Ethics and Science Quarantine Zone
  • Kow
    Show networks
    Twitter
    Kowdown
    Xbox
    Kowdown
    PSN
    Kowdown
    Steam
    Kowdown

    Send message
    Hurricanes, earthquakes, tidal waves etc affect poor people more than rich people, and white people are statistically richer than coloured people, therefore coloured people are genetically more susceptible to climate change. QED.
  • JRPC wrote:
    I've seen this clip. This is a really good example. From where I'm sat, you lot are the guy on the right. I mean seriously, you're doing exactly the same thing.
    Did you read all the links and articles Face just posted for you? Or are you ignoring them?

    Let me guess, you're busy at work and you'll get back to them later, amirite?
  • @JRPC, I never saw what the actual point you're arguing for was, would you mind summing it up for me, please?
  • dynamiteReady
    Show networks
    Steam
    dynamiteready

    Send message
    @GurtTractor - Total respect.
    "I didn't get it. BUUUUUUUUUUUT, you fucking do your thing." - Roujin
    Ninty Code: SW-7904-0771-0996
  • Yossarian
    Show networks
    Xbox
    Yossarian Drew
    Steam
    Yossarian_Drew

    Send message
    JRPC wrote:
    I've seen this clip. This is a really good example.

    From where I'm sat, you lot are the guy on the right.

    I mean seriously, you're doing exactly the same thing.

    As far as I can work out, your position is this:

    Political correctness shouldn’t get in the way of science.

    By ignoring IQ test results, political correctness is getting in the way of science.

    Is that about right?
  • Should've just merged this with the comedy thread.
  • dynamiteReady
    Show networks
    Steam
    dynamiteready

    Send message
    JRPC wrote:
    I've seen this clip. This is a really good example. From where I'm sat, you lot are the guy on the right. I mean seriously, you're doing exactly the same thing.

    I don't like dogpiling either, so when I mentioned climate change, I was aware of your position.
    In this case though, human behaviour, much like (to my chagrin) the Earth's climate, is not a clockwork...

    https://news.stanford.edu/news/2001/april4/ehrlichtalk-44.html

    And that's where you're finding opposition.

    Nature and nurture is a longstanding argument (like many thousands of years old... Not just the last 150), and modern psychology generally tends to favour environmental factors, because the outcomes of those experiments are repeatable.

    With experiments that explore genetic influence on behaviour though, beyond some rather contrived examples involving twins as cohorts, findings have been patchy at best.
    "I didn't get it. BUUUUUUUUUUUT, you fucking do your thing." - Roujin
    Ninty Code: SW-7904-0771-0996
  • What's your opinion on quantum mechanics and differential equations, dyno?
    .
  • dynamiteReady
    Show networks
    Steam
    dynamiteready

    Send message
    That relevant?

    If it is, contextualise it, and I'll humour you...
    "I didn't get it. BUUUUUUUUUUUT, you fucking do your thing." - Roujin
    Ninty Code: SW-7904-0771-0996
  • GooberTheHat
    Show networks
    Twitter
    GooberTheHat
    Xbox
    GooberTheHat
    Steam
    GooberTheHat

    Send message
    If IQ was based on hereditary genetic traits, how can you train yourself to be better at IQ tests?
  • That relevant? If it is, contextualise it, and I'll humour you...

    It's just a question. Do you have an opinion as to whether they are reliable.
    .
  • *it's a trap gif* (too lazy to bother...)
    SFV - reddave360
  • Vela wrote:
    quantum mechanics
    Vela wrote:
    Do you have an opinion as to whether they are reliable.

    lol
    [ackbar.gif]
  • Oh, ffs, too slow. Shouldn't have paused to spell check Ackbar.
  • I'm LTTP and have read the last couple of pages from the current affairs thread and all of this one. I've not clicked on any links.

    What the feck is being argued here?

    That there is a genetic component to IQ? And that ignoring this is bad for science?
  • Moving too fast! can't keep up!!

    There's too many strands already now and they're all getting tangled up again. 
    Yossarian wrote:
    I've seen this clip. This is a really good example. From where I'm sat, you lot are the guy on the right. I mean seriously, you're doing exactly the same thing.
    As far as I can work out, your position is this: Political correctness shouldn’t get in the way of science. By ignoring IQ test results, political correctness is getting in the way of science. Is that about right?
     
