Black people "less intelligent" claims scientist
810wmb
Posts: 849
i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
810wmb
Posts: 849
Comments
why did you choose psychology?
from my window to yours
Psychology has been concerned with this question for ages. My understanding is that there is some variability on the tests, but the mean for black people is lower than white people. Yet, another possible bias arises in the IQ tests themselves, whether or not they are culturally fair, and that has been debated for some time.
We also should concern ourselves with the effects of beliefs. It's been shown that Asian Women performing a math test will perform better if verbally cued with the stereotype "Asians are good at math", however, when verbally cued with the stereotype "Women are poor at math", they perform poorly. So, there may be some subject-expectancy or oberserver-expectancy biases inherent in intelligence testing. Not to mention Watson's own personal hypothesis doesn't appear to be based on anything but a presupposition that cognitive abilities evolved differently.
I understand Dr. Watson's interest in whether or not there are real intelligence differences. I heard from Christoph Koch, a neuroscientist, that african and european brains look slightly different, but you'd have to be a master of neuroanatomy to identify the differences. This alone isn't sufficient to support Watson's beliefs. There is no evidence currently that supports his belief and far too many possible biases and errors inherent in the study of intelligence to make such a conclusion at this time. Not to mention, there are many other things that cause far more deviation than possible genetic causes. For example, intellectually impoverished and financially impoverished environments, like the ghetto.
If you hadn't mentioned the environment there at the end, I'd have sworn you were agreeing.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
The source being?
1) an ignorant dickhead?
or
2) God's creation?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
But...women already have the right to an abortion for no reason at all so he's not really saying anything there.
And on the topic of the thread, I'd like to say to him that I feel scientists are less smart than the general population.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
He's deadskies
It could be, but you'd have to have a theory that accounts for a lot of possible biases and errors. That has an evolutionary explanation that can fit into a small time period.
There has been a lot of study of race and intelligence and there are no such theories. It's one think to speculate, it's another to claim truth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence
The best research tells us the mean is lower for blacks, but when we get blacks to write an IQ test they beat whites.
Agree to an extent, but the truth is "white" never equals "white" and "black" never equals "black", so his comments are short-sighted and ignorant.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Hey, you're right, they don't really equal White and Black
I just mean someone that you would call "white" is not going to have the same exact geneology, family tree, genetics - whatever the right term is - as basically any other white person so the comparison is flawed.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Yea, well if the following is true
It leaves a window of 35,000 to 200,000 years of evolutionary time to develop the needed genetic mutations to account for an increased intelligence of those humans who left Africa. If some of those mutations occurred later, it might only affect a small portion of "whites", Jews for example, they are really smart, stereotypically. It's more than likely a cultural thing, than it is a biological thing.
This is statement true only because its limited. Its not based on genetics, its based on developmental separation. It doesn't provide a bases that a person geographically separated or isolated could not be learned or that they genetically lack intelligence. This is a proven application with American blacks, the re-education of the American Indians, whites after the Depression, the people of the Appalichian, Tennessee and Eastern Kentucky valleys.
What country is on par or subpar to even begin a comparison of African intellect. This is an entire subcontinent of people who have been maintained in a state of world separation, underdeveloped and undereducated and yet many have achieve f reedom from colonization. A population that has been keep at its purported ancestral level and yet they are heads of state and sit at the UN. Yes, IQ testing would automatically show that the majority of the workers are not on the intellectual level of western standards, that's not to say that such people are automatically "genetically" intellectually inferior.
There's no valid theory here to support his view as a genetict scientist, just a man.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071018/ap_on_sc/controversial_scientist
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
You always find some humor in these weak subject matters. So what do you think original poster to this thread?
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
I think it's a load of bunk. I don't buy into that kind of thing.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Crick thinks its a crock.
