Please place all off-topic comments in this thread, they will not be posted in the main articles
I still plan on posting about sex differences in IQ, but we begin each week with an open thread.
So I hear they’re coming out with another Halloween film this fall. This picks up right after the original 1978 film, ignoring all the sequels and remakes.
Jamie Lee Curtis is reprising her role as the iconic Laurie Strode, 40 years later.
Growing up Halloween was not just a movie, it was a religion.
When I was about 11, my best friend and I watched the original Halloween almost every day for an entire month. I haven’t seen it in decades but can still recite it word for word. My friend and I would put on our Michael Myers masks scaring much older teenager aged girls by standing behind hedges, just like Myers did in this powerful scene:
Pumpkin Person 
With speed, I noticed the motor commands are slow. And they are slow because of mental blockage. It seems that some part of my frontal lobes is inhibiting fast thinking. Anxiety is the freeze response of the amygdala. Everything tightens up physically and mentally. The control mechanism is stuck. So you need to sit still and feel the stuck parts of your brain. Feel how it’s tight and let it untangle. Go slowing with exposer to those things you have trouble with doing fast. This conditions you to not tighten up and you go much faster. You can close your eyes it thing are too much. Control is the biggest part because you can guide everything into a looser state and balance everything. Your body can be involved keeping a frame of reference for control mentally. Simple things like walking in Walmart. The point is to pay attention and look in your brain and guide it softly. Then things speed up fast.
https://youtu.be/XQv3-f61qeA
Reminder, 30% of the worlds population are going to live as africans in the near future. Interessting times ahead.
I still dont understand how anyone would find them attractive, though i guess that only a minority in each ethnic group is good looking.
;D
SO he gets to say exactly what I said, but since hes autistic you wont moderate him. Right.
You can comment without a gravitar
his gravitar is hilarious.
you know what’s super un-attractive? the low hairline of some italians and blacks.
i think having a forehead is a sine qua non to being not ugly.
you’re a disgusting lowbrow pig who masturbates all day. What you find hilarious is irrelevant.
I have no signs of a receding hairline yet (nor any hair thinning) and I’m soon to be 30. Feels good. My Italian hair genes did me well.
Haha, i have a low hairline artificially through my long hair, but it actually ends around a third of my face.
I also have the autist bowl haircut that Phil talks about, but my curly hair makes it better than bill gates.
I wonder why few HBD:ers (outside of pumpkin) dont talk about the standard deviations of iq within ethnic groups, as that would perdict the amount of high iq people within an ethnic population. Ive heard that this is the case between men and women, though i cant confirm it now.
I would guess that Indian singaporeans would have a large standard deviation.
i wonder why few talk about standard deviation.
Why doesn’t anyone talk about how artificial the bell curve is and how few traits fit a bell curve?
The awnser to both of our questions is…
ignorance!
Suprise!!
Have you heard of Lee kuan Yew´s opinon on iq and hereditarianism? its interessting that these online forum discussions became politics for a period.
It’s ignorance that the bell curve is forced through item selection and analysis? That’s pretty well-known.
Exactly RR. Nobody cares, because this ‘forcing’ of distribution doesn’t create bias in any real way at least in regards to average racial differences. Plus the true distribution of intelligence is still pretty close to normal it just doesn’t have even intervals.
Melo is right, and i talked about differences in standard deviation as it would roughly show differences in the number of people with certain IQ´s between populations.
What the false normal distribution does is that it underestimates the number of dumb people, as you need to cater to a certain proportion of them (the proportion that would solve equally difficult questions more often) to get higher scores to get the curve even. It may also under estimate the number of smart people (lets say an IQ of 125+). So to fake a normal distribution is something done to make it easier to perdict the number of exeptionall people from a standard deviation, but it might fail badly. Unless IQ doesnt relate to job productivity linearily, then having wages and IQ be in different types of distribution would be detrimental. The relationship between IQ and wage/job performance is something i think RaceRealist covered in the past.
Oh shit, i just realised i said what meLo said :O
Melo IQ doesn’t equal intelligence. It’s a test of middle class knowledge. My argument attests to that. Either way, test construction and social class bias go hand in hand with the constructors presuming who is or is not intelligent then constructing the test to fir their presuppositions.
Mouse,
“Unless IQ doesnt relate to job productivity”
Not really.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4557354/
RR,
You quoted me wrong. I meant to say that if IQ wasnt a global fenomenon, meaning that middle classes with similar jobs had different middle class cultures, then one IQ test wouldnt be able to explain all possible ways to reach skills/porductivity, and thus weaken the criterion validity IQ tests argue they have. And i remember you making this argument citing some studies in India and China.
Thanks for the paper though 🙂
“Melo IQ doesn’t equal intelligence. It’s a test of middle class knowledge.”
There are 15 subtests on the wais 4. You need to go over each one to prove it follows what you are saying because what you are saying is wrong. You have no idea what is in all the test so you cannot back up what you are saying. Where is your evidence? Don’t cheat, you need to examine each subtest.
My argument is sufficient. (Take some notes Melo, this is an argument.)
Premise 1: IQ tests are experience-dependent.
Premise 2: IQ tests are experience-dependent because some classes are more exposed to the knowledge and structure of the test by way of being born into a certain social class.
Premise 3: If IQ tests are experience-dependent because some social classes are more exposed to the knowledge and structure of the test along with whatever else comes with the membership of that social class then these tests test distance from the middle class and its knowledge structure.
Premise 4: How an individual scores on any given test is predicated on his exposure to the middle-class knowledge structure, along with what they are exposed to in their everyday lives that also affect test performance.
Conclusion: Therefore IQ tests test learned skills and knowledge since they are experience-dependent and the information found on the tests are more likely to be found in higher social classes compared to lower classes; thus, IQ test scores are largely “middle-class scores”, one’s knowledge of the middle class.
Premise 2: IQ tests are experience-dependent because some classes are more exposed to the knowledge and structure of the test by way of being born into a certain social class.
They’re only partly depend on knowledge and cultural experience. They also depend on the physical & physiological development of the brain which depends on genomics, prenatal conditions, nutrition, and health.
Think about that statement.
RR
Why did I get 86 in processing speed yet 132 in verbal?
Why did I get 130 in logic (figure weights) yet 80 in picture completion?
Why is my (g) 130 yet my FSIQ is 113?
Why are some scores extremely high and others extremely low?
I don’t know. It’s irrelevant to my argument.
It was normed all over America.
But RR contradicts himself
He claims IQ tests measure culture not biology, but then says that twins score alike because of shared prenatal biology
The wais 4 was normed on 2,000 people in Iowa.
Iowa must be the epitome of middle-class standard exposure.
RR argument: If all kids in America raised middle class. Then all kids would score IQ 100 on the wais-4 test.
Which premise does that address?
“He claims IQ tests measure culture not biology, but then says that twins score alike because of shared prenatal biology”
It’s not a contradiction. It’s not only maternal environment but a while slew of other factors as well (and it depends which twin studies people speak of, people always bring up “twin studies” but never a specific study).
My argument is sound.
RR “My argument is sound.”
The implications of what you are saying are then, is That:
If all kids in America raised middle class. Then all kids would score IQ 100 on the wais-4 test.
Do you agree? Why or why not? Which premises is false? Or are they all true?
He just told you why not. If your logic leads to absurd conclusions, then your reasoning is false. It’s not Cat’s job to determine which of your premises is false. It’s your job.
same exposure to class (middle class) would result in all American kids having the same IQ scores because of experience-dependence.
You agree with the argument?
Premise 4: How an individual scores on any given test is predicated on his exposure to the middle-class knowledge structure, along with what they are exposed to in their everyday lives that also affect test performance.
The implications of what you are saying is That:
If all kids in America were raised as middle class. Then all kids would score IQ 100 on the wais-4 test.
“He just told you why not. If your logic leads to absurd conclusions, then your reasoning is false. It’s not Cat’s job to determine which of your premises is false. It’s your job.”
The argument is sound. It’s not my job to point out false premises, it’s your job to pick it out which premise is false and explain why. If you can’t then you accept the premises which means you have to accept the conclusion.
I’m sure you’d agree that IQ tests are experience-dependent. So premise 1 is true. I don’t know if you’d agree with the other premises. So, take a shot.
Anime kitty, I assume you think premise 4 is false. Why? Premise 4 follows from the other three premises, thus if it follows from the other three premises then how an individual scores on a test is due to what they’re exposed to and the class they’re brought up in since the tests are designed by a narrow social class (which would also bias against lower classes). This, again, goes back to test construction, item analysis and selection.
There’s no evidence for “genomics” playing any role in IQ in the normal range. Those other factors you discuss, again, think about it.
There’s no evidence for “genomics” playing any role in IQ in the normal range.
The 0.21 correlation between the genome and VNR scores is evidence. You can dismiss it as non-causal but you have no proof. The 0.75 correlation between the IQs of MZ twins raised apart is evidence. You can dismiss it as adoption placement bias and prenatal similarity, but it’s unlikely these factors alone could cause such a huge correlation.
Those other factors you discuss, again, think about it.
No you think about it. Health and nutrition are not entirely mediated by social class and even if they were, so what? IQ tests are still accurately reflecting biological development.
“The 0.21 correlation between the genome and VNR scores is evidence”
Source?
“You can dismiss it as non-causal but you have no proof.”
I have high standards for causation.
Mental states are irreducible to brain states.
“The 0.75 correlation between the IQs of MZ twins raised apart is evidence”
No it’s not.
“You can dismiss it as adoption placement bias and prenatal similarity, but it’s unlikely these factors alone could cause such a huge correlation.”
Do those two factors I brought up not matter (adoption placement bias and ESS; epigenetic supersimilarity)?
“Health and nutrition are not entirely mediated by social class”
I never made the claim. Lower class people have worse nutrition, fact. Worse nutrition leads to poorer health. Fact.
“IQ tests are still accurately reflecting biological development.”
That means it tests something biological? Are mental states reducible to physical states?
RR
You are the one that says all IQ scores are resultant of class exposer. Answer the question if you believe you are correct in your conclusions. Do all kids exposed to the middle class all have the same IQ or are you disingenuous in presenting an argument you don’t believe in. Are you ready to take responsibility for the implications of your arguments or are you a fraud?
“Do all kids exposed to the middle class all have the same IQ”
No.
That doesn’t rebut my argument.
“thus, IQ test scores are largely “middle-class scores”, one’s knowledge of the middle class.”
The lower class has less opportunity to cultural exposer and good schools.
The middle class has middle exposure to culture and middle-quality schools.
The high class has exposure to high culture and high-quality education.
Class combines with innate intelligence to bring a person up to where they are at.
A person could have high innate intelligence but poor education and low culture exposure.
A high-class person would have parents that teach them how to think and read complex books.
Shifting where a child is raised to any of the classes would affect how they think and perform on tests.
Innate intelligence is influenced by class.
Tests cannot tell low class but high innate intelligence.
You do not think intelligence has so far had a good measuring tests construct.
That is the premiss RR?
Mental events are identical with physical events. But mental events are anomalous—mental events are not regulated by strict psychophysical laws; psychophysical laws don’t exist. Mental states supervene on physical states, but the mental is not reducible to the physical.
This means that selection can’t act on mental traits because there are no psychophysical laws so the mental is undetermined by the physical. This means there can’t be a genetic mechanism for “IQ”.
“Class combines with innate intelligence to bring a person up to where they are at.”
“Class” is where the person is at which causes said test scores since they are not exposed to the items on the test (along with knowledge structure), since—as I’m sure we all agree, at least—P1 is true (IQ tests are experience-dependent).
“Tests cannot tell low class but high innate intelligence.”
IQ is a proxy for social class.
Thinking mouse,
“Melo is right, and i talked about differences in standard deviation as it would roughly show differences in the number of people with certain IQ´s between populations.”
Indeed. you’d only see biases at the extreme ends of the variation, which isnt really the main topic of interest.
RR,
.”Melo IQ doesn’t equal intelligence. It’s a test of middle class knowledge. My argument attests to that.
Arguments are not evidence, especially when the empirical observations they’re steeped in is false.
Secondly, as mentioned ad infinium: general knowledge is a reflection of general intelligence.g
“Either way, test construction and social class bias go hand in hand with the constructors presuming who is or is not intelligent then constructing the test to fir their presuppositions.”
