Please post all off-topic comments for the week here. They will not be published in the main articles.
Open thread, week ending July 1, 2018
26 Tuesday Jun 2018
Posted in Uncategorized
26 Tuesday Jun 2018
Posted in Uncategorized
Please post all off-topic comments for the week here. They will not be published in the main articles.
Pumpkin Person 
Really hope trump fails to get relected and hilary runs in 2020. What you guys think? I think she looks in great health. If vernie didnt run, we would have won. Bernie killed support for a more sensible and pro business democrat victory.
You are having a meltdown philo
He’s doing a parody
Bruno please respect the new commenting guidelines and refrain from disrespecting other commenters. Thank you.
I know he is illustrating you re alleged censorship by switching to parodical PC comments with humour but generally it doesn’t last that much and he quickly comes back to his classical persona.
Argentina Nigeria is a good match so far. Hopefully Nigeria with their 5 defenders and 3 defensive midfielders can take the game to the white supremacist Argentinian team in the second half.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/express/wp/2018/06/21/5-awesome-objects-from-the-new-oprah-exhibit/
Wow didn’t know Pumpkin was also working for the Washington Post. Really good article pumpkin. Proud of your success.
Pumpkin if I hand you my cv, can you give my cv to your editor, or boss. Im not jewish, but I support all jewish causes and have a degree in African American studies.
😂
I don’t like saying it. But the supreme court is RACIST. Illegal immigrants are the future of America. How can they be so insensitive to the Yemeni migrant community? Disgusting.
People, this is the new ‘Amerika’ of Donalt Drumpf.
No, they’re not. Living wages and a meritocratic system of rewarding supermen for their innate abilities will solve America’s dysfunctionalism. Not because Jared Kushner is Jewish and a Harvard grad. But this does not happen in vacuum. Humans are self-entitled and tribal.
?? Why is this RACIST still here?
Dont slacken in the face of evil Pumpkin. Be resolute.
Really super smart and very very logical unbiased and really insightful analysis of the supreme court ruling. Like Swanky said, the supreme court doesn’t understand the meaning of the constitution right now. It doesn’t say the word border anywhere in the constitution.
It looks like Swank might be secretly moonlighting for a major publication as well.
Wow, we are blessed with such great insights from top national writers on this blog!
Yes and history will vindicate Sotomayor grate insight and acute legal writing. It’s a pitty that Ginsburg herself is being right wing in her dissent that doesn’t stand up to the occasion to give hope to the Résistance where all good Americans have their heart. Truth will prevail and will have open communities with many Muslims, hopefully, good fellows of The religion of peace from which Christians got’ access to science and knowledge. If America could be a new Al Andalus. Charia is less unfair than the decrees of this dark administration. All with Maxim, Impeach 45 !
I would ‘like’ this comment if it was facebook.
Please accept a 🙂
It wasn’t a Muslim ban, it was 5 or so countries deemed potential dangerous harboring terrorist of which the travel ban affected. Muslims from many countries including Saudi Arabia that Trump visited can freely come to the US.
American Media, Soviet Tactics
Pumpkin, didn’t you obtain scaled scores of 19 on some of the WAIS subtests? If so, your 135 score might be an underestimation. Maybe you would’ve obtained scaled scores of 20 or so if the WAIS allowed for that?! I also read that the WISC IV has extended scaled scores that go up to 28, allowing to measure FSIQs up to 210.
Pumpkin, didn’t you obtain scaled scores of 19 on some of the WAIS subtests? If so, your 135 IQ might be an underestimation. You might’ve obtained scaled scores of 20 or so if the WAIS allowed for that. I read that the WISC IV has extended scaled scores that go up to 28, allowing for FSIQs up to 210.
It was the WISC-R not the WAIS. I have my own way of checking for ceiling bumping. Scaled scores of 28 sound fascinating but i want to learn more about how they were calculated since in theory that’s one in a billion level performance!
Pumpkin, would my WISC-3 score still be valid in some way at 125 same as you go by your WISC-R for your IQ of 135? You have said the WISC and the WAIS measure different things.
