|Racism and stuff||Woof the dog|
Dec 30, 2002 11:32 PM
|Do different races and/or ethnicities differ in their potential to become more learned people, like say professors/doctors/high paying engineers, etc. etc. etc.? (Basically those whose brains work better than others.)
Is there any statistical study sort of thing on whites versus blacks where it is shown that black kids do not progress as well as others, and which is NOT due to their social/economic status but rather due to the basic heredity. I wonder if such results get supressed in favor of things like equality. I mean I see how one would be pissed if somebody else said that their people on average were not as likely to reach the same level.
I will go search google now, or maybe tomorrow, and you tell me what you know. I'd like to hear what you think, and don't hold back!
Woof the dog
|too controversial for most||Duane Gran|
Dec 31, 2002 5:47 AM
|I don't know the answer, but I doubt if such a correlation could be definitively agreed upon. There is simply too much emotional investment at stake.
As an example, consider automobile insurance. It is acceptable to charge different rates based on age, sex and marital status (and a few other factors) because of clear statistics. If research showed certain races to differ in driving ability do you think insurance companies could get away with charging different rates? Not a chance.
There are simply some areas of research that won't see the light of day because it is too personal for most people.
Dec 31, 2002 7:20 AM
|I believe that would be an oxymoronic statement of the highest degree. No disrespect intended to you, but the idea of a statistic being clear is just mind-boggling.
Disraeli gave us the statement that "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." How true. It is easy to massage a "clear" statistic to mean almost anything you want it to mean. For example, and sticking with the race theme, there are clearly more black men in prison than white men. (I am sorry, but I do not have the ratio in front of me.) That is a statistic. The problem arises in the interpretation of the information. Does the statistic show: A) That black men are disproportionately targeted for criminal convictions, or: B)That black men are disproportionately of a criminal nature?
I read actuarial reports pretty regularly. They contain many statistics regarding life spans, disablities and retirements of a specific population, to name a few. We are left to the interpretation of the statistics to make decisions regarding retirement policy affecting 50,000 individuals. The correct intrepretation of the statisitical information is critical, but never "clear", as there is always an opposite interpretation to the one that is made. As chairman of the board that makes those determinations, it is ultimately my responsibility for that decision and my name at the bottom of the directive.
Statistics, like any other "fact", can be interpreted in many different ways. Their clarity is obfuscated by the experiences of the person reading them.
|"Clear statistics"||Duane Gran|
Dec 31, 2002 11:17 AM
|I'm suspicious of statistics as well, but in this case I'm referring to actuarial science, which does a scary-good job of relating subjective matters to objective costs. I'm drifting the thread here a little, but the analogy I provided was to illustrate that our society accepts certain forms of discrimination over others. Racial discrimination (or even information!) is an area that society shuns.
I would be happy to see good research to show no correlation between race and mental ability. Heck, I would also like to think that I have an inner Lance Armstrong inside of me (or anyone for that matter) and all that is required would be hard work. It appeals to my desire for universal justice. Work hard, get ahead. But alas, what I suspect is different and that is why no real study on the matter will see the light of day.
Of course, as another person pointed out, race isn't an easy thing to do define. Pardon the pun, but it isn't a black or white thing. Aside from some island states (and possibly inner china) we Americans are a mixed breed. You can't undo scrambled eggs. ;)
|I agree -- sort of a "don't go there" question||DougSloan|
Dec 31, 2002 8:23 AM
|Besides the issue of whether the question should even be asked, I agree that it would be extremely difficult to separate genetic, cultural, environmental, and other factors when testing for something as vague and contentious as "intelligence."
Even if the question were definitively answered, what good would that do? Like my friend's salary or IQ, I just really do not want to know.
|I Hate Auto Insurance Companies||Alpedhuez55|
Dec 31, 2002 8:24 AM
|If you live in an African American Neigborhood, they will charge you higher rates and claim it is due to a higher theft rate. Auto insurance have their way of getting at everyone.
It does bring up an interesting questions though. A man and women under 25 with the same driving record do not pay the same rates. Typically a young man would pay the higher rate. Would they be able to get away with that if the women paid the higher rates? The only factors should be age and driving record. Not Race and Sex.
