You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bono's BS
- Thread starter Pa(b)st Prime
- Start date
Intelligence alone, as measured by IQ testing has nothing to do necessarily with morality, creativity or what is best for a society, etc.
What a vacuous argument you are making...
What a vacuous argument you are making...
Quote from spect8or:
And your words are probably true but they're entirely beside point. Who cares if a communist system could 'work' or not? The point is a society with more intelligent people in it is better for everyone, even for the highly unintelligent.
Quote from spect8or:
And your words are probably true but they're entirely beside point. Who cares if a communist system could 'work' or not? The point is a society with more intelligent people in it is better for everyone, even for the highly unintelligent.
Fill the society with the likes of Unabomber...
Quote from traderNik:
Doesnât it seem likely to you that mixed race couples, having had the strength of mind to make a decision that they knew would be opposed by many, would be more likely to have what it takes to hold a marriage together? Donât you think that children of mixed race couples, having gone through the teasing that they might have been subjected to, would realize that their personal worth was based on more than the colour of their skin or the slant of their eyes? Donât you think that they would become adults who have a broad understanding of the things that unite us as oppose to those which divide us?
Well, yes, it does seem reasonable to think so, doesn't it?
It is often suggested that the cure for all of America's racial woes would be a few healthy rounds of miscegenation, and that way everyone come to be related to some of a different race, everyone would blend into everyone, and finally, the race problem solved.
But does the evidence bear that out?
A model often suggested is Brazil, said to be a 'racial democracy', which, I guess, means that because it is so heavily miscegenated, people of all colors get along famously. The reality, you might have guessed, is somewhat different. Go to any Brazilian forum and talk with actual Brazilians about what they think of Brazil's 'racial democracy'. They quickly tell you what a joke it is. That Brazil is rife with racism. At that point, it's obligatory to mention that the racism isn't the 'overt' kind, said to be found in the USA. And at that point I have to laugh hard, because the examples they give of what they consider 'covert' racism seem to me a degree of magnitude greater than what one would encounter in 'overt' America. In fact, I'm tempted to conclude that Brazil is even more race obsesse than America. Here's a Brazilian forum dedicated to race in Brazil www.brazzilrace.com although the topic is a mainstay in all Brazilian forums I have encountered.
The gist of it goes like this. Brazil is said to be populated, in the main, by 'whites', 'pardos' and 'blacks'. (There are also small numbers of Asians and native Indians.) 'White' in Brazil is either anyone European or who, while being mixed, looks European. 'Pardo' is a mix of anything, but typically of black and white, or black and indian, or white and indian, or all three, or with any other pardo. Naturally, there's a great mix of shades there, and therefore many who are 'whites' are only marginally so, and might also well describe themselves as 'pardos'. 'Blacks' are the pure Africans or the very darkest pardos. The numbers, I think go something like 53% white, 40% pardo, 6% black (without checking, I'm sure that's close enough).
As they do the world over, blacks in Brazil live in poverty at rates many times higher than whites. And as happens the world over, the cause of this is said to be widespread 'racism' on the part of whites. Unlike America, though, this throws Brazilians into a bit of a bind, because racism 'officially' doesn't exist in Brazil. Nevertheless, antiracists are making progress, and Brazil seems to be a favorite destination of African-American activists, flushed with the success of their enterprise in the US, no doubt, who jet down to stir up Brazilian blacks. A Brazilian NAACP is not yet a sure thing however, because as American blacks discover, Brazilian mulattos don't like to think of themselves as 'black'. 'Blacks, African-Americans are reminded, are the 'pure' Africans. So for now, African-Americans' first task is to get black-mulatto Brazilians to ditch their racial classifications (there are a whole host of them) and adopt the straightforward American 'one drop' rules (or something close to).
Regardless of what you make of all this, one thing is abundantly clear, race has most certainly not ceased to be an issue in heavily miscegenated Brazil. What reason is there to expect America to be different?
This whole bit about âmixed race marriage is bad for societyâ is just impossible for me to believe, and I donât think you can provide any support for this argument.
I'm not sure I really said it was bad for society. I do think it causes rifts within families though. Of course, in a free society, one can do what one wants without regard to what the family thinks, and that's not a freedom I would try to deprive people of. Ultimately, I think it's an unsound practise, but I'm quite happy to keep that opinion to myself.
Thereâs just something inside of them that, when it comes time to deal with a person face-to-face, allows them to see through the colour to the person underneath and treat them like⦠a person. To them, individual opportunity and potential trumps statistics.
Oh come on, you really think I don't? I'm nowhere near the monster you imagine me to be. Say my godfather's daughter marry's this Jamaican. You think I'd automatically snub her or them? Lol. Or worse, that I'd be rude to the guy, or make him feel unwanted? Nik, I've never once suggested that because racial differences might be more 'real' than is commonly advertised, that therefore it's okay to go around being mean to people. Never ever have I suggsted that. I am vehemently against it. Now, it's true that I tend to not have much to do with, say, Asians or Aborigines or Muslims in Australia, but that's mostly because all my 'slots' for friends are taken. Most of my time is spent with people I already know. Whenever I have to deal with an Asian or an Indian, it's a no-brainer. It's not like i have to remind myself to 'not be racist'. Lol, absurd.
Quote from james_bond_3rd:
Fill the society with the likes of Unabomber...
What is it with liberals and anecdotes? As though one anecdote knocks out reams of hard data. Sheesh.