Your WISC-3 score should still be relatively valid unless you suffered a psychotic break that permanently lowered IQ. Otherwise it might be more valid because it was taken when you were healthy & alert
The newer versions of the wechsler (WAIS or WISC) measure somewhat different abilities than the older versions, but the full-scale IQ of all versions are super g loaded & great measures of overall intelligence
This sounds like a suspiciously contrary opinion Anime. Please watch your behaviour.
no one cares about jewish cereal box IQ tests.
The most jewish test is the SAT since it only measures the two abilities where Jews do best: verbal & math
Wow, good point…the SAT is very Jewish….
I have a psychosomatic illness that slowed down my mind from accumulated stress. My friend suggested my IQ is really 118. I think this accurately reflects my intelligence better than 113. Stress makes your brain stuck but I have been working on being calm and relaxed which speed up my mental processes. Also, I am developing my sensory perception and shifting my center of attention faster without clenched fixation of mental stuckness I physically feel in my brain. I am working on using my whole brain simultaneously to speed up what it can do.
I think PP has an IQ more than 135. WISC or WAIS though accurate than all other IQ tests could still be incomplete. Its just that they may be the least incomplete compared to other IQ tests. So a person scoring a particular score on WISC or WAIS could have equal or even more IQ than the tests indicate but not less. And also seeing PP write, speak since years i think PP you have more than 135 IQ.
“And also seeing PP write, speak since years i think PP you have more than 135 IQ.”
What’s this mean biologically and physiologically speaking?
I don’t care what muggy says, I’m not throwing out my 145 Kellogstein IQ score.
I agree with Pumpkin on everything and disagree strongly with everyone who has a contrary opinion.
the sexiest short man ever…and this song marks the end of the classic era…
when pop music didn’t SUCK!
Animal’s House of the Rising Sun to…
to…
1964
to…
1981
british invasion to…
AIDS.
Animals‘s House…
Wechsler was born in a Jewish family in Lespezi, Romania, and emigrated with his parents to the United States as a child.
The fact that he was Jewish yet still created a test that was fair to Gentiles speaks to his good character, assuming he knew about Jewish cognitive profiles
You agree that tests can be unfair?
Who ever disagreed with that? The absolutist strikes again.
It’s just a question.
And how many times have you debated on this subject? Are you seriously that incompetent that you weren’t properly able to identify his position?
I mildly relate to this.
What is Pure OCD?
Pumpkin what are your thoughts on the role of women in technology?
Choice.
no discrimination.
school programs electives.
merit
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jun/26/trump-supreme-court-upholds-travel-ban
Really unhappy with this. Very angry. Totally upset.
Someone hold me.
A friend of mine asked me, why would 4 supreme court justices rule that the president had no power to enforce border law?!
I said: “Diversity is about RESPECT and FAIRNESS”.
So he said, “seriously, 4 justices just ruled that america has no borders, are they insane?”
I said “no you are insane”.
Im so glad I can say what Ive always wanted to say now that everyone is banned. Really happy about this.
Does paranoid schizophrenia permanantly lower iq? Prior to this my iq was 135.
what is your iq now then?
IQ was calculated from raven’s progressive matrices in 1995. I didn’t give another such test after that.
Edward Dutton has published a (non too flattering) biography of J. Philippe Rushton.
interesting. i wonder who, if anyone, he interviewed for this biography. he made no effort to contact me & i knew the man. sounds like a juicy beach read nonetheless, but i take celeb biographies with a huge grain of salt.
PP, you dont sleep?
What do you think of Oprah’s?
Yeah Pumpkin doesn’t sleep. I’m guessing significant stimulant use?
Thanks. Buying.
“An archetypal Narcissist, Rushton attempted to manipulate people into supporting his model and cherry picked and dishonestly presented his findings. And among many other fast Life History strategy traits, Dutton explores Rushton’s dropping out of high school, his multiple divorces, his compulsive lying, his affairs, his two illegitimate children including one by a married black woman, and even his use of physical violence.”
Wow so the great Rushton, the one who proposed r/K selection theory for humans is r-selected himself? Hahaha
For anyone who’s not aware that r/K selection theory is BS:
So Rushton has a black illegitimate son? Is his IQ in the middle of blacks and whites at IQ 93?
Something interesting to consider… What if Rushton formulated his theory because he got butt hurt by the black woman he had his illegitimate son with? Like, he got so butt hurt by her that he presumed there must be a genetic basis to the cause of his butt hurt and thus he formulated his theory because he had a broken heart?