    No.

    Maybe the first part. 

    AJ wrote:
    @JRPC, I never saw what the actual point you're arguing for was, would you mind summing it up for me, please?

    Right here an now, what I'm trying to do I guess is defend Harris and his arguments in the whole Harris/Murray/Vox thing. 

    The background to all this is summed up by Harris in this podcast which is about a 30-minute preamble to the later Harris-Klein podcast that's being discussed here. 

    What I'd love this not to be about is whether or not IQ is a good measure of intelligence or even about the state of the science of race and intelligence. Unfortunately the conversation keeps getting dragged in that direction anyway and I've stupidly risen to the bait when people are just confidently spouting pure nonsense about it.

    But that stuff isn't really the point of the podcast. 

    The broader point that Harris cares about and the one that I care about is the ability to have good faith debates around charged subjects like racial differences without resorting to sliming or defaming those involved in it. 

    I'm interested in the ethics here more than the science. The way that Murray and Harris have been treated and the way that the state of the science has been distorted by vox and others I find super interesting (and seriously troubling). Although it's of a different political flavour, it's absolutely a piece with right-wing denial of climate change.
    Gamgertag: JRPC
    PSN: Lastability95
  • Yossarian
    Show networks
    Xbox
    Yossarian Drew
    Steam
    Yossarian_Drew

    Send message
    Okay.

    I’m yet to see any examples of places where good faith arguments about racial differences aren’t being heard aside from the IQ thing, which arguably isn’t a good faith argument to start with.
  • It's about ethics in genetics journalism innit.
    I'm still great and you still love it.
  • @Face

    Yeah, I did notice the Buzzfeed link. Read a bit of it too. For shame!

    Although I appreciate the obvious effort there, I just can't deal a wall of text covering multiple subjects with a half dozen links to further walls of texts. 

    Pick a point, whatever you like, and I'll happily address it.
    Gamgertag: JRPC
    PSN: Lastability95
  • JRPC wrote:
    Moving too fast! can't keep up!! There's too many strands already now and they're all getting tangled up again.
     
    Aaaah, so this is your excuse for not following up with Facewon's good faith post again? And for ignoring all the counter-factuals? 
    Ok, shooor.
    JRPC wrote:
    @JRPC, I never saw what the actual point you're arguing for was, would you mind summing it up for me, please?
    Right here an now, what I'm trying to do I guess is defend Harris and his arguments in the whole Harris/Murray/Vox thing.  The background to all this is summed up by Harris in this podcast which is about a 30-minute preamble to the later Harris-Klein podcast that's being discussed here.
    Tellingly, all you ever seems to link to is Harris podcasts/sources...?
    JRPC wrote:
    What I'd love this not to be about is whether or not IQ is a good measure of intelligence or even about the state of the science of race and intelligence.
    Shut up about it then.
    JRPC wrote:
    Unfortunately the conversation keeps getting dragged in that direction anyway
    Stop it then.
    JRPC wrote:
    and I've stupidly
    Yup.
    JRPC wrote:
    risen to the bait when people are just confidently spouting pure nonsense about it.
    Nope.
    JRPC wrote:
    But that stuff isn't really the point of the podcast.  The broader point that Harris cares about and the one that I care about is the ability to have good faith debates around charged subjects like racial differences without resorting to sliming or defaming those involved in it.
    And what you have *absolutely* demonstrated is your complete inability or desire to actually engage in a good faith debate by actually bothering to read/listen to and respond to Face's good faith posts. Tellingly, you only "take bait".

    Lead by example. Do what you claim you want and show everyone how to do it.
    JRPC wrote:
    I'm interested in the ethics here more than the science.
    In what way? You want everyone to be nice to everyone? 

    But what if "the science" is done badly, or with bad intentions, or used to justify some horrible things? That, in itself, is surely the primary ethical concern about scientific endevours?

    Or is your primary concern only that everyone is always nice to everyone and only ever looks at the surface of claims and no-one ever points out troubling aspects of things?
    JRPC wrote:
    The way that Murray and Harris have been treated and the way that the state of the science has been distorted by vox and others I find super interesting (and seriously troubling).
    Or maybe they're dicks?

    /shrug 

    I don't know, nor care.
    JRPC wrote:
    Although it's of a different political flavour, it's absolutely a piece with right-wing denial of climate change.

