Tomfoolery
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2012
- Messages
- 282
- Reaction score
- 47
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Excellent use of discrimination.
A cursory read was enough to tell me “who the racists are in this thread.” Scientific racism is scientific racism, no matter how you dress it up. Personally, I find fault with a system of measuring an entire group of people whose score keeps shifting. Psychometrics initially told us 100 years ago that the inferior black race had a particular IQ yet 100 years later we see that it’s a different score. This pseudoscience causes huge damage and yet we continue to find one truism – intelligent people raised on a particular and abhorrent set of assumptions will continue to create tests and theories that support those assumptions. Pretentions about objectivity in studying the human race are a poor substitute for true science so please, don’t lecture me about “honest discussion.”
I’m done here.
Who was it that based part of his argument on physical performance of Kenyan / Ethiopian runners? If there's a strawman - you created it I'm afraid.
No, I think "thee" most fallacious" attempt at debate is ad hominem and you two are a lovely pair of bookends.
Now, if we can leave your childishness aside - can you tell me what the ultimate goal of your argument is, (I'm asking seriously) is it to bring back eugenics/ reduce spending on lower IQ races (why put them through school if they're (to use hicup's phrase) "dumb" / / ship them off US soil? I'd really like to know.
Accusing someone of "making absurd self promoting lies about their background" and "creating sock puppets" without a single shred of evidence seems rather "absurd" to me_
Unless of course you have a psychic link to the ouija board gods and therefore don't require proof for your opinions and accusations__Do you have connections to the spirit world Tomfoolery?
And exactly why do you see a problem with this???
That was retarded, straw man laden and your previous reasoning remains circular. And it's spelled counselor, retard. I will get past insinuating I may be smarter than you, I know I am, both because I am generally smarter than everyone around me and you are a damned fool based upon your poor, slipshod posting.
Varying. For some it is merely the belief they are elevated as individuals by belonging to an intelligent race, others are politically animated to do in affirmative action policies based on race and feel this forwards their argument. Others are deep seeded racists based upon their upbringing and find message boards afford a unique opportunity to vent their anger and torment their detractors which is otherwise unavailable to them for obvious reasons. It simply gives them joy to say African Americans and Mexicans are less intelligent than whites.
Of course this all misses the mark insofar as making a cogent and effective argument for dismantling the welfare state, our modest affirmative action programs or race preferences in government contracting, for example. The fact that intelligence could be associated with race does not mean historical oppression did not exist and should not be redressed in some fashion.
Sadly, there is a body of "work" which can be harvested to satisfy these untoward aims.
Give me some examples of how a standard IQ test skews results in favor of any one particular race? If you can't, then your entire pretentious argument is missing a key evidentiary threshold. In sum, you cannot back up your claim that IQ tests are not a key indication of intelligent capacity. If IQ tests are skewed to provide a certain outcome among different races then so too are psychological diagnostic tests, but no one is suggesting that MMPI test are skewed in favor of a particular race or creed.
Oh, and this whole business about everyone being a racist is getting old, cookie. How long do you plan to keep it up? Is anyone listening to you?
Tim-
Straw man argument.
I suppose any cogent argument is a straw man when you don't believe race actually exists, eh? Dude, you're such a phoney and amatuer. Any attempt at an actual debate and you go all goo goo and weak in the knees. You're not comfortable in an actual debate, you're much better when you can throw rhetorical spit-balls at people and fake apathy on the pretext that you're so much smarter than everyone else in the room in response.
Like I said, I had you pegged the moment you entered this particular room, now go away child, no one is going to push sunshine up your arse in this forum.
Tim-
Another straw man argument. And that race may not exist as such does not make all arguments straw men arguments. You hoist yourself on your own petard, repeatedly. You are a dolt, you make me appear a genius by comparison. You need to carefully read the language of your earstwhile adversary else you appear deficient, not to me, but to your presumed audience. I already know you are somewhat challenged. Your IQ is about 95, I speculate.
That initial judgment requires a valid test. Surely you see you assumed we had isolated the two subgroups somehow
The subgroup I was referring to were the smart and the less smart, not race. Those were your groups. So, no, your inference was an error. Good lord, you can't even recall your own posts, much less mine.
Ah, I see, so then, IQ tests are valid? One step at a time, and I'll walk you through it. Are they valid or are they not?
Tim-
Beauty before brains? OK sure, lead on adonnis. Ans. I am no expert so I am speaking out of school. That said, intelligence is an ephemral, elusive and broad concept. I would speculate that experts who have spent generations have developed written tests which capture certain aspects of human behavior which bear upon categories subsumed within the larger Venn diagramm we might call "intelligence." So with those caveats, and perhaps more, written tests may be valid in the main at capturing those limited things, subject also to extreme bias.
By the by, you won't spare your hypo my ridicule, but persist you may...
I'll interject little things along the way to maintain my own interest. Do you suppose a bushman would know what to make of origami lain flat?
So, IQ tests are valid but limited in measuring true intelligence;-
"stole it"???__That photo was taken of me by an old boyfriend who posted it on the internet as a prank and later sent me the link for a laugh_Oh I wish I were in the land of cotton ...
Please chump, your bio-CV speaks for itself. Craven and delusional. Keep your racism here, other boards will thank you. So you are claiming that you did not harvest that photo? I believe you know what evidence exists that you stole it.