Appeals to motive aside, it’s a good question to now ask (and I’ve refuted his theory on empirical and logical grounds multiple times so…).
Maybe it was the other way around. All his research on black genitalia made him curious about sex with a black woman & being with a woman from a race he considered less advanced made him feel dominant
We need to know when the woman birthed his illegitimate son.
I ordered the book so I’ll leave quotes of the juicy bits when I read it.
Sadly during slavery some white men would rape their slaves. Rushton didn’t rape her of course, but in his mind, he might have seen it as an act of domination over blacks, especially if her betrayed husband was black too
Its sad to see a brainwashed person do a hack job on someone whose ideas are so unbelievably obvious. Is what a friend of mine would say. But, I would say that it is vital we have all the details on Rushton’s personal life before we can judge R/K theory.
Edward Dutton is brainwashed? He’s a PhD in religion if I recall correctly. He’s one of Lynn’s lackeys. (So one can’t make the claim that it’s Jewish she’s SJWs doing this, he’s right wing.)
It’s not vital that we have Rushton’s personal information before we can judge r/K selection theory, it’s already dead. But it is hilarious that he has an illegitimate son with a married black woman.
Maybe he’s too autistic to realize Rushton’s on his team
What’s this even mean?
RR is totally right. R/K theory makes no sense. Just even beyond the autistic definition games of what is R and K, the model of fast and slow life mating strategies doesn’t work at all. Look at places where blacks have settled – they are paradises. Look at places where whites have settled – really bad.
That’s not evidence for the theory.
Why do people get so angry at racists? Is it because they’re retarded? Is what a friend of mine would say. I would say that its because racism, even scientific, common sense, really obvious racism, is EVIL.
“Edward Dutton is brainwashed? He’s a PhD in religion”
Very astute observation.
Haha damn. I didn’t even catch that. He IS brainwashed.
I wonder if the biography talks about how he pilfered money from the Pioneer fund.
PP do you think Rushton got curious as he read the pseudoscientific French Army Surgeon write about the vaginal width of different races?
Wow. The having a kid with a black woman thing reminds me of Strom Thurmond and Bill Clinton.
“I wonder if the biography talks about how he pilfered money from the Pioneer fund.”
I ordered it this afternoon. For some reason it takes three weeks to get to America from the UK.
“Maybe he’s too autistic to realize Rushton’s on his team”
There are “teams” in science? What do you mean by “team”?
I am not a brain.
http://modernpsychologist.ca/the-mind-does-not-reduce-to-the-brain/
The mind is in the brain. Where else would I or you be?
Mental states are irreducible to brain states. I am not my brain. You should read this book:
You’re falling into promissory materialism, i.e. most things we know about so far have been explained by purely physical phenomena, therefore we should expect this other thing to be explained by physical phenomena. It’s a ‘god of the gaps’ type of argument…
Just because quantum physics may be the source for consciousness does not mean the brain is not following quantum physics to contain the mind.
Swank, you are suggesting the answer is quantum and not material correct?
….I didn’t say anything about quantum physics, so no.
We have both a mind and a brain.
But they are not the same.
How do they interact is the problem of dualism.
What do you think the answer is Swank?
The answer is that we don’t have an answer yet as a matter of science.
They could be the same, as in the mind seeming to be different than the brain because of language symbolizing our perception of physical phenomena as they occur may be ‘the mind’ (neural states plus sensory inputs — also described physically — for those neural states) versus language describing the physical phenomena as the brain. Or it could denote an actual ontological difference.
I was pointing out that your reason for believing the mind is located in the brain stems from a way of thinking that provides less inductive support than most believe.
picture of swank:
picture of muggy looking at picture of swank
“The answer is that we don’t have an answer yet as a matter of science.”
It’s not an empirical matter.
Thats strange, I always pictured Swank more like this:
swank is a jewish woman.
NOT a jewish man.
are you kidding?
you don’t want muggy to have to deal with having a jewish fetish AND being a homo at the same time.
Philosopher I love your ethnically inclusive avatar.
Thank you RR. I tried to find one with aborigines, eskimos and swamp people but there isn’t anything that would fit. But I did remove the white person from the picture to make space.
“I did remove the white person from the picture to make space.”
