I don't know how to argue that I'm motivated more by wanting to be able to discuss scientific research on important topics without being called fascist than by desire to hurt poor people for fun. Seems crazy to me to believe opposite.
-
-
Out of interest - how likely do you think it is that there's a biological link between race and IQ? Like, what's the percentage chance? I've always wondered what your answer to this question would be.
-
You've complimented Charles Murray before and I vaguely remember you writing about the idea that Ashkenazi Jews might have some kind of genetic disease that makes them smarter, but I'm still not totally sure what your position is.
-
I assume you think scientists should be able to research the question without people calling them racist, but I've always been interested to know if you personally think there's anything to it.
-
Too complicated to fit in a tweet, but broadly agreeing with the scientific consensus.
-
ok sorry, I didn't see this. what is the scientific consensus as you understand it?
-
so basically: you think there's a fair chance that it has at least some measurable impact, but you could be wrong and don't want to overstate the case. is that correct?
-
That's how I interpret the Rindermann paper.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
My philosophy is pursue science, especially the kinds that have most consistently made the world better in the past, trust people not to be insane monsters motivated by hatred, distrust people who say everyone who disagrees with them is insane hateful monsters, hope for best.
-
And - sorry to continue this thread - but one more thing that bothers me. Right now we live in a world where people who shoplift small items are locked in cages for thirty years and frequently raped.
-
This is your people - the people who think crime is totally just a random personal flaw with no genetic correlation - who did this. What exactly do you think biodeterminists are going to do that's *worse*?
-
The only importance genes have had on the legal system so far is that a few criminals have gotten let off because they had genes that predisposed them to crime (see the BBC article linked before for the story).
-
I don't think that makes sense, but I'm glad people are finally asking the question "Are criminals just lazy and evil, or might they be fighting a hard battle against tendencies they were born with?"
-
I'm not sure it's worth fighting as hard as you are to protect the current system. I'm not sure thinking that everything is just laziness and upbringing is ushering in as beautiful a golden age for the poor and disadvantaged as you think.
-
Whatever you think Science's track record is, I'm not sure "random completely false socially accreted prejudice" is that good a source of social progress either.
-
If I thought current structure - epistemological, social, criminological - was worth protecting, I'd be more willing to keep quiet about its scientific inaccuracies. But I see mass incarceration, execution of innocents, etc, coexisting with crime rates typical of 3rd World
- 4 more replies
New 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.