More intelligent people have more efficient communicative pathways between brain regions which allows them to recall and then synthesize information. When the test makers constructed the items, they didn’t decide off of arbitrary rules, they’re testing the two main sensory mechanisms we use to sift through the complexity of our world Auditory/linguistic, and visuospatial. in reality though all items no matter how arbitrary are going to correlate to some level of functional connectivity, because all thought is processed by the brain.
“(Take some notes Melo, this is an argument.)”
If you knew how to read, you’d be able to identify some of the arguments I’ve made.
“Therefore IQ tests test learned skills and knowledge since they are experience-dependent”
And these learned skills shape the brain, which is then inherited epigenetically.
“I have high standards for causation.”
No, you have unreasonable standards that fit your bias presuppositions. For example you’re more than glad to use probabilistic causation in deducing VDH’s validity, but you remain agnostic on everything else….weird.
“No.
That doesn’t rebut my argument.”
It does. if IQ is only a test of social class, everyone of the same social class should have the same score on the same test, since they don’t the premise is wrong.
“This means that selection can’t act on mental traits because there are no psychophysical laws so the mental is undetermined by the physical. This means there can’t be a genetic mechanism for “IQ”.”
That’s not what it means, but keep on looking stupid.
King meLo: 1,998,786,435
RR:0
Also:
RR:0
Reddit:1
https://www.reddit.com/r/HBD/comments/8mqwae/twin_studies_adoption_studies_and_fallacious/
Seems RR never researchers counter evidence. Confirmation bias at it’s finest 🙂
“Arguments are not evidence, especially when the empirical observations they’re steeped in is false.”
sure they are evidence. my argument is evidence.
“Secondly, as mentioned ad infinium: general knowledge is a reflection of general intelligence.g”
As mentioned ad intintum, exposure to middle class knowledge is how one scores well on the test (a premise in my argument).
“More intelligent people have more efficient communicative pathways between brain regions which allows them to recall and then synthesize information. When the test makers constructed the items, they didn’t decide off of arbitrary rules, they’re testing the two main sensory mechanisms we use to sift through the complexity of our world Auditory/linguistic, and visuospatial. in reality though all items no matter how arbitrary are going to correlate to some level of functional connectivity, because all thought is processed by the brain.”
Yes they decided off of arbitrary rules; I’ve shown as much.
“If you knew how to read, you’d be able to identify some of the arguments I’ve made.”
You only provide claims.
“And these learned skills shape the brain, which is then inherited epigenetically.”
That doesn’t rebut the premise.
“No, you have unreasonable standards that fit your bias presuppositions.”
What are my “bias presuppositions”?
“For example you’re more than glad to use probabilistic causation in deducing VDH’s validity, but you remain agnostic on everything else….weird.”
You don’t know anything about physiology.
“That’s not what it means, but keep on looking stupid.”
Not a response.
“King meLo: 1,998,786,435
RR:0”
Sure thing kid.
“RR:0
Reddit:1”
“TrannyPornO” is possessed by the same delusion as you, that psychological traits can be inherited.
Also see Simon (1997 204; Four Comments on the Bell Curve:
There is another, and completely irrefutable, reason why the bell-shaped curve proves nothing at all in the context of H-M’s book: The makers of IQ tests consciously force the test into such a form that it produces this curve, for ease of statistical analysis. The first versions of such tests invariably produce odd-shaped distributions. The test-makers then subtract and add questions to find those that discriminate well between more-successful and less-successful test-takers. For this reason alone the bell-shaped IQ curve must be considered an artifact rather than a fact, and therefore tells us nothing about human nature or human society.
This will be my last comment on this particular matter. I’ve proved my point.
I also find it laughable how you say that I “never researchers [sic] counter evidence.”
You seem to forget that I had hereditarian/Darwinian delusions at the beginning of last year. I have “researchers” the “counter evidence” for years.
“my argument is evidence.”
No, arguments are by definition not evidence.
“As mentioned ad intintum, exposure to middle class knowledge is how one scores well on the test (a premise in my argument).”
And that refutes my contention how?
“Yes they decided off of arbitrary rules”
Like what?
“I’ve shown as much.”
Like where? all I’ve seen is you handwaving evidence and ad nauseam.
“You only provide claims.”
p1 Arguments consist of premises and conclusions
p2 Claims backed by empirical observations are premises, conclusions are the overall point a claim is trying to butress
p3 My claims are empirically backed, my conclusion is formed from these claims
c1 I am producing a legitimate form of an argument.
Do you understand now dipshit?
“That doesn’t rebut the premise.”
It does because you’re assuming a false dichotomy between intelligence and learned skills.
“What are my “bias presuppositions”?”
Your bastardization of anamolous monism is obviously a reach to promote your ‘muh culture’ garbage.
“You don’t know anything about physiology.”
My knowledge of physiology has very little to do with your hypocrisy
‘“TrannyPornO” is possessed by the same delusion as you, that psychological traits can be inherited.”
They can be, I’ve provided evidence of such. Schizophrenia and memories are both inherited.
“arguments by definition are not evidence”
Says who? Why?
“that refutes my contention how?”
Because if the items were changed then the distribution would change and the test scores would change.
“Like what?”
What doesn’t fit their presuppositions.
“all I’ve seen is you handwaving evidence and ad nauseum”
Sure thing.
Good job. You provided an argument here (though it’s unsound), why not any other time I ask other than your cop-outs and stupid reasoning?
You just writing “words” (citation) is not a damn argument. Arguments have premises and conclusions.
“It does because you’re assuming a false dichotomy between intelligence and learned skills.”
You’re assuming IQ tests test intelligence. My argument establishes that it’s a test of middle class knowledge.
“bastardization of anomalous monism”
It’s not a bastardization. The argument on the genetic transmission of psychological traits follows from the two arguments I laid out from Davidson.
“My knowledge of physiology has very little to do with your hypocrisy.”
So it has a little bit to do with my “hypocrisy”?
I’ve explained “ad nauseum” how it’s not “hypocritical” to the argument I’ve provided against EP just-so stories. Light skin is needed to synthesize more vitamin D in climates with lower UV rays. Dark skin produces less UV in climates with low UV radiation. Thus….?
“They can be”
Psychophysical laws exist?
“Says who? Why?”
Says anyone with even the slightest knowledge in philosophy. prior arguments are by definition not evidence based. Posteriori ones aren’t even technically evidence. They just organize it.
“What doesn’t fit their presuppositions.”
What are their presuppositions?
“Because if the items were changed then the distribution would change and the test scores would change.”
Actually the distribution would stay the same. This still doesn’t address my point. IQ tests are constructed to test Intelligence, why would they change the items?
“(though it’s unsound)”
It’s completely sound, all of the premises are true.
“why not any other time I ask other than your cop-outs and stupid reasoning?”
What cop outs? There is absolutely no reason I should have to produce a syllogism if you would just properly read my ‘words and links”
“You’re assuming IQ tests test intelligence.”
It’s not an assumption General knowledge is a reflection of general intelligence.
“The argument on the genetic transmission of psychological traits follows from the two arguments I laid out from Davidson.”
Lol, no it doesn’t. Brain structure(a physical entity) is physically inherited, that’s essentially a fact. Whether a particular physical event or entity(like the brain) always catalyzes mental ones(and vice versa) in a law-like manner is irrelevant to this fact.
“I’ve explained “ad nauseum” how it’s not “hypocritical” to the argument I’ve provided against EP just-so stories. Light skin is needed to synthesize more vitamin D in climates with lower UV rays. Dark skin produces less UV in climates with low UV radiation. Thus….?”
You deduced the proper adaptionist theory by using probabilistic causation. Like when you weighed which hypothesis(sexual selection, and VD) had the larger causal effect on the modern variance. All historical explanations must use probabilistic causation, because you need a time machine to be 100% certain.
“Psychophysical laws exist?”
Of course they do. Hick-Hyman law, Piéron’s law, and Weber’s law are some examples.
“prior arguments are by definition not evidence based.”
Arguments are evidence; if the a priori argument is a logicl argument then it is evidence.
“What are their presuppositions?”
Who is or is not “intelligent”.
“Actually the distribution would stay the same. This still doesn’t address my point. IQ tests are constructed to test Intelligence, why would they change the items?”
Actually, it wouldn’t. The test constructors can manipulate the curve anyway they want.
“It’s completely sound, all of the premises are true.”
Writing “claims” (citation) is not an argument; arguments have premises and conclusions. Anything to just keep citing links and text blocks and say ‘hur dur address my argument’, you clearly don’t know how to argue. You don’t provide arguments, you only provide claims.
“I should have to produce a syllogism if you would just properly read my ‘words and links?”
You don’t get it. haha
“It’s not an assumption General knowledge is a reflection of general intelligence.”
Yes it is an assumption; my argument is sound.
“Brain structure(a physical entity) is physically inherited, that’s essentially a fact.”
The mental is underdetermined by the physical.
“because you need a time machine to be 100% certain”
So you agree they’re just-so stories. I’ve explained too many times why the VDH is not a just-so story—vitamin D is the only agent to explain the skin gradation, this has nothing to do with probabilistic causation, it has everything to do with the knowledge of what this steroid does in our body.
“Of course they do. Hick-Hyman law, Piéron’s law, and Weber’s law are some examples.”
LOL those laws don’t govern mental properties, they govern physical states associated with mentality.
P1) To explain psychological events, we need to rely on terms like “desire”, “rationality”, “consistency”, and “coherence”
P2) If there were a lawlike account of psychological events, we would need to dispense with such concepts since they are external impositions on the events.
P3) We can’t dispense with such concepts when discussing psychological events.
C) Therefore psychophysical laws don’t exist
Thus psychological events necessarily fit into a set of deterministic physical laws
P1) For psychological events to be reduced to physical descriptions, there would have to be physical equivalents to terms like “rationality”, “consistency”, “desire”
P2) No such physical equivalents of these terms (and other psychological terms) exist
C) Thus, psychological terms described as physical events (when using the language of psychology) cannot be reduced to physical explanations
Going off the first argument, we can also argue:
P1) In order for psychological traits to be genetically inherited, laws are required linking mental events under their mental descriptions and physical events under their physical descriptions
P2) No such laws exist
C) Therefore psychological traits cannot be inherited
Thus, psychophysical laws do not exist therefore psychological traits cannot be inherited because there are no psychophysical or psychological laws.
These arguments against the existence of psychophysical laws are sound; nothing you’ve written has rebutted it.
There can be no law, for instance, that says, “Every M1-event causes a P2-event.” In that case, however, there must be a physical law that explains the connection between e2 and e3. Imagine that P1-events always cause P2-events, and that P1-events are the only events that cause P2 events. We know that e3 was caused by e2, which is a mental event, but since e3 is a P2-event, we know that it must have been caused by a P1 event. There must be a strict physical law that connects Alexander’s greed with his act of murder. This law cannot be a psychological law; it must instead be a physical law. Hence, there must be a way of describing Alexander’s greed and a way of describing his actions in physical terms — a way that corresponds to a strict law connecting physical events. But if Alexander’s greed and Alexander’s action can be described physically, then his greed and his action must be physical events. Hence, mental events are physical events. (Jaworski, 2011: 190)
There are also at least 10 arguments that establish the thesis that the mental is irreducible to the physical. Psychophysical laws do not exist therefore mental traits cannot be inherited.
Is there an assertable identity relation between the mental and the physical? Are there any ex ante specifiable ceteris paribus clauses with respect to mental phenomena?
(Post this comment, PP, not the duplicate in the other thread, wrong thread. Thanks.)
Also, whether or not anomalous monism is true or false is irrelevant to Davidson’s arguments against the existence of psychophysical and psychological laws.
Mental events are mental events. The mental is irreducible to the physical.
“if the a priori argument is a logicl argument then it is evidence.”
No, this contradicts the definition, therefore you are twisting words to conjure false data.
“Who is or is not “intelligent”.”
Who do they think is intelligent, who do they think is not? Why is it a false assumption?
“The test constructors can manipulate the curve anyway they want.”
Not through item excision. Still waiting for you to address my point.
“You don’t provide arguments, you only provide claims.”
Nope, I provide arguments. Where is the error in my syllogism?
