmmm, one overt racist with keyboard Tourettes, who just like Onar, couldn't actually support the crazy assertions they made, a gibbering nincompoop who did the whole "right-libertarian by numbers" schtick, and...well, that was about it.

It also brought a couple of rationalists who wanted to watch Onar swing in the breeze. Welcome!

 

[ViolentPanda]

Now we see the violence inherent in the system.

Bad people, for victimising the great Onar, prophet of our time, speaker of the Truth, and all-round good bloke!!

At least, I suspect that's the loop that plays in his head.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Well, I expect his mother still loves him. Maybe.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

I am still minded to give him the heave-ho though, like I wanted to many many pages ago. He's got enough posts to be perving away at Urbs in the nuddy, which is more than faintly disturbing.

 

[rekil]

I am still minded to give him the heave-ho though, like I wanted to many many pages ago. He's got enough posts to be perving away at Urbs in the nuddy, which is more than faintly disturbing.

He'll be making notes on willy sizes and whatnot, for purely scientific reasons.

 

[invisibleplanet]

Perhaps think about changing the viewing threshold, Mrs. M?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Can you get a move on and answer this, I've got thousands of people to kill today.

The way I look at it, you've had scholars such as Droz, Bracher and (although he's a dirty socialist! ) Lukacs analyse National-Socialism (why the hyphen? Because that's how the Nazis themselves portrayed the name, not as two separate words, and I do like a bit of historical accuracy now and then) in the phenomenon's immediate aftermath and not find a thread of "real living socialism" in Nazism, merely an appropriation of some of the rhetoric of socialism, but perhaps Onar can reveal something that 3 or four generations of scholars of politics and history have missed.

I doubt it, though. All he has is a few rhetorical devices to stave off the evil day when he flees this board, and even they don't work too well when your audience is even remotely critical.

 

[ViolentPanda]

And as his corpse twists slowly in the wind, we can use it as a pinata.

Just as long as we can make sure that the kiddies whacking the sack of dead meat don't get sprayed with his foetid Objectivist juices, Idris.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Benito the king of the socialists.