As for the genetics issue and intelligence, I don't buy that. I beleive it is more environmental than hereditary. Your home life has more to do with brain than your race or genetics. It is also has a lot to do the drive a person has to change their situation, for the better or the worse. THis is why you will see good people come from a bad family and bad people from a good family. For the most part, your mind is like a computer and what matters is what is entered into it.
Dec 31, 2002 9:13 AM
|Why would you hate them if they tailor rates to loss experience, whether that be driving record or thefts in a neighborhood? You are sort of arguing it both ways: you like underwriting based upon driving record, but not on theft loss. I'd guess that if you lived in rural Montana and had several accidents you'd want it the other way around.
I don't understand why we allow some underwriting criteria and not others. Discrimination (in the plainest sense of the term) based upon age and sex is ok, but not race. Yet, in other statutory schemes (like employment), age and sex discrimination is illegal. What gives?
We could require that everyone pay the same premium, but that doesn't exactly reward safe driving or living in safe areas, does it? The people in low risk categories would complain, that's for certain.
Genetics plays a huge role in intelligence, or at least the capacity to demonstrate intelligence. Of course, environment matters, too, but you can't make an Einstein out of a Gump. The question presented, though, is whether there is a significant difference among races in genetic factors influencing intelligence. That's a much more difficult question to solve as opposed to micro-studies of parents and children and their relative intelligence based upon genetic factors. There is just too much "noise" factor clearly to differentiate meaningfully.
Dec 31, 2002 10:35 AM
|In Massachusetts, for a while the insurance companies would come back at the end of the year and charge you an additional amount if they did not make enough money. THis practice, called a Remand, stopped about the same time Dukakis left office. I have had dealings with these companies a few times and they have all been negative. It is only natural that these dealings would make me somewhat prejudiced against the Auto Insurance Industry.
I think the way they operate is pretty bad. I had a car totaled once and they were trying to deduct for small dents caused by car doors and paint chips. THey tried to do the same to my parents this year. I do not have a very high opinion of these companies and their practices.
I am just posing the question, if young women caused more accidents than young men, would they be able to get away with charging higher rates? I doubt it. I also never said they should not be able to charge higher rates in high theft areas. But this is a way for them to target higher rates for a racial or social group. I think some underwriting is a legal form of discrimination. And I work in the Insurance Industry. I would approve of a increase in rates for Cell Phone users though. I have had too many close calls both on my bike and in my car.
I did qualify my first post as in most cases. There are of course Gumps and Einsteins in all races. We are not talking about genetic anolalies here. I am just stating for the vast majority of people who have normal brain power, learning is environmental than genetic. I do not think one race is significanlty smarter than another physiologically. If some scientist wants to prove otherwise, he is right up there with Dr. Mengele in my book.
|Another in a long line of the same....||eyebob|
Dec 31, 2002 11:26 AM
Your post's are getting quite familiar. First you lambaste something, then when called on the subject you recoil, qualify, and in this case present a flawed argument.
First off, "In Massachusetts, for a while the insurance companies would come back at the end of the year and charge you an additional amount if they did not make enough money. THis practice, called a Remand, stopped about the same time Dukakis left office. "
According to the source I found below this only happened twice and it was because the Mass. Supreme Court when sued by the Ins. Industry agreed that the Mass Auto Ins Commissioner set the rates too low. Seems like a good case of fair dispute resolution not about the Ins. industry trying to "make enough money" and what this has to do with Duke is beyond me (is that a time reference or a slight at him? You're an admitted "conservative stuck in a liberal State" right?)
(WARNING this is an Ins Co. group)
Secondly, "I have had dealings with these companies a few times and they have all been negative. It is only natural that these dealings would make me somewhat prejudiced against the Auto Insurance Industry"
By that argument if you've been run off the road by a driver of an SUV then all SUV drivers stink. It isn't "natural" to be prejudiced by your dealings with anything a "few times."
I'd suggest that if you've had failed dealings with auto insurance companies in the past try shopping around, or better yet, read up on how the process is set before you rip it. If you have a gripe, contact your Rep. and ask what s/he knows about the failings of the current policy. If you work in the Ins. industry I suspect that you're aware that there is a ton of stuff that goes into setting prices and such. Right? Like the fact that Mass. requires auto ins. to even drive. In this case no one pays what they should to drive because the real cost is spread out over everyone in the Commonwealth who drives. If you're a safe driver, effectively, you pay more than you should to cover those who are terrible, who, effectively pay less than they should.