Naturally.
Just to be clear I have no idea who philosopher is. I just thought you meant me, as a general thing ‘oh youre such a philosopher, social justice warrior’. I get that a lot.
picture of rr:
P1) Personality traits are mental traits
P2) genetic emotional traits are genetic
P3) most Personality traits are really just genetic emotional traits
C) genes can express themselves as emotional traits which are personality traits, personality traits being mental traits.
Italians have interesting emotional personality traits.
your emotional personality traits may be partially genetic.
An aluminum cup may orbit Uranus as we speak.
secret space program
break off civilization antigravity
If personality traits are mental traits then genes don’t cause them because genes don’t cause mental traits because psychophysical and psychological laws do not exist. Mental states are irreducible to brain states; mental states are intentional.
P2 is circular. And you have no inference rules.
Intentionality is irreducible to brain states
why didn’t you just say so RR
you had me confuse the mental with the phenomenological.
mind as the state of intending by knowing is not the same as the perception a being has of its phenomenological experience.
Can you elaborate?
intentions are not equivalent to qualia
genes shape the brain making each brain have unique qualia experience.
some people are born without the ability to feel pain because of a gene mutation.
This is a unique qualia experience but not a mental state.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia
Qualia are irreducible just like mental states are irreducible.
Have you solved the problem of dualism between mind and brain?
The mind is either reducible to the brain or it isn’t. Many arguments establish that the mental is irreducible to the physical.
so the mind is more than the brain.
do we even need a brain at all if all intelligence is in the mind?
intelligence is a mental state thus irreducible to the brain, it is all in the mind. no need for a brain.
The brain is a necessary pre-conditon for our mindedness, but it is no where near a sufficient condition.
If intelligence is a mental state, intelligence is intentional which means it cannot be selected for. If intelligence is a behavior then it can be selected for.
If intelligence is a mental state then genes can’t explain differences in intelligence because the mental is underdetermined by the physical.
So yeah, without the brain there is no mind—so what? Is it a sufficient condition for human mindedness? Not at all.
“so what?”
Hahahahaha
What an Idiot XD
“Not at all.”
Source?
Markus Gabriel.
Specifically?
I Am not a Brain: Philosophy of Mind for the 21st Century by Markus Gabriel, page 23.
This just creates another false dichotomy. The sensory feedback loop that constitutes “the mind” is indistinguishable from the physiological mechanisms that promulgate it.
To highlight the error in this type of thinking, one of the articles you linked to stated: This is why no matter how advanced the technology gets, one will never be able to look at a brain scan and know exactly what someone is thinking. The most you could ascertain, is whether someone is thinking of or perceiving an image, experiencing a feeling, planning a motor movement, and so on – that is because the areas responsible for these mental actions are roughly partitioned within the brain, while the more complex aspects of human consciousness involve areas that are comparatively plastic and would have been flexibly shaped by that person’s individual life history – you could not know what territory the map represents, unless you mapped out that person’s entire nervous system and the sociocultural meanings that are represented by them – which, given the brain’s complexity, would be practically speaking, impossible.
What someone is thinking completely constitutes: “perceiving an image, experiencing a feeling, planning a motor movement, and so on”. Seeing a dog and associating it with a word always utilizes the same group of neurons which are then encoded in synaptic connections, no matter the symbolic sequences we use to express it. The rest is a God of the gaps argument.
“Seeing a dog and associating it with a word always utilizes the same group of neurons which are then encoded in synaptic connections, no matter the symbolic sequences we use to express it”
This is how mental states reduce to physical states?
It’s not an empirical matter.
“This is how mental states reduce to physical states?”
Duh.
“It’s not an empirical matter.”
All physical phenomena are epistemically empirical matters. Since P=M, M is therefore an empirical matter.
The mental is mental, not physical. It cannot be explained in terms of brain (physical) states.
It’s not an empirical matter, especially on the basis of the argument priori arguments.
“The mental is mental, not physical.”
Nope. Anomalous monism is still monism. How many times is that going to have to be repeated until you understand it’s implications?
“especially on the basis of the argument priori arguments.”
A priori argument is useless in attaining knowledge about anything other than semantics. That itself is a priori truth.
Ouch…
and professor shoe didn’t correct for stratification when he found his 9% heritability for IQ. sad!