‘You don’t get it. haha”
Get what? That you’re a cringey idiot. No I got that from the get-go.
“Yes it is an assumption; my argument is sound.”
Your argument doesn’t refute anything. It only states that IQ tests test “learned skills” it doesn’t disprove my contention. Demonstrate how it’s an assumption.
“So you agree they’re just-so stories.”
All historical science is. That doesn’t mean they’re wrong. Only some people understand this.
I’ve explained too many times why the VDH is not a just-so story—vitamin D is the only agent to explain the skin gradation, this has nothing to do with probabilistic causation, it has everything to do with the knowledge of what this steroid does in our body.”
I’m not talking about Vitamin D I’m talking natural vs sexual selection. Most EP and historical hypothesis’ in general know the causal mechanism, like Experience dependency and genetic inheritance. That doesn’t mean they know how the actual selection process went down. In this context you used probabilistic causation.
“LOL those laws don’t govern mental properties, they govern physical states associated with mentality.”
There isn’t a difference.
“We can’t dispense with such concepts when discussing psychological events”
Why not?
“No such physical equivalents of these terms (and other psychological terms) exist”
Of course they do. Thoughts are physical events, not mental.
“In order for psychological traits to be genetically inherited, laws are required linking mental events under their mental descriptions and physical events under their physical descriptions”
Why?
“nothing you’ve written has rebutted it.”
They’re all unsound and false.
This statement is all it takes to handwave your garbage. You know why? Because just so arguments can be dismissed by just so refutations. You really need to learn to appreciate empiricism more.
“There are also at least 10 arguments that establish the thesis that the mental is irreducible to the physical”
Only somebody as stupid as you would take their knowledge on how the brain works from philosophy, rather than an actual neuroscience textbook.
“whether or not anomalous monism is true or false is irrelevant to Davidson’s arguments against the existence of psychophysical and psychological laws.”
LOL, no. The anomalousness of the mental is directly from the holism it accentuates. which is also where he derives the nonexistence of psycho-physical laws.
It’s not “false data”
“Who do they think is intelligent, who do they think is not? Why is it a false assumption?”
High and low class people, respectfully (re high and low ‘intelligence’).
“Not through item excision. Still waiting for you to address my point.”
Jensen: “It is claimed that the psychometrist can make up a test that will yield any kind of score distribution he pleases. This is roughly true, but some types of distributions are much easier to obtain than others.”
“Your argument doesn’t refute anything. It only states that IQ tests test “learned skills” it doesn’t disprove my contention. Demonstrate how it’s an assumption.”
You’re assuming that “IQ tests” are tests of “intelligence”in lieu of construct validity. My argument shows that IQ tests are tests of middle-class knowledge.
“All historical science is. That doesn’t mean they’re wrong. Only some people understand this.”
Just-so stories cannot be independently verified of the data they attempt to explain. One can think up any kind of story for any data, so a “good story” does not matter. Just-so stories are not science; science makes predictions, just-so stories do not make predictions and only explain what it purports to explain and nothing else.
“There isn’t a difference.”
Mental events are mental events, not physical events.
“Why not?”
Because there is no lawlike account of psychological events.
“Of course they do. Thoughts are physical events, not mental.”
Thoughts are mental.
“Why?”
Because mental states need to be linked to physical states in a lawlike way; since there are no laws of this nature, then mental traits cannot be genetically inherited.
“They’re all unsound and false.”
Arguments are unsound; premises are false.
And they’re not; they’re sound arguments.
“Only somebody as stupid as you would take their knowledge on how the brain works from philosophy, rather than an actual neuroscience textbook.”
Says the guy who thinks just simply writing words and looking for papers is an argument.
“LOL, no. The anomalousness of the mental is directly from the holism it accentuates. which is also where he derives the nonexistence of psycho-physical laws.”
Again, whether or not anomalous monism is true or not is irrelevant to his argument against the existence of psychophysical and psychological laws and is irrelevant to the argument against the genetic transmission of mental abilities due to the nonexistence of psychophysical laws.
“It’s not “false data””
You’re trying to pass priori assertions off as experimental evidence. They’re mutually exclusive, by definition. This is a priori truth.
“High and low class people, respectfully (re high and low ‘intelligence’).”
Why is it a false assumption? How do the items discriminate against class?
“Jensen: “It is claimed that the psychometrist can make up a test that will yield any kind of score distribution he pleases. This is roughly true, but some types of distributions are much easier to obtain than others.””
That quote is irrelevant to my assertion.
“science makes predictions, just-so stories do not make predictions and only explain what it purports to explain and nothing else.”
No, science makes mostly explanations, the past is over-determined by it’s present traces. Furthermore, Ad hoc is simply a derogatory term for ‘Hypothesis’ and a very successful set of ones at that. Order this book next:
Click to access S0169-5347(01)02396-5.pdf
“Mental events are mental events, not physical events. Thoughts are mental.Again, whether or not anomalous monism is true or not is irrelevant to his argument against the existence of psychophysical and psychological laws and is irrelevant to the argument against the genetic transmission of mental abilities due to the nonexistence of psychophysical laws.”
This is why it’s becoming increasingly evident that you know very little of AM. Davidson specifically subscribes to monism, he recognized that the mental and the physical were the same, the anomalous arises from the vocabulary used to describe and make these nomological connections. He defends semantic holism, except he believes this disconnect is a legitimate thing. The anomalousness is dependent on the existence of physical laws that correspond to psychological ones.
“Because there is no lawlike account of psychological events.”
Why not?
“Because mental states need to be linked to physical states in a lawlike way; since there are no laws of this nature, then mental traits cannot be genetically inherited.”
Why does it require a law like connection?
“Arguments are unsound; premises are false.”
Im aware.
“Says the guy who thinks just simply writing words and looking for papers is an argument.”
Jay joseph seems to think that’s an argument as well..
“You’re trying to pass priori assertions off as experimental evidence. They’re mutually exclusive, by definition. This is a priori truth.”
Logical arguments are evidence. If the argument is sound then the conclusion itself is evidence.
“Why is it a false assumption? How do the items discriminate against class?”
Because different classes are exposed to different things. See this on test construction: http://sci-hub.tw/10.1007/bf02259523
“That quote is irrelevant to my assertion.”
nope
“No, science makes mostly explanations, the past is over-determined by it’s present traces. Furthermore, Ad hoc is simply a derogatory term for ‘Hypothesis’ and a very successful set of ones at that. Order this book next:”
Ad-hoc hypotheses explain the data it purports to explain and only the data it purports to exaplin. Non-ad-hoc hypotheses make predictions of novel facts not known before the formulation of the hypothesis. That is science.
“This is why it’s becoming increasingly evident that you know very little of AM. Davidson specifically subscribes to monism, he recognized that the mental and the physical were the same, the anomalous arises from the vocabulary used to describe and make these nomological connections. He defends semantic holism, except he believes this disconnect is a legitimate thing. The anomalousness is dependent on the existence of physical laws that correspond to psychological ones.”
AM is false because it entails epiphenomenalism, see the causal exclusion argument by Jaegwon Kim. That, though, is irreleavnt to the argument against the existence of psychophysical laws and the irreducibility of the mental to the physical (which Kim also argues).
“Why not?”
Calling it “anomalous” means it does not act in a lawlike way; it does not conform to lawlike principles.
P1) To explain psychological events, we need to rely on terms like “desire”, “rationality”, “consistency”, and “coherence”
P2) If there were a lawlike account of psychological events, we would need to dispense with such concepts since they are external impositions on the events.
P3) We can’t dispense with such concepts when discussing psychological events.
C) Therefore psychophysical laws don’t exist
Thus psychological events necessarily fit into a set of deterministic physical laws
P1) For psychological events to be reduced to physical descriptions, there would have to be physical equivalents to terms like “rationality”, “consistency”, “desire”
P2) No such physical equivalents of these terms (and other psychological terms) exist
C) Thus, psychological terms described as physical events (when using the language of psychology) cannot be reduced to physical explanations
“Why does it require a law like connection?”
Because, for instance, no physical descriptions of mental events exist. For them to exist, there would need to be laws linking mental events with their mental descriptions and laws linking physical events under their physical descriptions. No such laws exist, therefore psychophysical laws do not exist.
“Jay joseph seems to think that’s an argument as well..”
I’m talking about Melo… I know what arguments are; you clearly do not.
“If the argument is sound then the conclusion itself is evidence.”
How can it be evidence when it is not steeped in any empirical observation?
“Because different classes are exposed to different things.”
That doesn’t explain why it’s a false assumption.
“nope”
Yeah.
“That is science.”
You don’t know science. You haven’t refuted my factual assertion in any way.
“see the causal exclusion argument by Jaegwon Kim.”
That’s been refuted before. And that has nothing to do with the anomalous, which is what we were discussing, as you agreed. So I’m still waiting for you to address my concerns.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11098-005-1439-x
“No such physical equivalents of these terms (and other psychological terms) exist”
Desires and beliefs have physical equivalents, as does rationality, though you may not have intentions of this rationality. Intention itself also has physical properties.
“there would need to be laws linking mental events with their mental descriptions and laws linking physical events under their phys”
No, only physical laws need to exist because P=M.
“I’m talking about Melo…”
I don’t care. Address my argument or shut the fuck up.
“How can it be evidence when it is not steeped in any empirical observation?”
Only empirical observation is evidence?
“That doesn’t explain why it’s a false assumption.”
If IQ tests are tests of middle class knowledge, and lower classes aren’t exposed to the same things then it logically follows that it’s biased since it’s a test of middle class knowledge.
“Yeah”
I showed that constructors can force any curve they want. Completely relevant.
“That’s been refuted before. And that has nothing to do with the anomalous, which is what we were discussing, as you agreed. So I’m still waiting for you to address my concerns.”
Are you a physicalist? Is epiphenominalism true?
My argument regarding the irreduciblility of the mental is sound. Nothing you’ve said refutes it.
“Desires and beliefs have physical equivalents”
Where?
“No, only physical laws need to exist because P=M.”
False. M is underdetermined by P.
“I don’t care. Address my argument or shut the fuck up.”
Where?
“Only empirical observation is evidence?”
It’s only scientific evidence. If it’s not science then it’s just semantic circle jerking.
“If IQ tests are tests of middle class knowledge,”
Still not answering my question.
“Are you a physicalist? Is epiphenominalism true?”
I’m ‘nothing’ you fucking idiot. The only philosophical schools I follow are those that constitute science, they’re the only ones that have made any progress in explaining the world around us, everything else has absolutely no value. Including fabricated mind-body problems.
“Nothing you’ve said refutes it. False. M is underdetermined by P.”
Everything i have said refutes it. Perceiving the anomalous can only rise from ignorance. We’re to the point that we can predict thoughts and ‘read minds’
“Where?”
In the brain obviously. Thoughts are just neuronal communications through sensory mechanisms, expressed by excitatory or inhibitory patterns.
“False. M is underdetermined by P.”
No, Anomalous monism is still monism. Davidson agreed P=M. he wasn’t arguing the mental was a different property, he was simply arguing it was incommensurate to physical laws. I disagree, as our technology has increased our predictive and explanatory abilities have as well, and I have no doubt in my mind that certain vocabulary will be eliminated in the future.
“Where?”
Here. If Barnes and Jospeh have made arguments, then so have I. To disagree would just be hypocrisy from you.
One can ascertain knowledge through reasoning.
So you’re a physicalist.
There are no physical equivalents to desire etc.
M is underdetermined and is irreducible to P. The arguments I have provided attest to that.
You don’t make arguments. You make claims and asset and give links which toy think are arguments.
I’d say you’re a reductive physicalist.
Hey, “you fucking idiot”, you should know that just because you don’t subscribe personally to a philosophical school of thought doesn’t mean you don’t have a philosophical position. I’d also say you’re into scientism too.
Fucking idiot.
Anyway Melo, I got a new job instructing a course and I start next week so I’ll give you the last word. You can look at it as “a win” but debates aren’t about “winning”, they’re for the audience obviously.
Take the last words.
“One can ascertain knowledge through reasoning.”
Knowledge without observation is useless.
“There are no physical equivalents to desire etc.”
Of course there are, that’s not a debate. A desire is simply a thought. if you desire to punch someone int he face, the physical alterations in the brain would mimic those of an aggressive individual for a particular context, but the motor neurons would just become inhibited form actually performing the action.
