|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 9:28 pm Post subject: Is Uncertainty Regarding Genetic Equality Really That Bad? |
 |
|
Article here.
| Quote: |
An email written by a third-year Harvard Law student has incited outcry at law schools across the country.
The email, reported by Above the Law, came after its unidentified writer made some controversial remarks at a dinner. It reads:
| Quote: |
| I absolutely do not rule out the possibility that African Americans are, on average, genetically predisposed to be less intelligent. I could also obviously be convinced that by controlling for the right variables, we would see that they are, in fact, as intelligent as white people under the same circumstances. The fact is, some things are genetic. African Americans tend to have darker skin. Irish people are more likely to have red hair. |
The email continues:
| Quote: |
| Everyone wants someone to take 100 white infants and 100 African American ones and raise them in Disney utopia and prove once and for all that we are all equal on every dimension, or at least the really important ones like intelligence. I am merely not 100% convinced that this is the case. |
The writer sent the email to a select few, one of whom forwarded it to more people. It eventually made its way to the Harvard Black Law Student Association list-serv and Black Law Student Associations countrywide.
The email's writer is set to do a coveted federal clerkship upon graduating, Above the Law reports.
The full email, and responses, can be seen here. |
As you can see in the original source article, the response to this is essentially persecution. Our society is essentially at the point where simply admitting you aren't sure people of different racial backgrounds are genetically identical in terms of average predisposition towards intelligence creates a storm of anger and persecution.
This snippet from the original source article is particularly telling:
| Quote: |
| The firestorm that has resulted has been EPIC. [A member or members of] Harvard�s BLSA sent the email, along with CRIMSON DNA�s name and information, to the BLSAs at other Top 14 schools. The BLSAs are meeting to discuss what should be done about this and judging from the craziness on the listservs and at meetings, this is going to get ugly. They want to go after her clerkship offer, so this one might make the news. |
That's right. Admitting to uncertainty regarding the matter of racial equality with regards to genetic disposition towards intelligence in a private email justifies organizations around the country gathering to do their best to harass you.
The worst part is that the author of the original email is completely correct: no scientific data has ever been presented which demonstrates identical predisposition towards intelligence in people of different racial backgrounds. She's being attacked over being honest. Is it any wonder that many people are simply getting fed up with the results of the pro-diversity mindset that's swept across the West? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Patrick Bateman
Joined: 21 Apr 2009
Location: Lost in Translation
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:36 pm Post subject: Re: Is Uncertainty Regarding Genetic Equality Really That Ba |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
That's right. Admitting to uncertainty regarding the matter of racial equality with regards to genetic disposition towards intelligence in a private email justifies organizations around the country gathering to do their best to harass you.
The worst part is that the author of the original email is completely correct: no scientific data has ever been presented which demonstrates identical predisposition towards intelligence in people of different racial backgrounds. She's being attacked over being honest. Is it any wonder that many people are simply getting fed up with the results of the pro-diversity mindset that's swept across the West? |
While the thought that a person could be at a disadvantage at a genetic level is unsettling, that doesn't make it untrue.
Also, I can see why at first a person would be bothered by the email author's comments, but you're right, they are just being intellectually honest.
It's a shame to see honesty provoking such reactions. I think it does everyone a disservice and chokes back progress. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moldy Rutabaga
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Location: Ansan, Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with the OP 90%. There are multiple issues here, and I think that's what makes the issue dicey.
It is problematic to use the term "African-American," I think, in such an academic circle as it presumes we can neatly place people into boxes. How are we going to determine who is this and who is that genetic makeup? What is Beyonce and Tiger Woods? Unless these are simply short terms for concrete genetic markers, to me they are dated and ugly terms. The same goes for intelligence, which can mean a variety of abilities, from verbal to aural to kinesthetic to whatever.
But this is nitpicking over a private e-mail, where people aren't expected to be so precise. It might show some poor judgment for someone to claim these sorts of differences, but the controversy is way out of proportion. I understand that some ethnic groups might see a chilling precedent here to classifying people based on 'race,' but to ruin someone's career because they dared to ask questions or posit ideas is extreme, and also makes damn sure that no one will ask them again, whether they're trying to solve a social problem or cure a medical disease.
Maybe it wasn't a good idea for me to return the library books late, but to execute me will result in no one using the library again. Does my analogy work? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Moldy Rutabaga wrote: |
| I agree with the OP 90%. There are multiple issues here, and I think that's what makes the issue dicey. |
The issue of the facts of the matter and how to best investigate them may be dicey, but there should be no "dicey-ness" to simply admitting to uncertainty and acknowledging that the proposition that racial background has no impact on intelligence may be true or false.
| Moldy Rutabaga wrote: |
| How are we going to determine who is this and who is that genetic makeup? What is Beyonce and Tiger Woods? Unless these are simply short terms for concrete genetic markers, to me they are dated and ugly terms. The same goes for intelligence, which can mean a variety of abilities, from verbal to aural to kinesthetic to whatever. |
Sure, there's plenty of vagueness with regards to concepts like race and intelligence. However, real scientific advancement on this matter is possible. There's a finite amount of genetic material in human DNA, and with regards to biological operations it's possible to divide that material up into discrete chunks. If it can be shown that a particular chunk of DNA being configured in way X tends to produce highly intelligent individuals more often than if it is configured in way Y, then you have something of real value to talk about. Unfortunately, if one were to research the matter and discover this (and I'm not saying it's the case; this is just a hypothetical), announcing the results has the potential to end your career if it's the case that configuration X is more likely in some certain races than other certain races.