It’s funny how population stratification is such a huge problem, even after “PCA corrections” for stratification (so-called corrections, they don’t account for deeper population structure).
Race I am curious as a new reader here, but when you call yourself ‘Race Realist’ and all your views are racist drivel, doesn’t that make you a provocateur. What is ‘Race’ anyway. Your article basically was very autistic and defined race by ‘whatever RR says’ which wasn’t very helpful. Many thank you. I am foreignor.
He’s not lying…
…because it is.
The new Philosopher is funny.
Right now we are watching football and things while little central american potential meat plant workers are being caged by Americans who don’t want coolies. Haven’t these people read an economics textbook? Immigration is GOOD for a country as it reduces the average IQ and increases crime, thereby giving more jobs to police and making people toughen up and get healthier. Ergo immigration makes people live longer thanks to more police and better health.
^^^
EXACTLY HOW AN ACADEMIC ECONOMIST THINKS
Is what I’ve been led to believe reading leading business publications.
A friend suggested people with autism have poor verbal reasoning because it suits master to have slaves that are more dangerous to themselves than him.
hello friend ❤
Imagine being Blll Gates child and seeing daddy piss away money on improving the numbers of people with no impulse control and high testosterone in the world. I would be delighted and so proud.
fertility rate decrease as child mortality decrease and education of girls increases.
Bill Gates is my hero.
you need to buy a helmet, wink, wink.
This indian SJW who aborted ICE raid on migrants has a quite high verbal IQ, it’s obvious. But I don’t think she believes in the crap she says. It is just a business.
Just a tan Hillary Clinton– a psychopath spouting SJW lies for political gain.
Its evil alright. Apparently Degeneres is an ogre off camera as well. What is it with lesbians?
HAHAHA
Joke.
Thats what I would say, if I was crazy.
Kamala Harris was born in Oakland, California to two ambitious graduate students—both immigrants. Her mother, Shyamala Gopalan, was raised in southern India and completed her undergraduate education at the University of Delhi at just 19, at which point she came to the U.S. to pursue a doctorate in endocrinology at the University of California, Berkeley. Shyamala was supposed to complete her studies and then return to India for an arranged marriage, but instead, she became active in the American civil rights movement. There she met Donald Harris, a Jamaican native who also came to the United States as a young adult to pursue doctoral work at Berkeley in economics. Shyamala ended up marrying Donald, and stayed in the U.S. By marrying for love outside her Brahmin caste—and outside her culture entirely—Shyamala made a very bold choice.
–> as a Brahmin from South India family, they probably came from upper cast, like Baniya, and were sanskritized into Brahmin status, exactly like Manjul Bhargava, the field medal professor at Princeton, who has the best students of math in the USA (even more than Tao). Surely Kamala manages the ethnic voters of Oakland like her ancestry dealt with lower cast and muslim casts and even no cast people in India. She is so good at the game. It’s really amusing.
It’s strange that I’ve known a few Indian American–Black couples (both genders of both races). It’s strange because most Indians are pretty racist (even 2nd generation ones in America, especially towards blacks), and most blacks don’t run in the highly educated circles Indian Americans tend to be in.
People say whites are racist. They are wrong. Asians are way more racist. Therefore they need to be educated.
OMG, so you’re NOT the Philosopher? I can’t tell anymore I’m so confused……
He is reverting to philosopher analysis but with SJW conclusions … we ll have our racist back soon. Thx god .
Wow, he’s so damn tricky
I believe the cure to racism is education. When people are severely educated and morally browbeaten into into a squalid stupor by the authorities, only then can we finally rid ourselves of evil.
Gman its actually quite common for racists to do people of other races as a power thing. They are evil.
I have no issues with dating black women and intend to marry the first black woman i find.
Apparently. It seems that’s what JP Rushton did (maybe). Racism, sex and a need for dominance often go together
I pretty sure Brazils current president is a CIA/deep state appointee. Chavez is more or less right that the US are imperialists and do appoint people to run latin american and central american countries. Most of these people are as Sailer observed, direct descendants of the spanish land barons.
The US media is deranged when it comes to the topic of Chavez. You even get morons in the alt right saying Chavez is what happens when you have socialism. AFAIK, the CIA are well known to print counterfeit currency and drop it in crates in latin american countries to cause inflation.