It would appear that in Mass. you all have a very tight regulations under which Ins. carriers have to exist. I'd presume that they are there to protect the citizens for the most part. Here's a link to your Commonwealths pages for ins. information.
In the interest of full disclosure, I have no ties to the auto ins. industry or the Commonwealth's Commissioner for Auto Ins. I'm just tired of seeing posts like this that don't offer any type of factual support, just vitriol.
|Another in a long line of the same....||Alpedhuez55|
Dec 31, 2002 1:50 PM
|Well BT, I wish I was selling you something. It would be nice to come to you next year and say I did not charge you enough money and you need to give me more or you canot use the product. You do not see anything wrong with that? Would you buy a bike if the shop could tell you they undercharged you and ask for another $150? And my argument is flawed? I know how the system works and think the system is flawed.
If memory served me correctly the last remand was in 1988 or 1989. Weld was elected in 1990 and the remands stopped. The insurance companies still ask for it. They tried hard to get it through last year and it did not work. Politics does have something to do with it, whether you want to accept that or not. If you want to go on another fact finding mission, you can always look for Duke's campaign donations and see how much he accepted from these insurance companies. Massachusetts is a two party state now, and the increases are not as large as they used to be and the silly process of remands has stopped.
The insurance companies come up with a high estimate, usually asking for a 10 to 15%, The insurance Commisioners at the state level work it down to 2 to 6%. I am well aware of how it works. It is why a lot of insurers stay out of the state. That is why we do not have competition. If Geico or another company wanted to come in and offer a lower premium to it's policy holders, it could not.
Prices are fixed other than certain discounts for employers, member of groups such as MAAD or AAA members offered by some companies. If you want to lower your premium, you need to give up something in coverage. Shopping around for price does not work here. I have switched to a different company and have not had to deal with them yet on a claim.
If you have ever had to negotiate with a company, you know they try to low ball. I had to take several hours getting a fair value on my parents car which was totalled earlier this year. I had to go to the agent and tell them that my parents and the rest of the family would move our home and Auto policies elsewhere. Ultimately I made my parents $1000.
I had a simular experience with the same company on one of my cars. Comparing that to getting run ofer by an SUV is a pretty silly argument. Like comparing apples to mufflers. I explained to Doug some of the reasons why I do not like these companies. I have worked for health insurance and P&C as well and am familiar with underwriting. It does not mean I need to agree with the system completely. Personal experieces with a company and living in a state for 36 years do count for something. They are far more valuable information than any regulatory Website.
I could write a 10 page thesis on the flaws in the Mass Auto Insurance system, but I do not have time and do not wish to bore the people of this board. My posts were factual. I included the information I could fit during a 15 minute break from work. You can also learn a lot more about something from personal experiences rather than you can on a website. If you have nothing better to do than go to the Massachusetts Insurance Commissioner's website in weak attempt to upset me, you need to get a life and do something more productive with your time. There are a number of liberals who like to jump on anyone who posts something they do not agree with. I think most of them are pretty funny or a little sad. But if you still are in the mood to be pathetic, feel free post a flame at the guy who told me I should not shop at Walmart.
Hapy New Year
|Now that's better....||eyebob|
Dec 31, 2002 3:22 PM
|At least this time you took the time to articulate an argument. That's all I ask for. Re-read your initial post and ask if I don't have a point. I didn't go the Commish's website in a "weak attempt to upset you." What point would that serve? I'm not here to upset you or anyone else for that matter. To assume so is indeed pretty funny or a little sad. I'll stick to my assertion that this fits your pattern a bit though.
A Great New Year to you and yours,
|Now that's better....||Alpedhuez55|
Dec 31, 2002 4:18 PM
|My original post was a resonse to one sentence in message. I was responding to a statement about increasing auto insurance due to race, but it already happens.
If someone has questions about something I say in a post, I try to answer. That is my pattern. I am sorry if I do not have time to meet your high standards of debate. I did not know I needed to add footnotes from the Massachusetts General Law so you would realize I am being truthful.
