"There were plenty of good-doing boys [...] aiming toward a straight life. But they were out of it in their own community" suggests that the "spurious aristocracy" system is partially a matter of local cultural incentives. (Actual HBD isn't strawman genetic determinism!)
-
-
Sure; but look at the whole quote - those boys are low status and stay that way *unless whites impose white cultural norms* on those neighborhoods - entirely artificial. The genes of those boys are rapidly disappearing under current conditions.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I see.
More generally (as a rationalist, I have NO interest in specific cases, and ESPECIALLY not politically-sensitive ones; I can ONLY articulate the GENERAL laws) populations are more predictable than individuals because of the law of large numbers. 1/22 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zackmdavis @CovfefeAnon and
@zackmdavis I sometimes- occasionally- do have interest in specific cases. I could justify this by saying the tangible details of a case are sometimes surprising in a way my model hadn't explicitly accounted for- 1/?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
"No interest in specific cases" was rhetorical hyperbole, trying to dodge the unease of having a productive public conversation with one who openly doesn't care about respecting antiracist moral sensibilities, while I'm trying to simultaneously be moral and understand reality
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
>while I'm trying to simultaneously be moral and understand reality "Well there's your problem right there" The moral code in question is the result of selective pressure to deny reality because only that allows it to consume more and more energy.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I think we disagree about how much of the selective pressure is "'point deer, make horse' as power game" vs. "obfuscate models that imply departure from the Schelling point of Equality"?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Isn't it obvious by now that there is no Schelling point in "equality"? It's easily chipped away because it requires people to point out uncomfortable things about people who outnumber you and have votes and more importantly because it's not a well defined claim. 1/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @zackmdavis and
Is there equality when people have different genetic endowments? When they have different backgrounds? "Well, this arbitrary amount of advantage from your family is ok, but this amount isn't" is the exact opposite of a Schelling point - no natural point to pick. 2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
"Equality under the Procedure" is? "Take noisy tests at face value; don't adjust for demographic regression to the mean" is Schelling if it's easier to agree on the Procedure than the regression coefficient. Maybe this is the part where you say "Manipulating procedural outcomes"?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Indeed; "equality under the procedure" is sliced from both sides. "The procedure is unfair, it's manipulated to give the results wanted" and the other side of a people whose core identity is that they are the people who are good at doing exactly that with every procedure.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.