“You don’t make arguments. You make claims and asset and give links which toy think are arguments.”
P1 Arguments consist of premises and conclusions
P2 Claims backed by empirical observations are premises, conclusions are the overall point a claim is trying to buttress
P3 My claims are empirically backed, my conclusion is formed from these claims
C1 I am producing a legitimate form of an argument.
Where is the flaw in my reasoning?
“I’d say you’re a reductive physicalist.”
And I’d say you’re completely wrong. Define physical. Are higher dimensional universes physical? Keep trying to put me in a box, you’ll just get more and more frustrated.
“Hey, “you fucking idiot”, you should know that just because you don’t subscribe personally to a philosophical school of thought doesn’t mean you don’t have a philosophical position. I’d also say you’re into scientism too.”
Haha, you’re so delusional. The strawman arguments never end do they? I’m not a follower like you. Im a reductionist in the sense that reductionism is the only way to figure out how a system works, but I’m also holisitic because I realize that systems still function in holistic ways. I’m a scinetific realist int he sense that scientific concepts are grounded in real physical entities, but Im an antirealist because i understand the scientific method is still a work in progress and words are not things. A model can be completely sound without corresponding to a real observation. Black holes and classical Newtonian physics being some examples. In those moments we didn’t assume the models are independent of what we could ever observe, and it’s no different for cognitive neuroscience and psychology.Science is an amalgamation of different philosophical positions, none can be used independently and the ones that are not incorporated are utterly useless when trying to understand how our world really works. Ultimately our differences only reflect two very broad philosophical positions: You are an Absolutist, I am not.
” You can look at it as “a win” but debates aren’t about “winning”, they’re for the audience obviously.”
Yeah and it’s pretty obvious I’ve convinced the audience of my position.
Arguments have a structure; writing words and leaving links isn’t an argument.
“Desire” is a mental state—an intentional one, thus it cannot be reduced to the physical since no psychophysical or psychological laws exist.
In order for one event to cause another conjunction, It has to be supported by exceptionless laws. Thus, mental-physical causation requires strict (exceptionless) psychophysical laws, while mental-mental causation requires strict laws that connect mental events with other mental events. No such laws exist, therefore the mental is irreducible to the physical.
By the way Mr. Logician, your “argument” has no inference rules.
““Desire” is a mental state—an intentional one”
You haven’t justified why an intentional thought is indescribable by neuronal dynamics.
“In order for one event to cause another conjunction, It has to be supported by exceptionless laws. ”
Cognition is only propagated through exceptionless physical laws. This goes back to my question: why do you assume irreducibility= high complexity? Its a form of the creationist argument, known as irreducible complexity. Essentially certain traits are considered irreducible because they function in holistic mannerisms. Anomalous monism extends this to semantic holism. Simply put, it’s special pleading. There is no reason to believe consciousness is an exception to any other biological construct.
“Arguments have a structure; writing words and leaving links isn’t an argument.”
P1 Arguments consist of premises and conclusions
P2 Claims backed by empirical observations are premises, conclusions are the overall point a claim is trying to buttress
P3 My claims are empirically backed, my conclusion is formed from these claims
C1 I am producing a legitimate form of an argument.
Where is the flaw in my reasoning?
Psychophysical laws definitely exist. For example I know without exception that you’re going to commit ad nauseam again and repeat your original assertions despite me directly refuting your contention.
What are the psychophysical laws? Your “argument” has no inference rules.
Hick-Hyman law, Piéron’s law, Weber’s law.
“Your “argument” has no inference rules.”
Yes it does.
I already explained that those laws don’t govern mental properties, they govern physical states that are associated with mental states.
Where are the rules?
“I already explained that those laws don’t govern mental properties, they govern physical states that are associated with mental states.”
More circular reasoning that ends in ad nauseam. Your contention that M is not reducible to P is formed from the assertion that there are no psychophysical laws. When presented with psycho-physical laws, yoru counter is “correlation is not causation” but this counter can only be deemed relevant if the propoenent already assume before hand that P is not reducible to M.
“Where are the rules?”
Are they not heavily implied? Why can’t you just admit you’re wrong instead of grasping at straws. Get over yourself, I mean one kind of loser cites his own blog post as evidence?
It’s not circular reasoning. I explained why those laws are not psychophysical laws.
Where are the inference rules?
“It’s not circular reasoning. I explained why those laws are not psychophysical laws.”
You didn’t explain anything. You simply stated: “they govern physical states that are associated with mental states.” without giving any reason,to assume the aforementioned statement you would already have to think that M is irreducible to P.
So basically you’re saying that Psycho-physical laws do not exist because M is irreducible to P, and any Possible Psycho-physical law I bring up is simply an association because….M is irreducible to P?
You’re a joke.
Those laws describe dispositions.
No they don’t. They describe how organisms make goal directed behavior.
They don’t link mental events under their mental descriptions and physical events under physical descriptions so they’re not psychophysical laws. Those laws don’t govern mental properties; they govern physical states that are associated with mentality.
“They don’t link mental events under their mental descriptions and physical events under physical descriptions so they’re not psychophysical laws. Those laws don’t govern mental properties; they govern physical states that are associated with mentality.”
I suggest you reread Davidson’s thesis on AM. The disconnect is a completely semantic one, and doesn’t concern whether M is a different property than P. Now that that has been cleared up I’ll let you have another crack at it, because the algorithms I posted satiate the interpretive nature on rationality.
Not relevant to my claims on the Hick-Hyman’s etc laws that govern physical states associated with mental states and not mental states under their mental descriptions and physical events under their physical descriptions.
That’s quite the run on sentence. It is relevant, but it’s not surprising that you can’t see it. You weren’t even able to recognize any of my arguments either.
Those laws describe dispositions, not psychophysical laws. Davidson’s argument is one of many that disprove psychophysical reductionism.
“Those laws describe dispositions, not psychophysical laws.”
No they don’t. You obviously have no idea what you’re talking about.
“Davidson’s argument is one of many that disprove psychophysical reductionism.”
Modularity =/= reductionism you fucking idiot.
The way computers implement A.I. today is to extract features from images adding them together in layers to find the abstract nature of a dog or a cat or anything else. Another way is to extrapolate all permutations of linguistic conventions to “reason” out answers by hypothesis testing of what is known and not known. This is what IBM has done. The point of utilizing A.I. as a tool is to create a fuller picture of the world and what happens in it and what can be done to influence it. Currently, the most effective way of interacting with A.I. is by voice. Visual interaction will soon follow. The way individual objects can be identified is because of the feature extraction which basically is a high dimension profile in comparison to all other profiles. Profiles are not new but the great volume of data allows predictions to be extremely accurate. The only problem is this information is used for advertisement. A real benefit would be to modify the profile yourself selecting what you want and don’t want in it. And to use the A.I. to follow your commands and explain to it the quality of its performance. The reasoning is there, the visuals are getting there. And the model of you the A.I. creates can create multiple self-enclosed branches of how your actions will evolve. All this is based on preferences and getting the most detailed representation of what is in your head. The goal of creating A.I. is to map reality to change it. With back and forth exchanging of people with the internal feedback of the A.I. system mapping reality should become complex enough for it to have the intelligence of an above average human.
Happy now? Or do you want a blank pciture altogether?
No gravitar at all please
Awwww Pumpkin! It’s funny!!!
Why is philosopher specifically not allowed to have a gravitar.
Omega males tend to be very awkward with women. They have little to no social status, so they are completely invisible to women. Their powerlessness in the sexual market often leads to psychological problems and indeed many of the recent mass shootings can be tied to men who were of this lowest status, as well as the medical establishment’s attempts to profit off their misery by drugging them. Needless to say, Rosy Palm and porn are their best friends. Women are repulsed by the Omega. Lifetime notch counts are in the single digits, if that.
Thats the blurb I found on a website.
IMO, its not quite right. Omegas to me are guys who just totally clueless and often lack basic social skills and social intelligence. All aspies are usually omegas, at least if they don’t have mega jobs.
There are many facets of my life right now that are omega. The video gaming. The basement. Trolling puppy. Etc. But I’m just too damn good looking and charismatic to ever be an omega, even with severe neurosis and being out of shape physically.
That’s beta, not omega.
Hahahahahaahaha!
“The Philosopher”
All you have to do to figure out where you are in the sexual hierarchy is look at how women react to you.
That doesnt work for me as i never interact with them and am autistic. Ive been called hot from girlls that barely know me though 🙂
Honestly, Anime is the kind of person I’d bully. I remember working in the bank and there was this guy named Dave who was a big guy, in shape and all. But his personality was a kind of loser personality and all the lads used him as a whippy post. It was hard to watch at times. I didn’t join in. It was a very masculine environment. My manager was an open racist. Every Friday was down to the bar for boozing.
Thats horrible, why wont he find new friends? He is strong enough to become fit, so he should be strong enough to fix this, unless his gains are from genes lol.
What is a loser personality? i think i might have it, though i stop being social when i cant dominate and controll my own fate.
I also have thought about compensating through going to the gym, so maybe me relating to him is why i got so porturbed.
Yes you do have it, you have said you have aspergers and Anime has said he has autism, that’s the common factor.
I wouldn’t describe it as a loser personality as Philosopher did.
I’d describe it as a childish and overly trusting/meek personality.
Anime has said he does NOT have autism
I know i have autism and am meek, but the meekness is becuase i have no power. Consolidating power infinately seems impossible, but there might be a point where i feel sufficient pride to not need to advance another stepp up where i need to suck up to go further, i exert space/dominance whenever it feels nescessary for my development.
The autism diagnosis is questionable, me being socially akward or bad at reading social cues might be due to short term effects from an bad environment. I worry that these autistic traits might be permanent or that they were inherited. To know that im doomed to be an loser is not healthy in my opinion, and the antidote to that would be things pp would retract.
Where do you get the idea that im trusting from? i always see selfishness in people, though i woulndt say im equiped with sufficient data and method to determine how to trust people, as i rarely interact with them, though me being selfish, i extrapolate it onto others, maybe wrongly.
Funny that im amongst few who would prefer looks to be the primary thing for womens attention, as my looks are better than my personality.
I think this has been discussed as nauseam (and I don’t think it should be kept being brought up), but Anime clearly has something else other than autism, even though he also seems to have the meek and highly suggestible traits that autists sometimes have.
In the past anime used to refer to some of his manerisms as “kittyautisms” and descrived himself as autistic metaphorically so its understandable that Fenoopy misinterpreted him.
Autism is retardation, right?
Schizo is crossed wired.
I have Schizoaffective disorder.
I don’t think straight and my mood makes me feel horrible all the time.
I am jittery a lot, I feel like shaking and the shaking disturbs how I speak.
I am very nervous and worry I will say something inaccurate.
I have to be careful about what I say, this causes nervousness.
I am always shaky. I always have negative affect. I stutter. and repeat things.
In me, everything shows I am cross-wired.
If I was retarded I wouldn’t have these mental disturbances.
If I was retarded I’d just be oblivious to things around me.
I am mentally disturbed and shaky and cannot think straight.
I had psychosis where I shut down to get rid of the negative feelings.
They can be when I came out of the shutdown mode.
I am worried all the time what people think.
This causes an internal disturbance, I need to be careful.
But not because I am anxious about not understanding them.
I am worried they will think I am crazy, I cannot be myself.
I cannot be myself around other so I am always on edge.
I cannot express myself so I suppress everything.
The suppression makes me shaky and so thinking straight becomes a problem.
If you cannot think straight you are schizo.
If you are oblivious then you are autistic.
I don’t think straight mostly.
Incoherence.
I always have second thoughts in the moment.
This is not the case in autism,
they say what is on their mind not knowing the impact.
I second guess myself, that means I have social metacognition.
I realize when I make mistakes and should not say something.
But holding it all inside is disturbing. It screws my ability to think stably.
I went to an all boys school and in a hillbilly town. Purty masculine but there was quite a few middle class ‘softies’ as well. I remember we’d all line up in the corridor both sides and beat the shit out of anyone that walked by. It was a kind of game that you didn’t walk down the corridor before lunch ended. I got caught in it once. Someone threw me in. I was like a cat.