Your pattern shows up in your posts where you attack conservatives because they did not completely state their side of an issue or responded with a little humor. I think anyone who goes to the Massachusetts Insurance Commisioners Website needs to put there time to better use, no matter what the reason. Something made you upset enough to go to the website. Maybe it was to make the day of the state worker who is charge of that page to finally see another hit on the webcounter. Whatever reason you had to go there to find out what a remand is pretty pathetic.
I have some suggested reading for you, How to Talk Dirty and Influence People by Lenny Bruce. You need to learn to read between the lines a little and obesrve what is absurd about life around you. You also may become more fun to be around at parties.
|Now that's better....||eyebob|
Jan 1, 2003 7:21 AM
|"If you live in an African American Neigborhood, they will charge you higher rates and claim it is due to a higher theft rate." Okay that's an interesting statement. For discussion's sake informative as well (I didn't know this), but that word "claim" that you use is a heck of an acusation. Got any proof? Sounds a bit like you're trying to say that they're simply trying to charge higher rates based on the predominant race of a location. Is this it? If it were not an area with higher theft rates, wouldn't someone call them on it?
You later said "Your pattern shows up in your posts where you attack conservatives because they did not completely state their side of an issue or responded with a little humor. I think anyone who goes to the Massachusetts Insurance Commisioners Website needs to put there time to better use, no matter what the reason. Something made you upset enough to go to the website. Maybe it was to make the day of the state worker who is charge of that page to finally see another hit on the webcounter. Whatever reason you had to go there to find out what a remand is pretty pathetic." Going to a website to "fact check" is better than just assuming that you know anything at all. There's actually a pretty long list of people who post on this (and the other RBR Boards) who don't know diddly and take swipes at people, offer bogus facts, and flat out lie to make their point. You tend to over-generalize a bit and while you're intention might be aimed at humor, it doesn't (to me) come accross like that. Sarcasm doesn't work as well in this type of forum so don't get your panties in a wad (see that's sarcasm and it sounds stupid) when people call you on your posts. And don't reply with suggestions on how to "observe what is absurd about life" because it's a weak attack argument that has little to do with backing up your own "facts", sort of like name-calling get it?
The webcounter line was funny, I can't really imagine why all that many people would ever go to that website. LOL It did lead me to learn some things though.
Are you going for a ride today? Partly Cloudy and 45 degrees up here in NH. Whooo hooo.
|No ride here||Alpedhuez55|
Jan 1, 2003 12:14 PM
|Most people will generalize in the board. If you have questions, just ask. You will also find my facts are not bogus. Your play on every word gets a old pretty quickly.
My town has the worst snowplowing in the state. It is tough to ride here today. The side streets are still covered with packed snow, the main roads are narrowed by a couple feet by snowbanks making it harder to get around. NH does a much better job of plowing. I went to college in Merrimack and they used to do a killer job there. They would go right up to the curb.
Have a good ride.
|I think the reason young males pay for for insurance...||empacher6seat|
Dec 31, 2002 9:18 AM
|is because they're more likely to be in accidents then females are.|
|It's all got to do with tendencies of large populations||moneyman|
Dec 31, 2002 9:24 AM
|Ask the actuaries, if you can stay awake while they answer!
Men under 25 pay more because they are more likely to drive carelessly than women under 25, as experience shows. Men also pay more for life insurance because they also die sooner. Women pay more for health insurance because they submit claims more often.
How do you tell if an actuary is an extrovert? He looks at your shoes when he talks to you.
|re: Racism and stuff||53T|
Dec 31, 2002 6:07 AM
|Interesting, if somewhat naive question. In the US, where you could manage such a study, your African-American population is highly contaminated making your study groups very difficult to set up. Your "white" group whatever that is, is also highly contaminated and hard to pin down. You could break it up into small buckets and compare Scots with Nigerians, for example, but it would be almost impossible to control for socio-economic or cultural differences. You would be hard pressed to find an economy where there were significant numbers of Scots and Nigerians competing for high-paying jobs on an otherwise equal footing.
Can you think of any African or non-African groups that are pure enough and in close enough proximity to be competing for the same jobs, degrees, or whatever you want to use as a measure of success?