Or he might, if he was still alive. As ridiculous as it sounds, it is an interesting question. We know that a lot of genetic characteristics other than skin and hair colour etc vary between races. But its much easier to measure a genetic difference at a single locus like sickle cell anaemia for example, than it is to measure a complicated trait like intelligence, which is almost certainly developed by complex interactions between many genes and environmental influences. As far as I know nobody has identified a defining 'smart' gene. Watson seems to be massively oversimplifying things. He seems to be suggesting that there are only two types of people on earth, and as Anhimas pointed out, he's ignoring cultural and environmental factors. While he's at it why doesn't he claim that Jews are smarter than Arabs, or Melanesians are smarter than Chinese or whatever?
-C Addison
As much as anyone wants to claim to be smarter (as this dud wants), errr...um,
hit it Ed:
...i gather speed...from you fucking with me...
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I recognize my ancestors. WE are ancestors in the making. What gives?
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
it's like one scientist was saying to everyone that the planet was round when everyone thought it wasn't. they should all have some god damn evidence.
me?
All men ARE created equal. But they are not all born to the same social status/advantages, but they are equal in value as human beings, like it or not.
And as for your other comment, SOME blacks are more athletic than whites, not all. SOME whites are more athletic than blacks. not all. Therefore SOME blacks could be more intelligent than whites and some less. None of it is absolute. Just because one person of one race achieves something doesn't mean that it should be used as a reflection on the rest of the race.
Stereotypes can make or break people. Black kids might get into sport more because of the stereotype and they're given more opportunities etc for this. But are they treated equally well elsewhere? No, because of the stereotype "blacks are good at athletics" so that's all they get.
Whereas white kids who are good at sport will get opportunities too, but if they want to go to university or get a high-level white collar job they'll get those too - because of the stereotype that they are presumed to be intelligent (even if they are not). Whereas there are always reservations around black people, partly because of the stereotype that they are "good at sport" and "less intelligent". Whether or not there's any truth in any of it is another matter.
I mean I'm not going to assume you're intelligent just because some other guy of your race did something intelligent, would you? That wouldn't be very intelligent
---
London, Brixton, 14 July 1993
London, Wembley, 1996
London, Wembley, 18 June 2007
London, O2, 18 August 2009
London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012
Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
where in his post did he come anywhere near implying otherwise? i saw no indication he said anything along the lines of whites having more value.
the point is when it is not "some" but "most". sociological studies can incredibly valuable. should we ignore that most unplanned pregnancies occur in lower income households becos it might hurt their feelings about being poor? or should we acknowledge that there are different circumstances and factors at work and tailor or responses accordingly to be more effective?
that said, measures of intelligence are pretty arbitrary and abstract. it's difficult to say objectively x group is more/less intelligent than y and even harder to say what that means. this scientist offered no scientific support for his views or any perspective on what it means.
go to a college admissions office and then come back and tell me it's hard for intelligent black people to get into college. admissions people are creaming themselves to recruit intelligent minority candidates. and you cannot tell me blacks get more opportunity to play sports... how many black people are playing hockey? whites have plenty of opportunity, they are being phased out becos they cannot compete. ps. there is scientific support for this. i don't remember the study but there was some biologist who did a study about how a particular set of muscles in the leg was invariably longer in black men which helped them to run faster and jump higher.
again, i didn't see him advocate this conclusion anywhere. nowhere did he say you should assume any black dude you meet is stupid and any white guy you meet is smart. but this does have sociological value in terms of evaluating how we tackle various educational issues.
As with any scientist at his level he's arrogant, full of himself and brilliant. His lectures are insightful and yes, even he has his boring moments. In the context of his work many associated theories applied to his initial DNA tracking has help identify genetic disorders associated in the black population like sickle cell. Genetics is simply a study of why you are and how you got to be that way and and can I help. Many times it does have to be evaluated and discussed not only in racial and ethnic terminology but also as it relates in developmental, social and environmental impacts. Yet, there's a way to say something as a scientist and a general person. His statement was wrong on both levels, as a scientist and a man of intelligence and he recognized that and the apology was about as genuine as you'd get from him because the controversy it's not worth his reputation.