There was a rugby player named Dennis one day who voluntarily walked down the corridor. Not many people tried to kick him. I did, from behind.
I don’t think your size is the biggest factor in whether you get bullied. I think the main factor is your will and your personality. I must have been one of the smallest guys on the banking floor actually. Everyone was gigantic. My manager was 6’5. One of my co-workers played second row for the bank rugby team.
Depends on the bully, some bullies are fucked up.
Anyways, i think its just a natural consequence of social dominance and humor in many cases. and that there are lighter forms of bullying carried out everyday (not treating people eequally). Social isolation is the only acceptable form of bulling in my opinion, as everyone agrees with it to an extent (since its practicall), physical bullying just makes people fucked up.
That’s probably true (think of the NFL offensive lineman Jonathan Martin), but more size usually does mean less bullying.
The biggest factor is how much of an insider or outsider you are, i.e. how different, i.e. how close to ‘average.’ That’s it, that’s all.
A group creates a bully, because the group will look the other way as the outsider is punished for failing to conform.
Bullying != clashes for leadership or dominance.
My experience working in Big 4, banking, regulator, consulting etc, there is definitely a preference for good looking people. In PWC some of the women could easily have done modelling. People have a subconscious affinity for aesthetics. Because im right, peoples looks say a lot about their personality. This is why I suggested Afro may have homosexual tendencies.
Do you still wear high heels and fake tan?
Intelligent people just understand how to looks-max to the maximum degree whereas stupid people don’t. There’s a genetic aspect to it, but just like IQ a huge amount of it comes from knowledge.
But Warren Buffet can be kind of funny in a geriatric uncle kind of way. Buffet is definitely as aspergers, if not more aspergery than Bill Gates. But he interviews much better than Bill. Maybe this explains why he doesn’t try to save Africa – he’s not totally retarded.
Ah! I forgot – actor. An aspergers person would probably be a terrible actor. As they usually can’t lie too.
Joking around demonstrates social intelligence. This is probably why blacks are often good comedians despite low IQs. I mean, Richard Prior was a burglar before he made it in comedy. Comedians may be the highest IQ performing arts people, but I suspect this is merely an artifact that so many comedians are jews. What is actually being demonstrated by jews as a comedian is not ‘intelligence’ per se, but social intelligence. Jews are pretty unique in being the only race of man that can be nerdy but in many ways more socially intelligent than even jocks. My theory of ‘merchant brain’ explains it I think.
A lot of non-jewish nerds are funny… Your over-stereotypes overpass your factual understanding…
I’d say jews are the only nerds that can be funny for this reason. And its shown empirically.
Again, not because they have high IQs, but because a merchant also needs to be able to read people.
Man, I am a genius.
The other insight I had about whites being the only people that can do fiction literature and not make it a thinly veiled autobiography is something nobody else has figured out yet. I mean, even jews can’t write fiction like whites can, despite HIGHER VIQ and higher social intelligence in certain aspects.
No deary,
Auster and many others already knew… Indeed since XIX raciology…
Italys president decided to nullify the incoming government because they chose a finance minister that wouldn’t do what the EU says. Italians always leading the way with social change – the renaissance, fascism….
They didnt start the communist capitalist split, the protestant split, the growth of liberalism, the industrial revolution, colonization, the growth of social democracy (though maybe you cuold say the mussolini had similarities with his public spending) and feminism.
Arent italian leaders historically an hodgepodge of other europeans ethnicities?
Latest GWAS paper on “gee”
In these meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies for both general cognitive function and reaction time (N = 300,486; N = 330,069, respectively), we make several original contributions. We report 148 genome-wide significant loci for general cognitive function, of which 58 loci have not been reported before. We report 42 genome-wide significant loci for reaction time, of which 40 have not been reported previously. We also report 291 gene-based associations for general cognitive function, and 173 for reaction time, which have not been reported already. Of these genome-wide significant results, six loci and 39 gene-based associations are genome-wide significant for both general cognitive function and reaction time. We are able to predict, using polygenic scoring, up to 4.31 [2.63% and 3.73% in the other samples] and 0.56% [0.43% and 0.26% in the other samples] of the general cognitive function variance in an independent sample, for general cognitive function and reaction time polygenic scores, respectively. We present original and updated estimates of genetic correlations with many health traits for both general cognitive function and reaction time. Gene-set analyses identified significant associations for general cognitive function with gene-sets involved in neural and cell development. Significant enrichments were observed with genes expressed in the cerebellum and the brain’s cortex for both general cognitive function and reaction time.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04362-x#Abs1
LMAO!
We are able to predict, using polygenic scoring, up to 4.31 [2.63% and 3.73% in the other samples] and 0.56% [0.43% and 0.26% in the other samples] of the general cognitive function variance in an independent sample, for general cognitive function and reaction time polygenic scores, respectively.
4.31% isn’t that bad because remember the square root of the variance explained is the correlation so it implies a 0.21 correlation between polygenic score and IQ. But keep in mind it’s too expensive to give real IQ tests to hundreds of thousands of people, so they typically give the piss-poor VNR which has only about 13 items. If you adjust for the low quality of the test, the correlation would go way up.
It is bad and it lacks cross-sample invariance. Yet all samples are drawn from Britain. And if you’re not convinced that it’s bad, well you have these laughable polygenic scores for reaction time that set the record straight and indicate that the polygenic scores for IQ aren’t real and reflect population structure and cognitive deficits caused by the disorders that have SNP overlap with gee.
Nevermind the population stratification problem. It’s capturing social class differences, not differences in “g” or “RT”. And yes, what Richardson wrote in his 2017 GWAS paper still applies.
It probably is capturing population stratification to some degree but you have no evidence so don’t jump to conclusions
Correlations with GWAS are meaningless and inevitable.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.15252/embr.201744140
The evidence is in that paper, how population stratification accounts for the observed variance. Variance is low so its capturing social class differences, not “intelligence” differences.
The evidence is in that paper
Quotation needed
Read it. It’s only 5 pages.
The evidence is the null predictive power.
Why is it so much easier to find reliable height-related genetic variants?
Because it’s way more expensive & time consuming to administer the WAIS-IV then it is to measure height.
Thus there are lots of large databases that compare height data with DNA and none with reliable IQ data.
Height databases aren’t nearly as large and since the IQ data is not reliable, you don’t know if overestimates or underestimates the predicted variance. The reaction time results suggest it’s an overestimate.
No unreliability lowers the strength (positive or negative) of correlations by decreasing the signal to noise ratio.
Reaction Time is also extremely unreliable unless you average many trials.
Haha, you’re grasping at straws.
Not really. Reliable measurements are essential to proper science.
Indeed. Are you trolling now? if not, you no have self-awareness.
You have no awareness period.
Administering the WAIS still wouldn’t get around test bias which is due to test construction.
The WAIS is highly g loaded. g is the common factor to all cognitive tests regardless of construction
So what? That doesn’t mean it’s not biased against lower classes. And “g” isn’t a real thing. No biology or physiology behind it.
Afro, the funniest part is that the n was over 300k and still ~5 percent variance “explained”. This stuff gets funnier and funnier.
They’ll hold on to this until research institutions cut funding for these stupid studies, and then they’ll cry over censorship.
Why did Africa never develop for all of history? Why is there no shortage of castles, ancient buildings, books, writing etc in the Arab world, but none in SSA? (I say Arab world because it’s the civilization bordering SSA on all sides)
There isn’t absolutely nothing South of the Sahara, West Africa and Ethiopia are on par with the Maghreb. Population density was just much smaller south of the Sahara. Small population = small development.
You’re overestimating the level of historical development of the Arab world. The Peninsula is pretty much empty of anything spectacular, most things found in Egypt, the Near East and the Maghreb are from the ancient civilizations of the Near East, Greece and Rome and most subsequent cultural development heavily borrows from these.
But instead of [redacted by pp, may 29, 2018], why don’t you buy books?
The non HBD reasons are partly mentGuns, germs and steel.
West africa,East africa and the congo had governments, texts and buildings. Their lack of intelectual life could be becuase of the small populations, different upper class culture and having non-africans import ideas that the small populations would have invented themselves if they were left to their own devices.
HBD could influense the upper class culture, but since you belive that the large ethnic groups are roughly equal, then the non HBD reasons stand to be an hypothesis for disparity.
Fenoopy its worse than that. They didn’t even invent the wheel.
Haha, neither did Europeans. They got it from the near east.
“Although the world’s oldest wheel has been found in Mesopotamia, the earliest images of wheeled carts were found in Poland and elsewhere in the Eurasian steppes. Some have suggested that due to the immense challenge that the invention of the wheel posed to mankind, it probably happened only once, and spread from its place of origin to other parts of the world. However, others believe it developed independently in separate parts of the world at around the same time. For example, The Ljubljana Marshes Wheel is a wooden wheel that was found in the capital of Slovenia in 2002 and was dated to 3150 BC. At present, the birthplace of the wheel is said to be either in Mesopotamia or the Eurasian steppes. Although Mesopotamia has the oldest known wheel, linguistic evidence is used to support the claim that the wheel originated in the Eurasian steppes.”
Afro really is a Wakanda fanatic.
LMAO, you’re so dumb, before wheeled vehicles, there was the potter’s wheel and it went to Europe from the near east.
What was so great about civilization for all of history?
Civilization = slavery for most of recorded history. IIRC in Ancient Egypt something like 80% of the populous were some kind of forced slave labor or another.
It isn’t much better now. Most are wage slaves. But now we have penicillin I guess, and better nutrition. More workers.
At least a savage works because he needs to and for a practical end.
Maybe it didn’t develop because too many decent, good people lived there…?
Survival of the fittest. Races that build civilizations dominate races that don’t. Who’s the loser, the Egyptian citizen or the Nubian slave-laborer? Granted the citizen works for the pharaoh, but the citizen has reproductive rights, the slave doesn’t.
>ancient building
They mainly build in mud, so their building disappear if not constantly managed.
But you’ve the remains of cities like Kerma, Tichitt, Djado, Cayor, Djenne, Mogadishu, etc…
Cities like Kilwa, Benin and Kumasi were burnt down, looted, and destructed by European explorers. There is remains though
>writing
Writing was independently developed in various parts of Africa but was never widespread.
Some writing systems were created and derived from Northern scripts(Ajami, all Nubian scripts, Ge’ez), which is not really a problem since all historical European scripts are derived from Oriental scripts(Phoenician -> Proto-Sinaitic -> Egyptian hieroglyph) too.
>books
You’ve tons of manuscript about various subjects in Timbuktu, mostly wrote in Arab, but also Songhaï, Fula and other local languages.
Ethiopian people also have manuscripts.
>(I say Arab world because it’s the civilization bordering SSA on all sides)
You say Arab world because you don’t know history. The Arab world doesn’t border SSA on all sides. The Islamic world do, but MANY parts of SSA are part of the Islamic world so this is irrevelant. What do border SSA are North African Berbers, who are definitely not Arabs.
They speak Arabic and are part of the Arab world, though. Also Ethiopia and Somalia border Yemen and there is large admixture between them over the strait. I agree that SSA did develop primitive civilization, writing systems etc, what I’m asking is why SSA is a complete shit-hole today?
This book is really good.
The opening animated sequence explains Wakanda was aware that the outside world was becoming increasingly chaotic, throughout the various atrocities of history such as the Atlantic slave trade, the Colonisation of Africa by European powers, World War I, and World War II. The Black Panthers of the past, however, were devoted to defending their own country and did not interfere, instead choosing to hide Wakanda from the world – fearing that if they became involved and revealed themselves, it would eventually lead outsiders to try to invade Wakanda itself. Wakanda passes itself off as a small, poor Third World nation of humble herdsmen, using an advanced holographic projection shroud around its borders to hide the advanced technological civilization within. A core tension of the film’s narrative is that the new Black Panther, T’Challa, is torn between his loyalty to hide and defend Wakanda as its king, and his own conscience to help the faltering world beyond its borders.
Hahahaha. I haven’t laughed that much in a long time reading this. As I keep saying. This is the kind of stuff I would write satirically. Pumpkin bans all my satire.
I’ll see that movie with my kids. All the people who’ve seen it loved it, sounds cool.
Have you ever considered maybe someone who thinks like me wrote the story as a joke?
No, people who think like you are in mental hospitals.
