I don't like literature based expressions because these are sensitive to social desirability bias, whereas anonymous surveys are not so much. I think one should follow the approach used in climate science to gauge expert opinion on climate change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists%27_views_on_climate_change …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
And these people have directly stated their opposition comes on ideological grounds ('science for the people' etc.), and this is supported by reports from their colleagues. One cannot attack hereditarians for being political extremists. IQ researchers are center-left on average.
I have come to have very large distrust in philosophers. The fact that they keep making the same trite arguments about heritability without reference to empirical work for 5 years I think is extremely damning. Why do they keep repeating their strawmen of Jensen, for instance?
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I don't like Rushton's work for methods reasons, seems I was somewhat right in this view if we are to take Dutton's biography seriously (I haven't read it). I am sympathetic to traditional leftism, and environmentalism (esp. work safety), so I am happy you choose to engage. :)
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Dutton has a video summary of it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dL8XCuBNM4 … I support Scandinavian social democracy type government, but without the crazy social justice stuff in recent times.
End of conversation
-
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.