If IQ group differences will be proven to be genetic, how'd you feel about AA?

[wxtransit]

First, IQ is not exactly a good way of measuring intelligence, there are many more components to intelligence and also there is a lot of subjectivity surrounding the issue. Second, this is not borderline racist, this is racist.

[wxtransit]

First, IQ is not exactly a good way of measuring intelligence, there are many more components to intelligence and also there is a lot of subjectivity surrounding the issue.

What exactly do you think is a better test for intelligence?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://akarlin.com/2012/04/race-denial-vs-racism-a-false-dichotomy/

Also, no one is disputing that there are some extremely small Blacks and Hispanics and some not very smart Whites and Asians; indeed, what I am talking about here are frequencies:

This whole argument is based on a hypothetical--what if genetic differences and IQ were linked. You don't seriously believe this to be true, do you? Because--spoiler alert here--they're not. The data that you provided only shows one thing: socioeconomic and societal factors affect performance on the SAT. I am not a supporter of affirmative action, personally I support a more meritocratic system. But there is no genetic difference in intelligence. Also, I do not think there is a conclusive test for intelligence, unfortunately. Until better methods are created, current tests are too subjective and intelligence is still to hard to quantify.

[wxtransit]

IQ is not a fixed trait, at least I don't think so. And just because someone may be intelligent does not mean they make better decisions or end up more successful. We start making dangerous conclusions when we lump groups together based on characteristics like these. The best thing to do is to treat people as individuals. Of course, affirmative action does not do that and that's why I'm against it and will be no matter what the scenario.

Bingo.

[wxtransit]

So uh...after a thread about justifying racism, do we at least get to say the N-word again? That was like the only main benefit of Trump getting in - An expanded vocabulary.

That's one of my biggest reservations with the idea of this thread. The idea that blacks or Hispanics have lower IQs than whites is used by alt-right Nazis to justify their disgusting views on race.

Bingo. I think this thread was a thinly veiled attempt to test their racist ideas with Atlas.

[wxtransit]

It wouldn't make much difference; I'd still be largely against group-based preferences but in favor of efforts to recruit from underrepresented communities. Group differences in IQ are in terms of distributional averages, so it would tell you nothing about a particular individual.  It would just be even more reason to try to aim for an economy where people can have a decent living without necessarily having the kind of the skills that are associated with high IQ.

Also, I agree with this.

So do I, actually.

Also, as I have previously stated, I certainly support income redistribution to help poor and low IQ people as well as IQ-boosting technologies (such as gene editing for embryos and IQ selection for embryos) to allow people--everyone, but especially low IQ people--to have (very) high IQ children and descendants if that is what they want.

Indeed, it would certainly be a wonderful place if we will have 1 million or even 1 billion people of Albert Einstein's or John von Neumann's intelligence running around.

Large groups of smart people are dangerous and more likely to commit crimes. Intelligence inequality contributes to a healthy and balanced society.

There's literally no evidence to support this.

Bingo, and it seems that now people are just making up stuff (to get attention?).

[wxtransit]

It wouldn't make much difference; I'd still be largely against group-based preferences but in favor of efforts to recruit from underrepresented communities. Group differences in IQ are in terms of distributional averages, so it would tell you nothing about a particular individual.  It would just be even more reason to try to aim for an economy where people can have a decent living without necessarily having the kind of the skills that are associated with high IQ.

Also, I agree with this.

So do I, actually.

Also, as I have previously stated, I certainly support income redistribution to help poor and low IQ people as well as IQ-boosting technologies (such as gene editing for embryos and IQ selection for embryos) to allow people--everyone, but especially low IQ people--to have (very) high IQ children and descendants if that is what they want.

Indeed, it would certainly be a wonderful place if we will have 1 million or even 1 billion people of Albert Einstein's or John von Neumann's intelligence running around.

Large groups of smart people are dangerous and more likely to commit crimes. Intelligence inequality contributes to a healthy and balanced society.

There's literally no evidence to support this.

Bingo, and it seems that now people are just making up stuff (to get attention?).

Tossing out fake facts and “mudslinging” is an effective and legal form of argument. That being said, I think we should all be ashamed that we even clicked on this thread, which is clearly clickbait.

Good point.

I held out hope, though.