The brilliant Joe Robert Cole
And Ryan Coogler
Wrote it and will be huge inspiration for the next generations of blacks taking over Hollywood.
Truly the blacks are talented at comedy.
Blacks are talented.
By the way, you still haven’t told me if you had found a new psychiatrist.
Let me improve the official synopsis.
The opening documentary footage explains Wakanda was aware that the outside world was becoming increasingly chaotic and racist, throughout the various atrocities of history such as the Atlantic slave trade, the Colonisation of Africa by European powers, World War I, and World War II. the slaying of Treyvon Martin and the 2017 Oscars ceremony. The Black Panthers of the past, however, were devoted to defending their own country and did not interfere, instead choosing to hide Wakanda from the world – fearing that if they became involved and revealed themselves, it would eventually lead outsiders to try to invade Wakanda itself and taking their Oscars. Wakanda passes itself off as a small, poor Third World nation of humble herdsmen, using an advanced holographic projection shroud around its borders to hide the advanced technological civilization within (cannot improve on this, this is comedic gold). A core tension of the film’s narrative is that the new Black Panther, T’Challa King Jr., is torn between his loyalty to hide and defend Wakanda as its king, and his own conscience to help the faltering world beyond its borders escape from racism.
In order to make his decision T King Jr eventually consults the high priest of Wakanda Michael Jackson and asks for a divine sign for the Wakandan gods – Colonel Sanders, Lebron James, and Mel Gibson. In a dream T King is told by the Colonel to save the world from racism and the KKK and also given a enchanted 3 piece meal with baked beans on the side to improve his IQ.
Unbeknown to our hero however, T King’s lifelong rival and former childhood friend Robert Mugabe is plotting a coup against the government to install a fascist government. As leader of the BLM party, Mugabe’s sole aim to establish his iron will across all of Africa and eventually the world using the powers of the magic negro herbs.
In a race against time T King enlists Hilary Clinton and Evelyn Rothschild as sidekicks in a frantic hair raising travail across the globe where the evil KKK and Robert Mugabe will do anything to stop our heroes.
PUBLISH THIS
https://mobile.twitter.com/TODAYshow/status/1002516127111614464/video/1
More from the alt-right and Neo-Nazis on the Today Show. Good stuff, you might enjoy, even though Arthur Jones gets his IQ data a little wrong. And some guy named Little spits on the Israeli flag.
even though Arthur Jones gets his IQ data a little wrong.
The U.S. black white IQ gaps is larger when you exclude blacks with any visible white ancestry.
Hahaha I saw that. He said twenty points. Great representation in the media for IQ-ism eh? Assuming the black interviewer had a low “IQ” because she’s black.
If you exclude all the African Americans with any visible white admixture, the U.S. black-white gap does rise to about 20 points (in adults, it’s smaller in kids).
I doubt he knows that.
Patrick Little is controlled opposition. Whites are sub-human IQ.
Why do you say he’s controlled opposition? I know nothing about him
And that’s just an assertion from Lynn with no evidence. (IQ 80 with little to no white admixture.) Where’s the data for the assertion?
Lynn published data from the general social survey showing the darker the skin (among african americans) the lower the IQ, so if the adult average african American is around 85, the darkest ones should be around 80.
Now this doesn’t nessecarily prove HBD. The darkest ones are more likely to live in the ghetto or the rural Deep South, so one could invoke an environmental explanation
That’s the paper where he found the .14 correlation with skin color and IQ?
If so see:
Hill, Mark E. 2002. Skin color and intelligence in African Americans: A reanalysis of Lynn’s data. Population and Environment 24, no. 2:209–14
Where he shows that the correlation all dissappears when controlling for childhood environmental factors such as SES.
“Why do you say he’s controlled opposition? I know nothing about him”
Just look at what he’s saying and how he’s saying it. It seems like he’s trying to discredit X. But I like conspiracy theories so don’t mind me.
He’s a neo-Communist/Leftist, pro-Black, pro-Muslim, pro-Goy, pro-Bernie, anti-Jew
I never have the time or energy to debate RaceRealist. But he just always seems so…fuckin’ wrong.
Or more like…”purposely contrarian”….
He was a huge HBDer until he learned that Lynn thinks southern Italians are dumb & then he flipped 180 degrees
People do not want to hear that their people are genetically inferior
They do not want to hear it
It’s the way you word it PP. You say ‘their people are genetically inferior’ which has supremacist undertones, as opposed to ‘their people have on average, more genetically intellectually inferior individuals’. I would argue that Thomas Sowell is genetically superior to the vast majority of Whites.
But even when it’s worded diplomatically, people interpret HBD with supremacist undertones
“He was a huge HBDer until he learned that Lynn thinks southern Italians are dumb & then he flipped 180 degrees
People do not want to hear that their people are genetically inferior
They do not want to hear it”
Appeal to motive. Your assumption is wrong. If “HBDer” means “accepts IQ” then I changed my view last year. It had nothing to do with Richard Lynn.
Why didn’t you post the comment about Lynn PP?
Too dark.
“Where he shows that the correlation all dissappears when controlling for childhood environmental factors such as SES.”
Race, have you ever thought about applying for a job as a sociology professor. I think youd be very good at that honestly.
But even when it’s worded diplomatically, people interpret HBD with supremacist undertones
What other purpose does it serve?
The study of anthropology, world history, economics etc.
LMAO! No serious history or economy theory refers to HBD.
Then they’re not serious.
If I recall correctly PP, you conflate “HBD” with “behavior genetics”. If that’s your definition of “HBD”, then no, I’m not an “HBDer” because behavior genetics rests on false premises that Evan Charney and others have rebutted. Furthermore, Jay Joseph in his book The Trouble with Twin Studies chronicles the history of twin studies and concludes that twin studies are no better than family studies at separating genes from environment. Twin studies measure environmental, not genetic, similarity.
See this paper by Evan Charney on behavior genetics.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/wcs.1405
“Race, have you ever thought about applying for a job as a sociology professor. I think youd be very good at that honestly.”
Nah I’m actually getting a new job as an instructor soon. Maybe if I didn’t have a career already I’d jump into something like that. But I already have a first love.
Race, have you ever thought about applying for a job as a sociology professor. I think youd be very good at that honestly.
At least he’d be good at something, unlike you. Or maybe we can see the fact of having been fired 15 times as a sort of exploit.
Race realism is a reality, racial supremacism is wrong. White supremacism, Jewish supremacism, even Afro’s negro supremacism. Judge people as individuals.
I won’t make a political statement even though it’s tempting.
I like this comment.
Damn, just when I’m trying to calm things down you can’t help name dropping me. Don’t you have enough getting owned every single time?
What?
Will our hero take victory from the jaws of racism?
Tune in next week to find out!
Have any of you guys gotten a WAIS just to satisfy personal curiosity? How much does it cost and will they give you one for this reason?
If you live in a big city there might be a University or psychological services center that offers testing at a very cheap price for indigent people. The place I went to, I didnt even have to prove I was poor and I could use my Mom’s health insurance!
Just say they you have problems at work and in school and you think you might have ADHD.
Pt2
On the slopes of Mount Doom in Wakanda the camera pans over thousands of worshippers before slowly rising up the 1000 step stone staircase to the plynth. The piece Dance of the Knights by Sergei Prokovfief is playing.
The camera is now behind a robed figure – Robert Mugabe.
“For 10000 years we have been slaves to the the real international racists – the bankers. No more!”
His voice booms through the valley and there is complete silence from the crowd.
“For 10000 years we paid their interest, liberalised our capital controls and floated our exchange rate! No more!”
“The time has come to perform the ceremony of death forgiveness to our true god, Ktulu!!!!”. There are roars from the crowd. A man dances wildly on the spot.
Robert Mugabe places the IMF official on the altar and takes his sacrificial dagger, raises it high as the sound of Dances of the Knights booms, and plunges the blade into the IMF official.
“It is done”. Ktulu our forsaken god is no more forsaken. The crowd suddenly chant as one Ktulu, Ktule.
The camera slowly zooms into Robert Mugabe who slowly transfigures into a snake.
PUBLISH THIS
This is really good. 🙂
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2018/may/29/roseanne-barr-tweet-valerie-jarrett-ape
HO HO
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/may/29/ra-chief-executive-calls-for-action-on-diversity
Oh, swanky will take this golf club to the supreme court now and make them finally except transgenders.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/may/29/nfl-protests-taking-a-knee-alternatives-new-rules-fines
Guardian flying the brave flag against slavery in 2018.
Maybe an alternative could be for black NFL players to work in the guardian?
Pt3
Meanwhile in a dark cave in Alabama, the evil KKK meet to go over their plans for world domination.
More to follow soon.
Dr. Eric Courchesne explains the underlying brain biology of autism
People with autism have too many brain cells at birth.
Patches of brain cells obstruct functioning.
Many abnormal connections.
Frontal lobes grow to fast for social development.
Pt 3 The KKK Strikes Back!
After hundreds of years persisting as a secret shadow world government conspiracy organisation the KKK has been biding its time waiting for the perfect moment to seize power from the governments of the world and introduce a new era of Jim Crow and racism.
Its leader, David Duke, played by Christoph Waltz, is sitting in his high chair with negro skulls adorning both arms of his throne.
“So gentlemen, we are here too, how do you say, TAKE OVER THE WORLD?”. He laughs evilly.
Around the table a texas oil baron in cowboy hat, german neo nazi skinhead, russian hacker, and canadian psychology professor lift their goblets of negro blood in salute.
“For 1000, years our organisation has suffered under the work of the Wakandan secret service. At every turn they have foiled us, sending magic negros to defeat our best agents in the worlds governments. Today, I introduce to you an answer to our wakandan problem.”
“Gentlemen, meet our new agent. A biologically engineered marvel”.
They turn to the door. The door swings open. The camera raises slowly.
Captain America, played by Mel Gibson.
“First im going to take out Wakanda, then I’m going for Tel Aviv”.
Lightning and thunder flash and boom. Can Challa King Jr defeat this new menace?!
Thanks but the network has cancelled this series. No more episodes please.
Puppy is a spoilsport. Now well never know if Wakanda can defeat racism.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3980130/So-s-goodie-baddie-really-tell-wrong-just-face-s-lips-eyes.html
BUT.. many of this photos have historical/vestuary additional information which make easier to deduct based on informations below…
https://exame.abril.com.br/estilo-de-vida/nove-diferencas-entre-caculas-e-primogenitos/
Use google translate… very interesting
highlights
1 Firstborn men and women tend to be the “male alphas” of their groups. The first-born of both sexes are also more aggressive and bossy.
2 Men who are the youngest tend to have many personality stereotypes considered “feminine”, while the first-born women tend to have personality traits commonly accepted as “masculine.” Because they are created full of pampering, the youngest are more sensitive and fragile. Firstborn women are charged with taking responsibility early and becoming firmer.
3 youngsters are more likely than the first-born men to become homosexual.
4 Firstborns are more jealous than the youngest. Since they were children, they received full attention from their parents and therefore always wanted to be the center of attention. The elders usually seek more status and power.
5 Youngest tend to be more liberal than the first-born in their social attitudes. Younger people find it easier to relate to people. Most comedians, for example, are younger children.
6 Compared to right-wing politicians, left-wing revolutionaries are 18 times more likely to be the youngest. Because they do not need to reaffirm their space, the youngest are less conservative, even in their attitudes. They do not accept authoritarian and traditionalist leadership.
7 Firstborns are more likely than their youngest to adopt the political attitudes of their parents. Because they carry more expectations and are more charged, older people usually make decisions in line with family positioning. This is also true for career decisions, they often follow the same profession as parents, for example.
8 There are more firstborns in politics. The elders have won more elections and are among the majority of the presidents and members of the American Congress. Even in companies it is possible to observe that the older ones occupy the high posts. In family businesses, for example, in 63% of successions from father to son the presidency is occupied by the eldest son. This is because older people are charged to take responsibility early on.
9 Youngsters are more likely than their elders to fight for racial equality. Younger children learn to divide early on, from parental attention to family resources, so they are more collaborative and often develop an interest in social causes.