    I'm trailing off here because I just don't know or care what you're on about now.
  • Oh god. 

    Lets have a look then...
    Gamgertag: JRPC
    PSN: Lastability95
  • I'm not convinced racial difference in intelligence exists. Maybe some physical traits have been selected for in terms of heat and cold tolerance. Some bacterial gut strains and immunity. But intelligence? No. 

    I bet you could take any child from one part of the earth to any other cultural setting and assuming they were raised by surrogates as they would their own their intellectual profile would be identical within the range of their adopted culture. You would still see natural variation on individual scale, but you would not find evidence for higher intellect for one race than any other.

    Hell, you don't even need ethical approval to get this data. International adoption is widespread.
    .
  • Yossarian wrote:
    Okay.

    I’m yet to see any examples of places where good faith arguments about racial differences aren’t being heard aside from the IQ thing, which arguably isn’t a good faith argument to start with.

    Yeah that’s it unfortunately. To debate a genetic link between IQ and race in good faith is to give credence to racists.

    It is a typical argument of the left and it causes division. Ie you’re not just wrong but morally bad for holding that view. Not sure how it can be resolved really.
  • @dj

    Right.

    You expecting a response to that?
    Gamgertag: JRPC
    PSN: Lastability95
  • Really, who is going to go to a grant board with a proposal for race-based science anyhows?
    That's already ringing alarm bells for me.
  • JRPC wrote:
    or even about the state of the science of race and intelligence. Unfortunately the conversation keeps getting dragged in that direction anyway and I've stupidly risen to the bait when people are just confidently spouting pure nonsense about it.

    But that stuff isn't really the point of the podcast. 

    The broader point that Harris cares about and the one that I care about is the ability to have good faith debates around charged subjects like racial differences without resorting to sliming or defaming those involved in it. 

    I'm interested in the ethics here more than the science. .

    1. You've yet to actually lay out a good counter to any of the claims on IQ being a good measure or the further claims about racial differences. You've just restated, again, almost verbatim, Harris. Maybe you want to hang your hat on the haier piece, I dunno, but it troubles me that I've found and linked to more stuff you could have used to defend IQ than you have.

    2. Klein is having a good faith debate. It's there for all to read. And as I mentioned in the depth of the ca part of his, Murray and Harris never addressed any of the best counters to his stuff, they just characterised it all as defamation and moral panic. Weaksauce.

    Currently, Harris's idea of good faith is anything that falls within his boundaries of what the debate is about. That's bad faith arguing from the jump.

    Just because he likes to rip on ip, I have to accuse him of virtue signalling.

    Good times.
    I'm still great and you still love it.
  • djchump wrote:
    Really, who is going to go to a grant board with a proposal for race-based science anyhows? That's already ringing alarm bells for me.

    Well, you could with things like immune systems I guess. Isolated populations in remote areas might not have exposure to regionally confined outbreaks. I bet that there is no exposure to bubnic plague in some regions, so differences between their immunity and europe-asia might be interesting. I thought it was suggested some cell receptors in a small subset of european chimera (transplanted bone marrow) patients gave them immunity to HIV.
    .
  • Yossarian
    Show networks
    Xbox
    Yossarian Drew
    Steam
    Yossarian_Drew

    Send message
    Possibly splitting hairs, but that doesn’t sound race-based to me.
  • dynamiteReady
    Show networks
    Steam
    dynamiteready

    Send message
    Vela wrote:
    That relevant? If it is, contextualise it, and I'll humour you...
    It's just a question. Do you have an opinion as to whether they are reliable.

    In regards to what, exactly? 

    Take differential equations for example...

    In engineering, the use of differential equations have been proven to be less effective than other mathematical tools in certain domains where the application of calculus was once de-rigor...

    But what does that mean here, beyond snoot?

    And which subject do you think I'm talking about?
    "I didn't get it. BUUUUUUUUUUUT, you fucking do your thing." - Roujin
    Ninty Code: SW-7904-0771-0996
  • Yossarian wrote:
    Possibly splitting hairs, but that doesn’t sound race-based to me.

    Not in a global world no. Its geographical. If the populations had been switched at the time, you would probably have the same outcome (unless a specific gene mutation eg sickle cell anemia was at play, which contributes to protection against malaria, for example.)
    .

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!