How can we ever hope to genuinely understand our own genetics when we have this kind of freaking out over mere agnosticism? I don't think these people realize the harm they're doing to society. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Define intelligence
this debate has been raging for a long long time. Trouble is standards keep changing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Bateman
Joined: 21 Apr 2009
Location: Lost in Translation
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rollo wrote: |
Define intelligence
this debate has been raging for a long long time. Trouble is standards keep changing. |
I think this article presents a different debate. It's not so much what is intelligence, but rather, what is the proper response to honesty? If something is true or honest, how should people go about dealing with it, even/especially if it is unsettling? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rollo wrote: |
Define intelligence
this debate has been raging for a long long time. Trouble is standards keep changing. |
The definition of intelligence is ultimately irrelevant with regards to whether or not it's acceptable to admit you aren't sure that racial background has no impact on intelligence. In fact, intelligence being vague and hard to define makes it even more questionable to expect people to blindly accept such a proposition.
This person wasn't standing up making a statement about race and intelligence. This person was standing up and admitting to uncertainty. Unfortunately, that uncertainty defies current academic dogma, and as a result, they're facing severe backlash. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 1:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, it's certainly a thought crime and criticizing liberal ideas is borderline illegal.
Anyway, crudely put, on average, East Asians are more intelligent than whites and both are more intelligent than blacks. This is standard science.
The other problem is that black Americans are far likelier to grow up in fatherless households. By every conceivable measure, fatherlessness is detrimental. We've got the welfare state to thank for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 3:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| like I say to the communists, and the islamists and the neonazis. Power to the right people. The right people should have more prestige and political power and they should have more resources. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It should not be taboo to discuss this. Different groups will perform differently on different tests and tasks, and that is ok. It does not mean differing worth or a hierarchy of groups. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| The other problem is that black Americans are far likelier to grow up in fatherless households. By every conceivable measure, fatherlessness is detrimental. We've got the welfare state to thank for that. |
And the police state- most notably the war on drugs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Different groups will perform differently on different tests and tasks, and that is ok. It does not mean differing worth or a hierarchy of groups. |
Right. Its not even quite intelligence per se, but on average Asians do better on tests, on average African-Americans do better on the basketball court, etc. Recognizing these proficiencies does nothing to roll back civil rights. Nobody is arguing that HR should racially profile.
Sergio's modern phrenological studies are still pretty amusing, though. I'd like to see some evidence showing that larger craniums = smarter. Also, to pick on his link, I loved this part:
| Quote: |
Culture-only theories do not explain the highly consistent pattern of race differences in IQ, especially the East Asian data. No interventions such as ending segregation, introducing school busing, or "Head Start" programs have reduced the gaps as culture-only theory would predict. |
Yes, desegregation and school busing failed because of genetic predispositions! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Bateman
Joined: 21 Apr 2009
Location: Lost in Translation
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
double post
Last edited by Patrick Bateman on Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:15 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Bateman
Joined: 21 Apr 2009
Location: Lost in Translation
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Quote: |
Culture-only theories do not explain the highly consistent pattern of race differences in IQ, especially the East Asian data. No interventions such as ending segregation, introducing school busing, or "Head Start" programs have reduced the gaps as culture-only theory would predict. |
Yes, desegregation and school busing failed because of genetic predispositions! |
While not necessarily defending the article, I think you misunderstood or at least misrepresented, the passage. The block quote is saying the educational environment was radically changed with no noticeable change in performance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2010 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Bateman wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| Quote: |
Culture-only theories do not explain the highly consistent pattern of race differences in IQ, especially the East Asian data. No interventions such as ending segregation, introducing school busing, or "Head Start" programs have reduced the gaps as culture-only theory would predict. |
Yes, desegregation and school busing failed because of genetic predispositions! |
While not necessarily defending the article, I think you misunderstood or at least misrepresented, the passage. The block quote is saying the educational environment was radically changed with no noticeable change in performance. |
Yes, its very debatable whether the educational environment was radically changed. Ever heard of white flight? Yes, whites fled the inner cities not just for their two-car garages, but because they wanted 'better' schools for their kids. This was because of Milliken v. Bradley limited desegregation to districts where there existed actual evidence of prior segregation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