Popular culture has moved away from black as a descriptive term of a person’s genealogy for political reasons. Scientists have little use for it as well, for scientific reasons. At one time, most African-Americans were of a relatively common background, they were captured in several West African nations and imported to the Americas. Today, this is not the case. Today's African Americans do include West African people, but many are recent immigrants, many more have roots in West Africa, but descend from many generations of mixed origin people, such as Spaniards, Scots Irish, Native Americans, and more recently, whomever their parents wanted to marry. Soon we will move away from "white" as a polite term. I, for example am not white, I am Irish American. I look nothing like an Eastern European, or a Sicilian.
Of course, the words we use will not end racism. Only money will do that. What we will continue to debate is how to bridge the gap in wealth between dark skinned people and light skinned people in the US. Honest people disagree about how to do this. In the long run, we'll work it out. That is a certainty.
|Just an observation.||Spoke Wrench|
Dec 31, 2002 6:44 AM
|In North American track meets, black athletes tend to win all the sprints and white athletes win the distance races. In the rest of the world, it's the white athletes who usually win the sprints and the black runners win the marathons. I'd have to guess that cultural factors are more important than genetics in producing most of the results that we observe.|
|re: Racism and stuff||gregario|
Dec 31, 2002 6:58 AM
|There was a very controversial book published a few years ago called "The Bell Curve" by by R. J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray (which I haven't read). It apparently said there was a relationship between race and intelligence. By stating what that book concluded does not imply that I agree.|
Dec 31, 2002 8:08 AM
|There is no need to explain that you don't agree with Hernstein. Your innocence is proven by the fact that you didn't read the book!|
Dec 31, 2002 9:05 AM
|There's an academic here in Canada--it may be Hernstein, I'm not sure--who wrote a book claiming that intelligence is differentiated by race, Orientals being the smartest, Whites next, and Blacks the dumbest. He claims to have done all kinds of head measurements and other stuff, of which I don't have a clue. At any rate, when he published his "research" and opinions a few years ago he was completely pilloried and marginalized.
Even if such a hypothesis could be proven, it would never gain legitimacy since the whole subject is too emotionally and politically loaded. BTW, there's a whole pile of research and inquiry that's been done concerning race and sports performance. Even though Africn distance runners have similar VO2 maxes, LTs, etc, for some reason which is not fully understood, they seem to have an ability to run for extended periods of time at higher percentages of their aerobic capacities than other runners. I'm referring here to West African distance runners such as the Kenyans.
Dec 31, 2002 9:52 AM
|Race is indeed a sensitive issue. Given that, you could have looked at a map before you called Kenyans "West Africans".
|Not Funny||Jon Billheimer|
Dec 31, 2002 6:56 PM
|You're right!! I can't tell directions either:)-|
|53T, have you been to WA?||daz I|
Jan 1, 2003 4:34 AM
|Have you been to WA? Nigeria?
I live in Port Harcourt, Nigeria
|53T, have you been to WA?||53T|
Jan 1, 2003 5:31 PM
|I have not been to sub-saharan Africa. The closest I've been is Algeria, Algiers and Hasi R-Mel. I do remember talking to some guys in Nigeria about some LNG imports here in the US. Is the LNG trade still up and running in Nigeria? I remember some political turmoil had slowed things down some years ago.
Is there a racing scene where you are? What is the language there? The guys I spoke with all spoke English.
|No Racing, LNG up?||daz I|
Jan 3, 2003 5:33 AM
|English is the means of communication here, too many languages so everyone settles on English.
The LNG plant is up and running, 3 trains now and commitment for 2 more. Nigeria is estimated to hit the no 1 spot in LNG exports in 5 years time.
Racing? no way for me. There is one professional race (about 1000km) once a year in the country. I ride weekends when able (work pressure etc) and the traffic here is really not the type you want to be in Mon to Friday.
Just started this cycling thing last June and have a Cyclocross - Redline Conquest pro and MTB - Cdale Lefty 800. Wife is using a Trek Fuel 90 WSD.
Jan 3, 2003 12:46 PM
|Hope thing continue to improve. I'm sure Trinidad wants to be #1 exporter as well, should be an interesting competition.|
Dec 31, 2002 11:12 AM
|The "Bell Curve" was controversial not in what it said but what it talked about, race. You'd never know by reading a review that the book was actually an argument for Affirmative-Action type policies. The premise is that IQ tests measure something, maybe not even intelligence, they hardly change after age 6, and they are by far the best predictor for everything from academic achievement and salary to illegitimate children and crime rate. They felt that those on the lower end of the curve, at an early age, should get extra guidance, learning, discipline etc., to keep them from their expected destiny.