"stole it"???__That photo was taken of me by an old boyfriend who posted it on the internet as a prank and later sent me the link for a laugh_
What made it so funny to both of us was the fact that he always jokingly referred to me as a sexy nerd, but who could of imagined it would cause this much excitement_
You obviously don't like me and the things you choose to believe about me reflects that, making you the victim of the hate from which you draw your conclusions_
And for some reason, people who can't defend their position in a debate will many times resort to personal attacks to deflect attention away from the defeat they are suffering at the hands of an opponent_
For example, my personal history and physical appearance have absolutely nothing to do with "Race differences in average IQ are largely genetic" which happens to be the subject of this thread_
Personally, I don't understand why you people obsess over this kind of stuff cuz none of us actually know diddly-squat about each other so what difference does it even make?!
I'll see you in the land of cotton, good times there are not forgotten__(you need to get a life dude)
Tim, it's getting beyond merely tiresome rectifying your habit of shoving words in my mouth. Do you think obvious framing of issues makes you slick? Newsflash, it doesn't. it makes you either foolish or unethical. I am, on a foregoing basis going to stop quoting you at the precise point you err first. I stop reading the moment that happens and point it out to you. Notice here what you said. It is merely 10 words before you lie. I can't discuss an issue with someone who is going to do that. Do you see what I mean? I did not say IQ measures true intelligence at all. Why did you just lie? Don't even paraphrase me if you are that unfaithful to meaning.
Seriously, I need to quit with you. This can go nowhere. best to your endeavors, whatever they are.... Wow. (eyeroll)
Ans. I am no expert so I am speaking out of school. That said, intelligence is an ephemral, elusive and broad concept. I would speculate that experts who have spent generations have developed written tests which capture certain aspects of human behavior which bear upon categories subsumed within the larger Venn diagramm we might call "intelligence." So with those caveats, and perhaps more, written tests may be valid in the main at capturing those limited things, subject also to extreme bias.
That said, intelligence is an ephemral, elusive and broad concept
I would speculate that experts who have spent generations have developed written tests which capture certain aspects of human behavior which bear upon categories subsumed within the larger Venn diagramm we might call "intelligence."
So with those caveats, and perhaps more, written tests may be valid in the main at capturing those limited things, subject also to extreme bias.
The questions one must ask themselves are this. Could a person, representative of a demographic of an average intelligence, design an intelligence test that would otherwise have those with an average higher intelligence score more poorly on? Conversly, could the opposite be true? Could a person representing a demographic of average higher intelligence, design a test that would otherwise have the person of average lower intelligence, score more poorly on?
The answer is yes to the latter, and no to the former. The former could never happen, the latter almost exclusively would happen. Therefore, IQ is a repeatable, and demonstratable measure for intelligence that will produce consistent results within, and without any variables you wish to include, and control for. It's a real thing that tells us that, whatever, and however you wish to define intelligence, there are measurable differences between certain subset groups of humans.
Tim-
Your support of the dumbbell side of the Bell Curve makes you a self-hating High IQ, just like the Unabomber. He hated the technological achievements of his own kind, which got us out of the subhuman forest life he chose to live in. I grew up a few miles from him, at the same time in the same kind of neighborhood. Anyone who got high grades was mercilessly attacked and isolated, so all the Unabomber's theories revealed was a subconscious resentment of the pain and isolation his High IQ had brought down upon him, instead of a pride that High IQs had created all our prosperity and everything that prevents us from living like animals and other inferior beings. Though self-haters show a pathetic lack of pride, I feel no pity for them, because of their cowardice in refusing to lash out at the powers who set up such insulting ingratitude.You admit your half baked hypothesis has zero scientific support. Thanks for that. I disregard hypothetical tests with presumed results employing circular reasoning that are unsupported by science. And you misspelled fray in that idiom you used. Errors of this nature (phonetic spelling) tend to allow perceptive readers to stereotype you and it diminishes your credibility. I for one simply find it reinforces my estimation of you based upon your absurd assertions.
You are correct. I am very smart due to heredity, environment and as proven by testing and in professional and educational achievement. As a perceptive person, I notice those who frequent message boards promoting or supporting racist causes invariably have the benefit of none of these traits. They appear to be covering an inferiority complex and hope that by buoying their race to elevate themselves. It does not work that way.
I already explained the logical deficiency of your idea. Read it over and over until it takes.
Your support of the dumbbell side of the Bell Curve makes you a self-hating High IQ, just like the Unabomber. He hated the technological achievements of his own kind, which got us out of the subhuman forest life he chose to live in. I grew up a few miles from him, at the same time in the same kind of neighborhood. Anyone who got high grades was mercilessly attacked and isolated, so all the Unabomber's theories revealed was a subconscious resentment of the pain and isolation his High IQ had brought down upon him, instead of a pride that High IQs had created all our prosperity and everything that prevents us from living like animals and other inferior beings. Though self-haters show a pathetic lack of pride, I feel no pity for them, because of their cowardice in refusing to lash out at the powers who set up such insulting ingratitude.
Yes, but he hasn't even touched me or a Single one of my meaty posts. In fact he hasn't refuted any of your posts except call them speculation, which they admittedly are, if logical. He's just a Burden Shifter, demanding proof for what is admittedly not proveable.
This debate is about evidence. One side has 100 consistent years of it, the other has apologism ranging from language dissociation (on IQ/Intelligence/Race) to apologism of other sorts about those numbers.
So you still, and conspicuously, have NO On Topic Replies to me in the string. (or even off topic, for that matter!)Tomfoolery said:...or rather it is simply not vocalizing hurtful and false generalizations or epithets towards historically disadvantaged minorities, females or homosexuals because polite people care and have a bit of class. But you can stick to a more complicated psychological theory if it enables you to avoid having class, empathy and intelligent discretion.mbig-but Not my post said:political correctness
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?