This sounds a lot like you are lazily slandering someone in order to avoid having to treat them as a human being. I'm open to Scott being a dirty eugenicist. I haven't read his whole blog, just parts of it. Make the case for real.
-
-
Replying to @cowtung
Yes, that's what a low-decoupling conflict theorist does, keep up
2 replies 2 retweets 109 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @cowtung
Arthur Chu Retweeted Aster, internet archaeologist
If you're actually interested in receipts someone with more time than me to go through the laborious process of indirectly searching shit on http://archive.org has done sohttps://twitter.com/RiotAtArbys/status/1275505026824273922?s=19 …
Arthur Chu added,
Aster, internet archaeologist @ArsonAtDennys@AcausalG@davidgerard@RationalWiki Any of y’all want to do a separate thread on these or should I? Remember the ones? Pretty sure they’re on http://archive.org This was a “well aCtUaLLy the data shows the black race commits more crimes so it’s highly logical etc etc” https://twitter.com/ArsonAtDennys/status/1275504294796636166 …3 replies 14 retweets 113 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @cowtung
But, in general, I don't think it's possible to be passingly familiar with Scott's blog and not know that one of his hobbyhorses is "IQ realism" and biological determinism, and the distance between this and eugenics is at best a hairsbreadth
6 replies 15 retweets 214 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
So there's distance between Scott and eugenics? So far my impression is that Scott isn't sure about IQ realism or biological determinism and is seeking answers in available studies. Is being sure that these are wrong and bad the prerequisite to not being called a eugenicist?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cowtung
There's *rhetorical* distance, if the absurd wink-wink nudge-nudge of the "Kolmogorov complexity" thing was somehow actually opaque to you
3 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @cowtung
And yeah, actually, I'm willing to say that it is
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
This sounds like working backwards from "eugenics is bad" (which we can all agree on) to "any notion that might be used to justify eugenics is false". Do you really think Scott secretly wants to selectively breed humans, and that wish is preventing him from seeing basic truths?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cowtung @arthur_affect
I should probably mention that I'm not trying to sealion you here. I'm just not very well versed (obviously) on the types of arguments you're using to justify calling Scott a eugenicist. I don't know what a "low-decoupling conflict theorist" is, for instance.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cowtung1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
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.