Since a disproportionate share were blacks, this outraged many who agreed with the policy but not the derivation. Any reason that wasn't because of our enduring history of racism smacked of racism, somewhat ironically. I don't like the genetic argument because of its implications. I don't agree with the history argument because it doesn't explain, for example, the success of 2nd and 3rd generation black immigrants. Is America's racism so finely tuned that it doesn't discriminate against blacks per se, but only against blacks that are descendants of slaves, and only American slaves at that? Since I don't agree with either the genetic or the history argument, I'm awaiting a more sensible/agreeable one... any ideas?
|Sort of like white guys can't jump high?||RoyGBiv|
Dec 31, 2002 9:55 AM
|Philippe Rushton, a professor at the University of Western Ontario in London, Canada, (my alma mater) ventured into this territory and was roundly criticized for it.
If you read this passage from The Globe and Mail newspaper, which probably summed up his theory succintly, you'll understand why. "For this: positing a racial sandwich of sexuality, crime and intelligence with Asians on top, whites in the middle and blacks on the bottom. According to Rushton's research, Asians have the biggest brains, the smallest genitals and the least testosterone. Hence, they have the highest IQ scores and the least promiscuity. Blacks, he says, have the smallest brains, the biggest genitals and the most testosterone. Hence, they have the lowest IQ scores and commit the most rapes and murders."
I think his "theory" is a gross generalization relying on tortured, if not fallacious, statistics that opens up a bitter debate.
|Sort of like white guys can't read.||53T|
Dec 31, 2002 10:00 AM
|Please, read the book, or skim it. Rushton probably got real stupid by only reading newspapers. So far our fellow posters have dismissed two authors without ever cracking their books. I understand this is an open forum and opinions of all merit are welcome, so here is mine: READ THE BOOK.|
|Not going to read that crap.||RoyGBiv|
Dec 31, 2002 10:08 AM
|Don't want to and don't need to. It's erely grist for parlour room (or internet forum) debate. Even if it were true ... and maybe it is, I don't know ... what's the point?|
Dec 31, 2002 10:10 AM
|"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1816
|Good for you||SteveS|
Dec 31, 2002 10:33 AM
|Good for you on suggesting to read the book. I haven't read either and probably won't but I am always suspicious of quick dismissives on these most politically correct of topics. Another book that I haven't read and probably won't is "Black and White in America." I did see the author of this one speak a couple of times and I thought she made some good points, none of which I remember at the moment. I do however, remember the rants and raves of the p.c. people., in an effort to squelch an honest discussion of the book.
Interesting that some of the same people who would demand complete freedom of speech would also willingly 'censor' if they could, ideas that challenge the current accepted norms of political correctness.
As an aside, North African (read 'Arabic') runners have left the Kenyans behind in middle distance races; Said Ouaita and others from Morocco or Algeria are the fleetest of feet in the middle distances. Can't speak for their I.Q. or crime quotients.
|Here's your answer||eyebob|
Dec 31, 2002 10:00 AM
|I did a quick google search and hit this. It seems (though I have not read it all) to be a rather objective, cited/referenced review of the recent information out there on this subject. Read it and report back.
|Rushton put to bed.||eyebob|
Dec 31, 2002 10:34 AM
|While the concept seemed reasonable, I'd say after reading Danny Yee's response to Rushton that we cannot say what Rushton is saying based on Rushton's own arguments.
|i've read all of it||Woof the dog|
Dec 31, 2002 11:57 AM
|I think that there is truth to what all of them say. And even though I do not regularly read stuff like this I understand what has been said just fine. I agree with Rushton's 'facts.' I find it interesting that in one example, IQ levels were determined by how fast a child could think, or something like that. So, in the end I do buy Rushton's separation between whites, asians and blacks. Snyder and others can talk all they want how it is hard to pinpoint just what defines a race. I think they overall do not want to see that there is still 'something' there that separates whites, asians and blacks in general. I do not buy this interbreeding theory completely because even though I can accept that all the populations/races were interebreeding, it does not seem likely that the interbreeding that happened is significant enough to have an impact such as eventual homogenity of different races. So, i can see that even though there is too much noise, it is possible to have general groups like whites, blacks and asians. After all, there are some physical differences between races, so why can't there be any differences in mental capacity? Snyder is a whiny b!tch to refuses to accept that there is some truth to Rushton's conclusions in light of her education that emphasizes complete equality and maybe her feminine nature. I disagree with Rushton on AIDS issue.
