U tweetove putem weba ili aplikacija drugih proizvođača možete dodati podatke o lokaciji, kao što su grad ili točna lokacija. Povijest lokacija tweetova uvijek možete izbrisati. Saznajte više
This, to me, is the weirdest part of Charles Murray's intellectual project. The IQ stuff is mostly in service of an argument against affirmative action, but it's easier to just test if affirmative action works — and it does!https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1223302565196001280 …
Like if you take Murray at his word about why he cares about this, it's just an overestimation of the "mismatch" hypothesis, which you don't need any heritability analysis to evaluate https://www.vox.com/2018/4/10/17182692/bell-curve-charles-murray-policy-wrong …pic.twitter.com/AsiRXIG1GC
i thought IQ arguments were in service not having to judge social policy outcomes by racial disparities in results
I think these are two sides of the same coin. He doesn't want to judge based on disparities *because* he doesn't want policies that affirmatively address those disparities.
Also, no one is a more important testimonial to the power of affirmative action that Murray himself
There’s also a moral component to the affirmative action argument that the IQ stuff bears on. (Is it legitimate to expect population racial mix to match racial mix in eg top universities?)
It does?
my impression was that race was only one section of the Bell Curve; main point was elitism
The argument against affirmative action isn't really that it harms non-asian minorities, It's that it misallocates resources. If you accept that the SAT is measurement invariant across races for predicting college value gained, then distorting it's use increases deadweight loss
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.
