Everything you are saying here was in my little post. If I didn't call out the difference between median intelligence and individual intelligence it's because I am cognizant of my audience; I don't need to. If there are three not-fully-congruent normal distributions for the intelligence of the three major races, they are vastly overlap…
Everything you are saying here was in my little post. If I didn't call out the difference between median intelligence and individual intelligence it's because I am cognizant of my audience; I don't need to. If there are three not-fully-congruent normal distributions for the intelligence of the three major races, they are vastly overlapped.
Don't expect me to take very seriously the denial of any role of genetics in intelligence, and if you are implying that I recognize no environmental role in how well one does on intelligence tests then you are verging on insulting me. A child who grows up in a house full of books and other stimuli has an advantage over one who grows up with a TV set that is never off and checkout-counter newspapers the only reading material.
And frankly conforming to progressive ideology is not much of a priority for me. I would not post what I did in a WaPo blog or on Facebook because I would be called all kinds of names by sloppy readers and sloppier thinkers. Honestly, I am deeply disenchanted with the current state of progressivism with its "woke" horseshit and its virtue signaling. There is tyranny there and "trans" activists are doing enormous harm in their determination to swell their ranks.
I mentioned Asians. The high achievements of Asian-Americans are not reflected in my experience here, where hardly anyone has the brains to close a door he had to open to walk through.
My father had read all of Shakespeare by the age of twelve. I have no memory of him, he died when I was three, but he left a library behind. I sought to know him by knowing his influences, his books and his writing. A sad substitute for growing up under his influence, but it was a gift.
My wife grew up where such things were not valued. A little girl with no shoes also has no books. But when she came to America she knew what her daughters must have. While I could accept that they might not accel in everything I made it clear that they had better not being a report card home with a comment that they were not performing to their capability, she just wanted to see "A"s. She became that Asian mom in America.
I didn't get to know Vietnamese people while I was in Vietnam, but I know quite a few in America. The name Nguyen was a common one in engineering departments and among super technicians. Principle design engineers who's journey to America began as boat people.
The less technically inclined are often astute business people. The large successful Asian markets here are owned by Vietnamese people. They do what the Chinese in Southeast Asia did. Sowell discussed it in his book "Black Rednecks and White Liberals". More about seeking opportunity where they find it than race.
Crap! I wandered as I wrote on my phone when I should be sleeping.
How would you respond if you assumed (correctly) that
(1) I have read a number of your writings and appreciated them, earning my respect FWIW. I was feeling happy to have a chance to explore some concepts with somebody I respect. I did not expect your reaction, tho.
(2) I was largely agreeing with you, not disagreeing. I may emphasize a different facet, or phrase something my own way, but that doesn't mean I'm an adversary.
(3) I was neither denying any role for genetics, nor imputing that you were denying environmental factors; just not thing existing in my mind (however clumsily conveyed)
(4) Having read other work by you, I already know you are not a modern neo-progressive, and that we share a disenchantment from what it has become. However, the issues of intelligence and population groups is an exceptionally explosive subject, and can cause problems even for non-progressives, so I wanted to note that.
Clearly, I have badly miscommunicated and apologize for that. I would appreciate if you could quote what I said that led you to believe (1) that I was denying any role for genetics, or (2) that I thought (almost insultingly) that you were denying any role for environment. I'd like to learn to avoid whatever I wrote that came across so far from my intent (I'm in what my spouse calls "debug mode"). Sometimes our words can be interpreted in ways we did not intend, so we need to learn how to avoid that when possible. That's my task.
OK, thanks. The last word was not meant to mitigate anything, but to explain that I was presenting a hypothetical rather than an assertion. Read it in the spirit of "EVEN IF the differences were 100% environmental... certain issues remain". I appreciate your explaining; I do not always anticipate all the ways something I write can be interpreted, so this is helpful.
Everything you are saying here was in my little post. If I didn't call out the difference between median intelligence and individual intelligence it's because I am cognizant of my audience; I don't need to. If there are three not-fully-congruent normal distributions for the intelligence of the three major races, they are vastly overlapped.
Don't expect me to take very seriously the denial of any role of genetics in intelligence, and if you are implying that I recognize no environmental role in how well one does on intelligence tests then you are verging on insulting me. A child who grows up in a house full of books and other stimuli has an advantage over one who grows up with a TV set that is never off and checkout-counter newspapers the only reading material.
And frankly conforming to progressive ideology is not much of a priority for me. I would not post what I did in a WaPo blog or on Facebook because I would be called all kinds of names by sloppy readers and sloppier thinkers. Honestly, I am deeply disenchanted with the current state of progressivism with its "woke" horseshit and its virtue signaling. There is tyranny there and "trans" activists are doing enormous harm in their determination to swell their ranks.
I mentioned Asians. The high achievements of Asian-Americans are not reflected in my experience here, where hardly anyone has the brains to close a door he had to open to walk through.
My father had read all of Shakespeare by the age of twelve. I have no memory of him, he died when I was three, but he left a library behind. I sought to know him by knowing his influences, his books and his writing. A sad substitute for growing up under his influence, but it was a gift.
My wife grew up where such things were not valued. A little girl with no shoes also has no books. But when she came to America she knew what her daughters must have. While I could accept that they might not accel in everything I made it clear that they had better not being a report card home with a comment that they were not performing to their capability, she just wanted to see "A"s. She became that Asian mom in America.
I didn't get to know Vietnamese people while I was in Vietnam, but I know quite a few in America. The name Nguyen was a common one in engineering departments and among super technicians. Principle design engineers who's journey to America began as boat people.
The less technically inclined are often astute business people. The large successful Asian markets here are owned by Vietnamese people. They do what the Chinese in Southeast Asia did. Sowell discussed it in his book "Black Rednecks and White Liberals". More about seeking opportunity where they find it than race.
Crap! I wandered as I wrote on my phone when I should be sleeping.
Wow. Can we reset and reparse, Chris?
How would you respond if you assumed (correctly) that
(1) I have read a number of your writings and appreciated them, earning my respect FWIW. I was feeling happy to have a chance to explore some concepts with somebody I respect. I did not expect your reaction, tho.
(2) I was largely agreeing with you, not disagreeing. I may emphasize a different facet, or phrase something my own way, but that doesn't mean I'm an adversary.
(3) I was neither denying any role for genetics, nor imputing that you were denying environmental factors; just not thing existing in my mind (however clumsily conveyed)
(4) Having read other work by you, I already know you are not a modern neo-progressive, and that we share a disenchantment from what it has become. However, the issues of intelligence and population groups is an exceptionally explosive subject, and can cause problems even for non-progressives, so I wanted to note that.
Clearly, I have badly miscommunicated and apologize for that. I would appreciate if you could quote what I said that led you to believe (1) that I was denying any role for genetics, or (2) that I thought (almost insultingly) that you were denying any role for environment. I'd like to learn to avoid whatever I wrote that came across so far from my intent (I'm in what my spouse calls "debug mode"). Sometimes our words can be interpreted in ways we did not intend, so we need to learn how to avoid that when possible. That's my task.
"The differences could be 100% due to environment and 0% due to genetics (hypothetically)"
The last word doesn't mitigate it.
OK, sorry if I sounded like I was bristling. I wasn't, but I see how it could read that way. Fair do's.
OK, thanks. The last word was not meant to mitigate anything, but to explain that I was presenting a hypothetical rather than an assertion. Read it in the spirit of "EVEN IF the differences were 100% environmental... certain issues remain". I appreciate your explaining; I do not always anticipate all the ways something I write can be interpreted, so this is helpful.