The question is how to go about these differences that quite likely exist? I think that it is a good thing that the law tries to disregard things like that because in the end intelligence differences are not that large and to many it is inhumane to judge based on how potentially smart one could be. I think its not good from an ethical point to separate, but it simply happens on its own to a smaller degree due to the intelligence differences.
Woof the dog.
|Why assume that physical differences correspond. . .||czardonic|
Dec 31, 2002 1:29 PM
|. . .to intellectual or mental differences? After all, physical differences among races were inspired by (physical) environmental factors that have nothing to do with mental capacity. Moreover, if you subscribe to the theory that all humans descended from a common ancestor (evolutionary or biblical), then it makes even less sense to assume that some are genetically smarter than others due to inherited traits (race being one of them). Unless there is an objective correlation between a physical trait and intelligence, the assumption that because races look different they must behave different seems pretty specious.
Also, your assertion that there are concrete distinctions between races is rather bogus. What are these distinctions? Where does one draw the line between one race and another? There is significant variation among each race, even in the absence of recent inter-racial breeding. So, who represents the true essence of a given race?
|There are no differences||53T|
Dec 31, 2002 5:56 PM
|There are no genetic differences associted with skin color, other than skin color. DNA from a poodle and a Great Dane are about 99.99% the same. A Nigerian and a Brit have about 100% the same DNA.|
|2 % difference between humans and Chimps.||Sintesi|
Jan 2, 2003 7:55 AM
|Gentically speaking, the concept of "race" is meaningless. It's just that people and their dicriminating tribalism (I mean that as a neutral observation, just the way it is) will always draw a line and create groupings of individuals whether it be based superficial perceptions or deep cultural values.
I do know that some groups (usually impoverished) are cynically "anti-education." A friend of mine taught in school where kids were beat up by their peers for trying to study. There is always a normative effect where your peers try to pressure you into staying at "their level." Don't a lot of women act stupider than they are so they don't louse up their prospects of attracting men since our egos are so easily bruised? Just an observation.
The Black middle-class is a growing segment and their chidren do better economically than ghetto kids. Honestly, succeeding in life has a lot to do with the support and expectations of your peers. How many of us think our bosses and leaders are idiots who come from a privileged background? How many times have we met someone we expect to be stupider than ourselves and be proven quite the contrary?
I think it's a societal mystique that can't be easily solved if at all. People are constantly screwing others and theirselves out of opportunity simply because they need to "fit in."
|Why assume that physical differences correspond. . .||Woof the dog|
Jan 1, 2003 12:38 AM
|Nah, its too late. I will not listen to the reason anymore. I will just trust my inner feelings, my unconscience (sp?) to make a decision instead of my conscience. And whatever will be that conclusion, it will invariably work for me.
Woof the dog.
|Why assume that physical differences correspond. . .||Woof the dog|
Jan 1, 2003 1:10 AM
|Just to make sure I must say that whatever is the truth out there, I try not to judge people based on race. Rather, I look at everything from 'we all are before one god' sort of viewpoint. This thread was started because i was not familiar with the issue.
Woof the dog.
|You could take this a step further||carnageasada|
Dec 31, 2002 11:04 AM
|And maybe ask what species are smarter than others. My wife claims that our bluetick-hound/rottweiler is much smarter than myself. He fetches the newspaper most mornings, comes when he's called, doesn't complain about her cooking and is generally more suited to social occasions than myself. Tonights festivities included.|
|You could take this a step further||Woof the dog|
Dec 31, 2002 12:02 PM
|What are you trying to say?
Just because I am a dog, it doesn't mean I can't think and ride a bike! As a matter of fact, I am far beyond the bell curve among my dog fellows.
HAPPY HOLIDAYS !!!!!!!
WOOF THE DOG THAT THINKS HE IS SMART
|The New Bell Curve||Alpedhuez55|
Dec 31, 2002 5:12 PM
|I think we may be on to something here. If genetics are so important, it only makes sense that the person with the biggest brains are the smartest. And Cyclists are by far the smartest of all people in addition to having the best rear ends. I think I found the answer to all of the troubles in the world, The new Bell Curve.
