Did you read all the links and articles Face just posted for you? Or are you ignoring them?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.
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.
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.
dynamiteReady wrote:That relevant? If it is, contextualise it, and I'll humour you...
Yossarian wrote: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?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.
AJ wrote:@JRPC, I never saw what the actual point you're arguing for was, would you mind summing it up for me, please?
JRPC wrote:Moving too fast! can't keep up!! There's too many strands already now and they're all getting tangled up again.
Tellingly, all you ever seems to link to is Harris podcasts/sources...?JRPC wrote: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.@JRPC, I never saw what the actual point you're arguing for was, would you mind summing it up for me, please?
Shut up about it then.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.
Stop it then.JRPC wrote:Unfortunately the conversation keeps getting dragged in that direction anyway
Yup.JRPC wrote:and I've stupidly
Nope.JRPC wrote:risen to the bait when people are just confidently spouting pure nonsense about 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".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.
In what way? You want everyone to be nice to everyone?JRPC wrote:I'm interested in the ethics here more than the science.
Or maybe they're dicks?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).
JRPC wrote:Although it's of a different political flavour, it's absolutely a piece with right-wing denial of climate change.
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.
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. .
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.
Vela wrote:It's just a question. Do you have an opinion as to whether they are reliable.dynamiteReady wrote:That relevant? If it is, contextualise it, and I'll humour you...
Yossarian wrote:Possibly splitting hairs, but that doesn’t sound race-based to me.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!