Why Race-Realism is Pseudoscience

[EgalitarianJay]

It sounds like a good argument, although I have not thought about it fully. Your source is very inadequate though, you really need a paper so the details and sample can be checked. There may be methodological flaws.

It would ofcourse be helpful for discussion if the full paper was available. However not everything is available for free on the internet.

At the very least the source is credible and therefore worthy of consideration.

 

[MadLib]

The inherit issue with the Race-Realism theory is that it is a classic example of confirmation bias: a researcher already believes something, so he sets out to prove that it is true rather than taking evidence and basing a conclusion off of it. That is basically what Jay's Pseudoscience column points out. This is true of alternate medicine like homeopathy, and also with religion. People will always have bias, and confirmation bias is a big example of bias.

Another issue with Race-Realism is that IQ automatically favors white people, as it was created by white people. The people who established IQ measured intelligence through white people, so the criteria are based on what white people do. That is inherently biased.

 

[Mikemikev]

The inherit issue with the Race-Realism theory is that it is a classic example of confirmation bias: a researcher already believes something, so he sets out to prove that it is true rather than taking evidence and basing a conclusion off of it. That is basically what Jay's Pseudoscience column points out. This is true of alternate medicine like homeopathy, and also with religion. People will always have bias, and confirmation bias is a big example of bias.

The inherit issue with the egalitarian theory is that it is a classic example of confirmation bias: a researcher already believes something, so he sets out to prove that it is true rather than taking evidence and basing a conclusion off of it. That is basically what Jay's Pseudoscience column points out. This is true of alternate medicine like homeopathy, and also with religion. People will always have bias, and confirmation bias is a big example of bias.

Another issue with Race-Realism is that IQ automatically favors white people, as it was created by white people. The people who established IQ measured intelligence through white people, so the criteria are based on what white people do. That is inherently biased.

IQ predicts success in cognitive tasks independently of race in any context. IQ predicts mathematical ability in any race for example. Is maths a tool of white supremacism?

 

[PrometheusBound]

The inherit issue with the Race-Realism theory is that it is a classic example of confirmation bias: a researcher already believes something, so he sets out to prove that it is true rather than taking evidence and basing a conclusion off of it. That is basically what Jay's Pseudoscience column points out. This is true of alternate medicine like homeopathy, and also with religion. People will always have bias, and confirmation bias is a big example of bias.

Another issue with Race-Realism is that IQ automatically favors white people, as it was created by white people. The people who established IQ measured intelligence through white people, so the criteria are based on what white people do. That is inherently biased.

Fine, let's not base who gets to study advanced science on race-biased test scores. To be fair and politically correct, let's base admissions to MIT on a quota system or a lottery.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

-- IQ predicts success in cognitive tasks independently of race in any context. IQ predicts mathematical ability in any race for example. Is maths a tool of white supremacism?

The problem is not mathematic ability but how it is presented in local context. It's that old culture bugbear that remains the thorn in the side of western designed ideas of intelligence testing.

The problem over the last 100 years is that there's a huge agenda as demonstrated by many of the bodies that have funded many of the tests and papers - bodies which pay researchers to find answers desirable by the holder of the money - which takes everything back to the truism of the cartoon in the OP.

 

[TeeHee777]

The problem is not mathematic ability but how it is presented in local context. It's that old culture bugbear that remains the thorn in the side of western designed ideas of intelligence testing.

The problem over the last 100 years is that there's a huge agenda as demonstrated by many of the bodies that have funded many of the tests and papers - bodies which pay researchers to find answers desirable by the holder of the money - which takes everything back to the truism of the cartoon in the OP.

the circularity of that argument could hardly be more dramatic...

the article concludes (hilariously)

"you're just going to be able to pick out more efficiently those individuals who would be considered intelligent by Western standards, but you're not going to be able to answer the question of whether you're picking out people who are most intelligent according to the standards of their culture."

once again this liesheet pretends that IQ is not a suitable intelligence indicator, because it does not take into consideration the relevant skills and types of intelligence of "cultures" such as that in Benin or Togo, or Eritrea... or congo pygmies!

obviously we use IQ testing to ascertain the characteristics and mental faculties MOST LIKELY TO BE USEFUL in OUR CONTEXT: i.e.: modern western CIVILIZED society

obviously our society values traits such as scientific and mathematical literacy, which is largely logic problem solving...

furthermore this article actually concedes that there is a causal linkage between races and types and degrees of intelligenece (that IQ is eurocentric, and that other cultures have different mental aptitudes or ways of thought process that aren't "picked up" by traditional IQ testing)... so, it actually argues the racialist POV.

 

[TeeHee777]

The inherit issue with the Race-Realism theory is that it is a classic example of confirmation bias: a researcher already believes something, so he sets out to prove that it is true rather than taking evidence and basing a conclusion off of it. That is basically what Jay's Pseudoscience column points out. This is true of alternate medicine like homeopathy, and also with religion. People will always have bias, and confirmation bias is a big example of bias.

its interesting but you can apply that marvellously to "racial egalitarianism" or the "race as social construct" people. Notice the incessant back-peddling on their part: and the "discounting-game" they play with every piece of evidence that tells us that human clines/races/ethnicities are real, and have measurable differences, as surely as the races of canines do (the same way the rest of the biological world also works)

If IQ shows a racial discrepency... the entire science of IQ is junk, and useless or at the very least culturally biased and hence innacurate. riiight...

If racial medicine comes up with the drug BiDil... and provides blacks with superior heart disease medication (tailored for them specifically)... then its a marketing ploy, and again "junk/quack medicine"

If specific diseases (sickle cell anemia) is detected at abnormally disproportionate rates accross racial lines... again... its irrelevent... the fact that some cicilians or moroccans can on occasion be diagnosed with it means its unimportant... "we all the same!"

When Foreign Policy realeases a map of failed states: The 2012 Failed States Index - Interactive Map and Rankings | Foreign Policy, and it might as well read as a map of black ruled states... again, the familiar shouts of "racism" accompanied with sob story excuses that amount to: "its all white peoples fault anyway" are the order of the day...

nearly every single proof that substantiates that human being are in fact DIVERSE, and hence: DIFFERENT, elicits a knee jerk EMOTIONAL reaction on the part of the racial egalitarians... and their counter-arguments are not at all sound...