At the bottom of this post, you will find a picture of the Bell King Head Bicycle Helmet. It is the Super Big Gulp of the Cycling World. It can be used to protect a medium sized watermelon. It is mostly used to protect only the largest of craniums, which is used to protect the largest of brains. The largest of brains must therefore be genetically superior.
We can go through the Warranty Registration cards sent back to Bell and use that to make a list of the best and brightest. We can use this list to choose all of our leaders. All our CEOs, Politicians, and Doctors will be the smartest since they have the biggest brains. It will be a Utopian Society run by cyclists. Rednecks in pickups with Dale Ernhardt vanity plates who run a cyclist off the road will be forced to ride up le Alpe d'huez on a 45 pound Huffy. Old Ladies who honk their horn and tell tell ride on the sidewalk will do community service of Mountain Bike trail repair. Massachusetts Cities and towns will be forced to send a plow down bike paths since they are not just recreational but are used for commuters. What a wonderful world it will be.
I wear an XL Giro helmet. So I guess that would put me somwhere in Middle Management. Actually I would settle for the cities plowing the bike paths around Boston.
|Actually, I've sold a few King Heads||Spoke Wrench|
Jan 2, 2003 6:30 AM
|I'm not positive, but I think they all went to guys who played on the line for the St. Louis Rams. I'll tell you one thing, the people who bought them were all seriously huge men. Guys who could say "Fee fie fo fum" like they really mean it.
As a general rule, most men fit a size large Bell helmet and most women fit in a size medium.
Uh - I wear a large in the brands that have small, medium and large sizes, and large/extra large in the brands that group them that way. The only thing I think that says about me is that I'm intelligent enough to see the value of owning a helmet. I was either too smart or way too dumb for middle management because I had a different take on EVERYTHING than the rest of those guys.
|Actually, I've sold a few King Heads||Alpedhuez55|
Jan 2, 2003 8:29 AM
|A friend of mine worked in a shop and he said whenever they would sell one, the would call in all the guys in the back working on the bikes would come out to see who was buying it.
I am a big guy and the bell L/XL was a little on the snug side for me nomatter how I adjust the pads and straps. I have an Evo 2 and still wear it though. I like the fit system better on Gyro Helmets getter though. I think they changed their sizing slightly and this year's models work for me better. I tried a Kinghead out of curiosity and it was way too big.
|LOL! : ) You are exacly right. nm||Sintesi|
Jan 2, 2003 8:09 AM
|some people understand the value of education...||jose_Tex_mex|
Dec 31, 2002 1:59 PM
|... some do not. Asians are not genetically more inclined towards science and medicine. They just understand where studying can get them.
Likewise with Jews, they study hard to be doctors, lawyers, and the like. Not genes IMHO, just good habits and traditions. Some people do not have traditions, only bad habits.
Pardon my bluntness, however, it is hard to impress upon dummies the value of an education.
Also, the black and white education systems are comparable until about the third grade. After that it is all downhill for the black schools. Sad, grade 3...
Just my last $0.02 for 2002
|Historical value of education.||czardonic|
Dec 31, 2002 3:04 PM
|Your point about realizing the value of education seems quite apt. The Tang Dynasty (618-907) established a system of civil service examinations in China under which (in theory) education was rewarded. I don't know how much mobility there was between the higher and lower classes since a good education was probably expensive, but the idea that education, rather than birth or wealth, was of paramount importance was established. The examintaion system endured until 1911, and of course China has had an immense influence on other countries and cultures in the region. Is it any wonder that education is still valued today in that part of the world and among people emmigrating from it?
I don't know if a similar phenomenon explains similar values among other groups. Still, it makes sense that where education is an available means of advancement for people who are otherwise disadvantaged, it will be valued. It also makes sense that among people hailing from a culture where education offers little practical advantage (e.g. nomadic or agrarian societies), its value will not be as deeply ingrained.
|The Bell Curve.||Sintesi|
Jan 2, 2003 7:13 AM
|Hernstein and Murray's infamous book with two reviews pro and con.
Another source to consult on this is the immensely excellent Stephen Gould and his book "The Mismeasure of Man."