Where did you grow up james? Among the working class, like I did? Would my anecdotes about the cruelity and the depravity I witnessed there, and never among the more well-to-dos I also knew, be enough to convince you to change your mind? No? What's that, you'd want some hard numbers? Fancy that.
neophyte321
Guest
There would always be degrees of intelligence, unless my worst science-fiction nightmare became reality. If your fantasy came to fruition, what's to say that the 180+ IQers, wouldn't again start fantasizing about a world with no one under 140.
I give it 100 years before yours becomes reality. Up until a recent case, genetic screening was used, as a matter of ethics, exclusively to screen for undesirable traits. In a recent case, embryos were screened for a desired trait, specifically a match for a bone marrow transplant for an existing daughter of a women. Twenty eggs were taken from the women and 20 embryos were conceived, (YES CONCEIVED), screened, and the ones that didn't match, were presumable scrapped. (regretably, I couldn't find info on this on the web, and don't have the time to further look, but be assured it did happened, recently)
And So It Begins .........
Frankly, it was always been a matter of semantics, The Absence of an Undesirable Trait, Is Indeed A Desirable Trait.
Is it desirable for a woman to have big breasts, or is it desirable for a woman not to have small breats?
I give it 100 years before yours becomes reality. Up until a recent case, genetic screening was used, as a matter of ethics, exclusively to screen for undesirable traits. In a recent case, embryos were screened for a desired trait, specifically a match for a bone marrow transplant for an existing daughter of a women. Twenty eggs were taken from the women and 20 embryos were conceived, (YES CONCEIVED), screened, and the ones that didn't match, were presumable scrapped. (regretably, I couldn't find info on this on the web, and don't have the time to further look, but be assured it did happened, recently)
And So It Begins .........
Frankly, it was always been a matter of semantics, The Absence of an Undesirable Trait, Is Indeed A Desirable Trait.
Is it desirable for a woman to have big breasts, or is it desirable for a woman not to have small breats?
So we can dismiss your anecdotal family story of some Jamaican...as any evidence that you are not a racist...
Quote from spect8or:
What is it with liberals and anecdotes? As though one anecdote knocks out reams of hard data. Sheesh.
Where did you grow up james? Among the working class, like I did? Would my anecdotes about the cruelity and the depravity I witnessed there, and never among the more well-to-dos I also knew, be enough to convince you to change your mind? No? What's that, you'd want some hard numbers? Fancy that.
Quote from spect8or:
What is it with liberals and anecdotes? As though one anecdote knocks out reams of hard data. Sheesh.
Where did you grow up james? Among the working class, like I did? Would my anecdotes about the cruelity and the depravity I witnessed there, and never among the more well-to-dos I also knew, be enough to convince you to change your mind? No? What's that, you'd want some hard numbers? Fancy that.
I don't know if you can get any hard numbers.
From my school years, I never liked the rich kids. They were just spoiled and arrogant. Although it's true that majority of the poor families would never hope to produce the kind of "intellectuals" you describe, the best and brightest in my school always seemed to come from working class families.
Quote from neophyte321:
There would always be degrees of intelligence, unless my worst science-fiction nightmare became reality. If your fantasy came to fruition, what's to say that the 180+ IQers, wouldn't again start fantasizing about a world with no one under 140.
That will never happen, because, as designed, 100 is defined to be "average IQ." Therefore, 50% of the population will always have IQ below 100...
Racists are so, not based on any real scientific conclusion, but on observations based in a lack of any real science.
Consider the IQ scores that they parade around.
I am not an evolutionist, you know that, but it is clear that we can see nutrition, diet, family values, stimulus, parenting, prenatal care, discrimination, lack of money for tutors, low self esteem, etc. can dramatically impact IQ scores in any racial group.
What would the real scientific test be to prove Sp8teracist and his theories?
Take a current society of whites, and transport them to Africa as slaves. Have them experience many generations of a minority status, slavery, poverty, abuse, hopelessness, lack of education, lack of proper diet and medical care, etc.
Take a current society of blacks, and transport them so that they had several hundred years of society of superior education, benefits of racial preference, nutrition, etc.
Then compare the results of IQ scores...
Anything less, is simply a preconceived racial bias, fully discounting the reality of environment and long term exposure to environmental and cultural/social conditioning.
Consider the IQ scores that they parade around.
I am not an evolutionist, you know that, but it is clear that we can see nutrition, diet, family values, stimulus, parenting, prenatal care, discrimination, lack of money for tutors, low self esteem, etc. can dramatically impact IQ scores in any racial group.
What would the real scientific test be to prove Sp8teracist and his theories?
Take a current society of whites, and transport them to Africa as slaves. Have them experience many generations of a minority status, slavery, poverty, abuse, hopelessness, lack of education, lack of proper diet and medical care, etc.
Take a current society of blacks, and transport them so that they had several hundred years of society of superior education, benefits of racial preference, nutrition, etc.
Then compare the results of IQ scores...
Anything less, is simply a preconceived racial bias, fully discounting the reality of environment and long term exposure to environmental and cultural/social conditioning.
Quote from james_bond_3rd:
I don't know if you can get any hard numbers.
From my school years, I never liked the rich kids. They were just spoiled and arrogant. Although it's true that majority of the poor families would never hope to produce the kind of "intellectuals" you describe, the best and brightest in my school always seemed to come from working class families.