Even i don’t get that behaviorist narrative…
PumpkinPerson,
What is it like to have a significantly higher Performance IQ (PIQ) than your Verbal IQ (VIQ)? What does that mean exactly? What does it look like, and how does a person like that learn the best? Also, what career should someone like that consider? I tried to find some of the answers for this, but there just isn’t as much information available as there is for something like VIQ. Thanks in advance!
at least a few fags have contributed to civilization.
not a single dyke ever has.
sad!
https://www.yahoo.com/news/congressional-candidate-virginia-admits-pedophile-011921211.html
I just read about this guy on Yahoo. He reminds me of Pill and number of other commenters here. People like this don’t help the alt-right cause AT ALL.
So where is the new open threaD?
Decided to skip it this week.
You enjoy playing with peoples lives.
I imagine Fenoopy said Lynn falsified the data because he was angry his penis wasn’t as big as many Africans. Unlike Afro I accept blacks probably have larger sexual organs (both sexes) whereas he doesn’t accept blacks are genetically the most primordial human being.
I even said I accept blacks probably have better social intelligence on average than most asians and probably most whites. This is why retarded blacks do not look retarded like retarded asians/whites.
social intelligence
Is there a neurological cause for this?
Your best guess?
Oh, I completely accept that blacks have larger dicks, I got this opinion from all the women who told me the BBC isn’t a myth and from what I’ve seen in locker rooms. Physiologically that makes sense, Allen’s rule would predict it. We have long legs, long arms, long fingers, so why not long dicks? Especially since it’s a very vascularized part of the body that would be the most efficient for thermoregulation, this alongside lips which are also thicker.
This locker room envy stuff is why losers of your type hate so much on blacks. My friend are mostly white jock types, they’re all very handsome, tall, athletic, yet they look up to me and I kinda act like a big brother with them. On the other hand, I’ve always looked up to the other black dudes, occasionally hanging out as an all black crew with my team mates and the black guys at my high school and college, especially we had monopolized the soccer field at my high school. I invited them to my parties and managed to get them invited to other cool parties where their presence was always much appreciated.
Because yes, beside the obvious physical superiority, and while losers of your types grew up rotting somewhere at the library, hiding their pale skin, acne, yellow teeth and greasy hair away from their bullies, blacks are typically and unironically fun to be around. Nothing is really cool if it doesn’t have a black vibe, and blacks make the best entertainers. Black Twitter is undeniably more entertaining than mainstream Twitter, so were Black Vines, the trendiest Instagram posts aside from those from celebs are always mostly blacks. And everyday I tell myself damn, I like my people and I thank god for not being born a wimpy boring white boy.
Along with coolness, the most prominent mental trait that anyone who visits Africa notices is craftiness. While you’re dedicating your worthless existence to pushing the HBD nonsense, scamming dumb whites is a multi-million business in the whole West African region. Africans find whites extremely dumb and gullible, and no Africans would fall for such unsubtle scams.
Well the French are one of the few ethnic groups to ever lose a war to blacks, so no wonder they treat you like an equal 🙂
All Europeans have lost wars to blacks. Even the colonial conquest was essentially carried out by local African allies and it happened much later than the conquest of India, North Africa, South-East Asia, Australia and America.
My friends look up to me because I’m lit. It’s very simple. I’m also known for being very lucky so they know hanging with me is a guarantee for experiencing great things.
All Europeans have lost wars to blacks.
All French Europeans? Yes.
Portugal, Spain, Italy and Britain have lost colonial wars and independence wars. Haiti didn’t just defeat the French, it defeated Spain and Britain, invaded the Spanish part of Hispanola and occupied it for a few decades.
BS.
Allen’s rule:
Allen’s rule is an ecogeographical rule formulated by Joel Asaph Allen in 1877,[1][2] broadly stating that animals adapted to cold climates have shorter limbs and body appendages than animals adapted to warm climates.[3] More specifically, it states that the body volume-to-surface area ratio for homeothermic animals varies inversely with the average temperature of the habitat to which they are adapted (i.e. the ratio is high in cold climates and low in hot climates) due to thermal adaptation
Body appendages:
appendage
Use the noun appendage to describe something that’s attached to something larger. Your arm is an appendage to your body.
Appendage often describes body parts, either on humans or animals. If it’s something that sticks out — like a finger, tail, or leg — chances are it can be called an appendage. The word can also be used figuratively to refer to something that’s associated with something larger or more important, like a husband who’s a mere appendage to his famous wife. In this sense, the word takes on a negative connotation: the appendage is not important.
What doesn’t logically make sense here?
It’s not supported by the data. There are only 2 studies in Africa that weren’t self-reported or just straight up made up by the “great” Rushton and Lynn. I’m of course open to being wrong, it does make logical sense but I need good data and what Rushton and Lynn have is trash.
I was writing a reply to your previous comment then I got a notification from you.
Here I found more reliable data than Lynn’s.
Based on 40 studies.
So, although the differences are small, they are very meaningful at the extremes.
The most notable difference is East Asians vs the rest. I’m no expert, but I’m not surprised, man it’s just obvious that East Asians aren’t hung.
Check where the data is sourced from.
Whites here:
I concede the whole pattern doesn’t align well with Allen’s rule. Maybe the data sucks, maybe the rule doesn’t apply, maybe other evolutionary forces (sexual selection, drift, migration) caused deviation from the rule.
It’s locker room knowledge that black men carry bigger things on average. And what girls have told me is that although it’s not true that most black men have the monster cocks we see in porn, black micropenises are very rare whereas they’re probably quite common in Asia.
Lmao look at Afro go ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I wish I had a gif of a guy slapping himself in the head. I’m not completely against Afro going the Negroid superiority route (if only to balance out some of the other commentary here) but why do you have to resort to childish discussions about “muh big black dick” and “we’re more cool to be around!”?
Although the black penis thing is true😆
Although rushton regarded big penis as genetic inferiority.
Why not? Muh dick, muh biceps and muh swagg really make my life better. Their “IQs” don’t prevent them from being kissless basement-dwelling virgins.
Facts vs delusions.
While you’re dedicating your worthless existence to pushing the HBD nonsense, scamming dumb whites is a multi-million business in the whole West African region. Africans find whites extremely dumb and gullible, and no Africans would fall for such unsubtle scams.
In fact, they’re even more skilled than that, they outsmart big businesses.
West Africa’s infamous internet scammers have evolved, dropping their impersonations of online love interests, princes and U.S. soldiers in favour of hijacking corporate emails, costing businesses hundreds of millions of dollars a year.
It is a much more lucrative venture that works by gaining access to corporate e-mail login details or passing off almost-identical addresses as the real deal, a scam known as Business Email Compromise (BEC), according to a report by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike issued on Thursday.
These Nigerian rackets now dwarf other types of online criminal theft, amounting to at least $5.3 billion of losses between October 2013 and the end of 2016, said CrowdStrike and the U.S. FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3).
“There’s a disproportionate amount of criminal gains they get from it,” Adam Meyers, vice president of intelligence at California-based CrowdStrike, told Reuters. “The lion’s share of ill-gotten, fraudulent money is around these business e-mail compromise attacks. It’s a huge problem for our customer set.”
Nigeria has become one of the hubs of BEC. Nigerian online fraudsters, known as “Yahoo boys”, became notorious for trying to pass themselves off as people in financial need or Nigerian princes offering an outstanding return on an investment.
The capers became known as “419 scams” after the section of the national penal code that dealt — ineffectively — with fraud.
Yahoo boys even impersonated a U.S. forces commander in Afghanistan to defraud people by asking for help in recovering the assets of deceased soldiers. It forced the commander to issue a Facebook statement saying he would never try to contact anyone asking for financial help.
Now the scammers have bigger fish to fry, with the potential gains amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars a year, according to CrowdStrike.
Although rushton regarded big penis as genetic inferiority.
Given that humans have the largest dicks of all primates, Rushton is full of shit as usual.
Chimps have much bigger balls and only slightly small dicks, so their overall genitalia size is huge.
Big genitalia = genetically inferior
No correlation between test size and penis size.
One study [7] found a weak significant correlation (r = 0.14)between testicular volume and flaccid and stretched penile length whereas one did not [24].
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bju.13010
Big penis = very human trait, no penis anxiety, confidence, sexual selection material.
Never claimed they were highly correlated, but both are part of genitalia size which is a primitive trait. And humans only have longer penises than chimps because we’re much, much taller. Relative to height our penises are smaller.
Tests and penis are different organs, different tissue. There’s no correlation between height and penis size in humans.
The most meaningful trait for human/chimp comparison is the penis to tests size ratio, it’s higher in humans and probably even higher in Africans. whereas Asians likely have the lowest.
Tests and penis are different organs, different tissue.
But they’re both part of genitalia
There’s no correlation between height and penis size in humans.
Wrong!
penile dimensions are highly correlated with height and weight.
The most meaningful trait for human/chimp comparison is the penis to tests size ratio, it’s higher in humans and probably even higher in Africans. whereas Asians likely have the lowest.
Well that’s a third dimension you can look at.
But they’re both part of genitalia
Irrelevant, the genitalia isn’t an organ.
Wrong!
The meta-anlysis I posted above says there are as many studies that find no correlation than studies that find one. In other words, your correlation isn’t replicated, it’s scientifically falsified.
Well that’s a third dimension you can look at.
It’s the most remarkable human/chimp difference. As a whole, animals tend to have less developed sexual characteristics than humans, especially the secondary characteristics, it’s also true of breast size in females.
Wrong again. Way more studies found positive correlation than no significant correlation:
Height and flaccid length
One study [7] found flaccid length to be moderately
significantly correlated with heig ht (r = 0.32) and three studies
[10,21,22] found weak correlations (r = 0.19–0.2). However,
two studies [8,21] reported no significant correlation between
flaccid length and height.
Height and stretched flaccid or erect length
Aslan et al. [7] found height to be moderately significantly
correlated with stretched length (r = 0.61); four studies
[10,12,22,23] found a weak correlation with erect or stretched
length (range r = 0.21–0.31).
Yeah, publication bias. Those two studies that find no correlation as well as the poor correlations in the ones that do dismiss the pattern.
Publication bias? Now Afro thinks all the tall academics are conspiring to supress the fact that their dicks aren’t big. And do you understand the difference between no correlation and no significant correlation?
Oh no, I’m not a conspiracy retard. Publication bias is a thing, and when it comes alongside inconsistent findings, you can safely dismiss it.
What would plausibly cause the bias in this case? More likely the inconsistent correlations are caused by sampling different populations, and small samples yielding less reliable correlations than big samples. And whatever overestimate may be caused by sampling bias is likely negated by the underestimate caused by unreliable penis size data (self-reported) that drag down the correlation. Anyone with common sense knows that height and penis size are correlated.
Publication bias is pervasive in research, all researchers are incentivized to come up with conclusive results and studies with null findings are much less likely to get published. It’s a fact.
And lol, no, anyone with locker room experience knows there is no such thing as big guys have big dicks.
all researchers are incentivized to come up with conclusive results and studies with null findings are much less likely to get published. It’s a fact.
How do you know it’s a fact? Maybe all the studies showing it’s not a fact were supressed by publication bias. At this point your theory achieves its own negation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publication_bias
Studies with null results are three times less likely to get published.
According to a study that was published and thus subject to the very publication bias it claims.
LMAO! Hit me up when you’re an adult.
As a whole, animals tend to have less developed sexual characteristics than humans,
Wrong again!
“With an average penis size of around 6 feet, 5 inches, the African elephant’s penis is taller than the average human being.” (source google)
LMAO! An African elephant is a huge animal. Their penises aren’t large for their size. In primates, Gorillas, which are much bigger than humans do have micropenises.
PP won’t let me post any pictures of videos of Nigerian slaves in North Africa but lets Afrosapiens post multiple paragraphs of Black supremacist material.
Haha! The people who fall for West African scams would be easy prey for slavers if they crossed the Sahara as illegal migrants.
PP why won’t you let me post Libyan slaves? I’m not making any racist comments. Just stating facts about reality. Truth comes first. I simply wish to see Afrosapien’s opinions on the matter.
[link redacted by pp, June 6, 2018]
Big genitalia is only “inferior” depending on the environment. In primitive societies and the hyper-sexualized post-modern West, they’re highly valued. In East Asia, not so much.
And as has been discussed here many, many (way too many) times, while black men on average likely have larger penises, the median black male isn’t much larger than the median white male. I also get the impression that not only East Asians are small but South Asians, too. I can’t see Afros charts on my phone to see what they say regarding the issue…
Penile enlargement is a big thing in Asia iirc.
Long legs relative to height, and penis size are both some of the few aspects of African superiority. Man’s closest relatives, like chimps and gorillas are both lacking in those departments compared to humans, thus making Africans more “human-like” in those respects, not less so…
And why is Afro bragging about African scam artists like they’re a good thing??? So funny….it indicates psychopathy and maybe social intelligence, not much else…
Oh, not just that, lips, black skin, smooth skin and kinky hair are other very human traits that blacks have and non-blacks have less.
Why I’m mentioning scam artists? Because they represent African craftiness at its finest. When you go to (West) Africa (I can’t tell about other parts), it’s the first thing you notice. No traveler comes back from Africa with a HBD revelation, quite the opposite, they tend to feel a bit disturbed by how much western comfort numbs the brain.
Blacks do have a superior body build to non-blacks. I think after humans left the tropics there was “backwards evolution” in body build (we became stockier) despite progressive evolution overall.
Lol, sure, you also forgot to mention that you evolved fur.
“When I’m mentioning scam artists? Because they represent African craftiness at its finest. When you go to (West) Africa (I can’t tell about other parts), it’s the first thing you notice. No traveler comes back from Africa with a HBD revelation, quite the opposite, they tend to feel a bit disturbed by how much western comfort numbs the brain.”
Replace the word comfort with (((media))) and this actually makes sense!!
“And lol, no, anyone with locker room experience knows there is no such thing as big guys have big dicks. ”
what? dick size scales with the rest of your body. im 6″3 with a dick nearing 7inch but it looks normal, if I had a 5inch at 6″3 it would look like a micropenis, idk what world you live in. part of the reason why chink dicks are so tiny is because THEY ARE A SMALL PEOPLE
More nonsense. First, penis size is set in utero and isn’t affected by the factors that influence whole body growth. Secondly, Africans in Africa are the same size or smaller than Asians in Asia and in the West but have bigger dicks.
Thirdly, it’s very sad that a well endowed big guy like you can’t lose his virginity.
“Blacks do have a superior body build to non-blacks. I think after humans left the tropics there was “backwards evolution” in body build (we became stockier) despite progressive evolution overall.”
They’re climatic adaptations. Blacks are good bodybuilders because they have thinner skin folds so a black and white bodybuilder are the same body fat would look pretty different.
I reviewed much evidence here (references for these claims and more in the article):
Humans became stockier in colder climes since stockier bodies can retain heat better than thinner, lankier bodies. Evidence reviewed here regarding strength differences between Neanderthals and homo sapiens sapiens on the basis of body type here:
Evolution isn’t progressive, for the nth time.
Evolution isn’t progressive, for the nth time.
What do we have to do to get you to understand you’re wrong?
How is it progressive?
GondwanaMan there’s notl good evidence for the penis assertion from Rushton et al. Lynn used an internet survey to “prove” Rushton’s r/K BS. Yawn.
PP, I see you came across Veale et al (2014). I hope you realize that Lynn’s (and Rushton’s) papers on this matter are trash and they are very clearly biased on the matter.
“Long legs relative to height, and penis size are both some of the few aspects of African superiority”
I don’t know about anyone else, but when I see the words “inferior” or “superior” I only think in terms of anatomy, that something is higher or lower than another.
The head is the most superior part of the human body whereas the fret are the most inferior part. That’s the only time these terms make sense.
properly measured a 7″ erection is more than enough to do porn and any longer is actually worse because you can’t go balls deep.
but i think that post of average size is too small. as i’ve said i’m 6.5″ nautical inches and 5.5″ around. i’ve seen enough porn to know i could do it. i’d be fucking yuge in japan.
my erection was measured by NASA.
Citation for dick-size being determined at birth?
And I didn’t deny that, there is a genetic aspect to it, but they definitely do scale somewhat with height. Tall men with 5 inch penises = micropenis and most tall men also have tall penises.
“A person’s height ~might~ be related to their penis size. Of all the correlations the researchers looked at, the strongest and most consistent was between height and erect length or flaccid, stretched length.”
Your virginity insults are incredibly shit and mild. Evidently you haven’t been subjected to many banter/roast battles in your sheltered school days. At least think of something offensive. I think my insults are 10x more offensive and thus more effective at their job. They would be 100x more offensive but I have to tone them down for the PP censor.
Research in rats has found that penis length is pre-determined by the action of hormones during a limited time frame early in fetal development. Exposure to hormones after this time can speed-up penis growth, but ultimately cannot increase the size reached in adulthood. The research has important implications for clinical management of children born with penile abnormalities. The results are published in the International Journal of Andrology.
The discovery was made by scientists at the Medical Research Council Human Reproductive Sciences Unit at the University of Edinburgh as part of an ongoing programme of research into the origins of common male reproductive disorders.
It builds on early work by Dr Michelle Welsh and Professor Richard Sharpe that has highlighted the importance of action of the hormone androgen during what is described as a ‘masculinisation programming window’ (MPW). When rat and human gestation times are compared, the MPW corresponds to approximately 8 to 12 weeks in human pregnancy. The level of androgen activity during the MPW also determines the distance between the base of the penis and the anus (anogenital distance) making this measurement a life-long gauge of androgen exposure in the womb during the critical MPW.
This most recent research demonstrates that maximal growth potential of the penis is pre-determined by androgen action during the MPW. Because the anogenital distance gives an insight into hormone exposure during foetal development it may be possible to use this measurement at birth to predict future reproductive problems or abnormal adult penis size.
https://mrc.ukri.org/news/browse/penis-length-is-determined-early-in-fetal-development/
Your virginity is a fact, you mistake it for an insult because you know the hurtful truth. Your pathetic attempts at hurting me are laughable, we both know which one of us has it much better than the other.
That’s outright false, PP. Their body build is specialized for short-range sprinting. The stockier build is specialized for strength.
Afrosapiens suffers from the consequences of the lower average IQ of his race. Gondwana must be a Blasian because he behaves like one in every way.
African morphology is specialized for optimal bipedal locomotion.
Afrosapiens suffers from the consequences of the lower average IQ of his race. Gondwana must be a Blasian because he behaves like one in every way.
LMAO! Gondwana man is a negro, an American house negro.
“Their body build is specialized for short-range sprinting. The stockier build is specialized for strength.”
Who?
“African morphology is specialized for optimal bipedal locomotion.”
This.
“Their body build is specialized for short-range sprinting.”
East Africans have a similar build but are “specialized” for middle and long-distance running which are due to climatic adaptations, along with the altitude they live at.
These climatic adaptations are a large part of the cause for racial differences in sporting performance, with some authors calling this “environmental determinism” (I’ll write an article on that for PP’s blog this week).
Northern Nordics dominate heaving lifting. Highlanders and Hamitics (North Africans, Kenyans) dominate long-range sprinting. Jamaicans dominate short-range sprinting. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to repeat these facts.
Even so, the difference between a White and a Jamaican in the 100m is microscopic and is a matter of around 4 to 10 milliseconds. This difference is almost imperceptible but it does exist. No doubt the difference in human IQ is similar, very small but does exist enough to be noticed if carefully measured.
I don’t know what Semitics, Southern Meds, Asians and Central Congoids are good at. Nothing, I presume.
“Northern Nordics dominate heaving lifting. Highlanders and Hamitics (North Africans, Kenyans) dominate long-range sprinting. Jamaicans dominate short-range sprinting. I don’t know how many times I’ve had to repeat these facts.”
Dude. Tell this to someone who hasn’t been writing and reading about this stuff for about a decade. See my blog. I discussed this stuff and way more.
IQ scores aren’t genetic.
I remember going to a party at christmas and there was a retarded asian person. You could definitely see it just looking at the guy. But if you made him and say, Muhammed Ali do the same IQ test, they’d probably get the same score. IQ tests DO NOT measure social intelligence at all.
Theres a story in Fictions by Borges about a fictional country that appears in code in all these academics papers and research. It was the first story in the book and it completely sailed over me when I first read it. I thought what the hell is this story? Its only reading his other stories that I realised he was doing a twilight zone type thing.
It reminds me a bit of Wakanda which is a much lower IQ version of the story where a bunch of guys get together to create a fantasy world as a joke and bury it in the minds of children, instead of in Borges story’s case, academic journals.
Borges had another story where this middle eastern biblical type civilisation decided everything by the lottery. This is a fairly philosophical satire as it makes you question the nature of ‘fairness’ and ‘justice’ In many ways a society directed by lottery is a lot fairer than the marxist view or the alt right view of a bunch of foreign high IQ trolls.
Yes afro but the original people that thought up of the of Wakanda could be doing it in a private joke way, not the screenwriters of the movie version of black panther.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man-Eater
This is the original source of the story apparently.
No, Black Panther is a very old Marvel character, nothing to do with your lunatic delusions.
“In recent stories by writer Ta-Nehisi Coates, Wakanda is located on Lake Victoria, near Mohannda, Canaan, Azania and Niganda”
Wow I thought Steve Sailer was joking too much about this guy. He really does write amazing nonsense.
Serena Williams looks more masculine than 90% of asian males. How the fuck can anyone deny HBD?! Its a joke that people can’t see something so obvious.
That’s true…except that booty tho!😮
That Reddit dude must like phat booties….
RR has no verbal reasoning ability. Thats the problem with him reading all these papers. Its like hes had a lobotomy or something.Very strange imo.
Said the guy who got kicked out by his psychiatrist.
Herr Dee Durr. The law is whateve Rabbi Stephen Wise thought the founders said. Herr Dee Durr.
Imagine Stephen wise meeting one of the founders. Or even any president pre-1960s.
I mean even Nixon would hold opinions privately that Wise would excoriate him for. And Nixon was a kind of benevolent HBD realist.
If you listen to the tapes Nixon is an example of how an intelligent mind actually stereotypes MORE than normal. Not less. Its called pattern recognition.
Theres a really bad logical/semantic argument that you can’t judge a group because some individuals are not atypical. Its not even logical to say it….Its not even ‘moral’ to say it either.
My ability to think.
Hold information and
manipulate it at speed
IQ 92
Verbal and Spatial/logic
IQ 130
some kind of learning disability.
I dont know about that big brother crap. Might another of your orphan aristocrat delusions of grandeur. But you don’t accept blacks are dumb or more violent or more incapable of civilisation than other races whereas I accept black penis length.
Its like everything you believe in is a carefully manicured front for your own ego and nothing can penetrate it lest you’ll fall to pieces. You don’t find it really weird how you are all a sudden an alpha in france having been disowned and then raised by benevolent but brainwashed whites? Come on man. Be serious for once.
I got this big brother role since high school. I did middle school in the military, so I was more mature than the spoiled brats who spent their early teens at mom and dad’s. Plus I’m big, deep voice, calm, slow manners which contrast with their hyper-excitability.
I simply don’t accept your racist fantasies because they are false, that’s it. And that’s why you can’t even say a thousandth of your schizo babble in public and you’re just the epitome of a faggot posting anonymously from your basement and scared to reveal an ounce of personal info.
Afrosapiens cries about ‘racist fantasies’ while posting walls of his own ‘racist fantasies’.
Nah Fenoopy, the only crybaby here is you.
You are a basket case. Its obvious.
People see you more like a special Olympics athlete than an athlete lol. The magic negro phenomenon is about how people are inured to want to believe you can do it.
LMAO! No, the special Olympics athletes here is the “guy” who gets banned by his psychiatrist and has less testosterone than a castrated poodle. I won track and field medals, I was a central element in my soccer team, first picked on PE classes teams at school and I’m twice your weight, one head taller.
We’re polar opposites, and while I’ve always enjoyed the best of this world, you’re falling further into insignificance day after day. Look at yourself: mental illness, virginity, video games, unemployment. You’re genetic garbage.
Good stuff afro. You keep believing all that. Youre make belief pparents certainly do!
And now comes the time when schizy can’t even spell anymore.
As I said in a comment that was censored, I feel pity for your type. And I’m a nice guy, I denerdified my neighbor back in the days. Once the guy got JJ’d up, it turned his life around and I prevented him from ending up like you. He’s very grateful to me.