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-latin-america-44607051
I will genuinely laugh when a non manchuko leader refuses an IMF bailout. I sussed out in college these IMF ‘bailouts’ are actually ways for the public sector to pay off American and European banks and some hedge funds bad bets.
Someday a real nationalist will call their bluff and just simply default on debt and the bankers will go crazy and eventually get the CIA to appoint a leader who will accept the ‘bailout’, which is so kind of the IMF for sure.
Then they fire sale state assets to deep state friends.
Its pretty obvious what the IMF is. In most situations a country is often better off defaulting as the debt markets NEVER remember and in fact a lot of academic papers keep asking why debt markets keep ‘forgetting’ about defaulters history.
When you have made up money, people have to park it somewhere.
Most of argentinas debt now is the result of that terrible Griesa decision in new york. I would bet 1000000000000 he was bribed by Peter Singer to make that ‘unprecedented’ ruling that debt that creditors already wrote off, can still be brought back to life.
What i dont understand about the IMF, is why it never talks about immigration as a reason for high property prices or higher healthcare, police or transport spending. Population migrations are a massive factor in economics. And if you are alt right, you also should hold the opinion that they ultimately determine the economic potential of a nation more than capital ever will.
So you get these 100 page reports about the economy of a country and they would rather set themselves on fire than mention illegal immigration driving down wages or driving up property prices.
So you can tell thats because they are told not to put it in. Just like in academia they are told to say immigration makes people intelligent.
Its a conspiracy. But you people take me ultra literally when I say that. There are a few high IQ people organising it. But the university presidents or even most IMF officials I doubt know anything beyond being autistic and following orders like idiot sheep. [redacted by pp, june 28, 2018]
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/25/greece-and-euro-zone-agreed-to-further-debt-relief.html?yptr=yahoo
From what I can make out, I genuinely believe the CIA would stage a coup or assassinate a political leader if he refused to take an IMF ‘bailout’. The whole corrupt system is presaged on sovereign debt having some sort of fundamental status.
I don’t think well see a country default again for a very long time.
https://blogs.imf.org/2016/11/02/a-sea-change-the-new-migration-from-sub-saharan-africa/#more-15331
Someone with severe mental retardation wrote this garbage. The last paragraph has no empirical evidence whatsoever. It doesn’t even make sense from a pure logical perspective.
The IMF, is ‘converged’. I.e. its a part of our occupation by [redacted by pp, june 28, 2018]. There is ZERO chance you can get to the top levels of the IMF and be a nationalist.
“The boost to the labor force should somewhat compensate for aging and declining domestic populations in rich countries, which is good for both economic growth and taxes in the long run. Very importantly, this should minimize social tensions often associated with immigration emanating from concerns about the displacement of native workers and fiscal costs.”
If a professor or someone said that to me, I’d think about washing their mouth out with soap. Since the US has let in 40m latin americans, the average american is unquestionably poorer even though technorogee improved TFP 2.5 times or so in that period.
In other words, 95% of the gains went to a bunch of jews and some gentiles living in the Bahamas or some other tax haven.
Trumpy makes a troll point that immigration has hurt blacks the most. Hahaha. Its true actually. Its kind of funny jews banging the table psychopathically about black poverty asking for reperations and oscars when they cause most of it by abolishing the border with Honduras.
Its so obvious to me they dont believe anything they say. RR looks at Stephen Jay Gould and is autistic and so just takes him at face value. I look at Gould speak and immediately realise this person is too intelligent to believe the nonsense he is saying. I only get this feeling with deep state people [redacted by pp, june 28, 2018]. Max Boot is another example. Google the video of him talking with Tucker Carlson about Russia. Its deranged. His lying is so passionate though hahaha.
rushton agreed with you about gould. he thought he was a fraud.
How is Gould a fraud?
Gould is vindicated.
Click to access remeasuring-man.pdf
Click to access KAPGOM.pdf
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002444
All 3 of these articles were written by jews. 2 of them by the same guy. And they cross reference each other. Moron.
I’m really interested in what Gould was wrong about, but no one on this blog can tell me.
Maybe Melo knows?
Who’s the Jew out of Kaplan, Pigliucci, and Banta?
Either way, appeal to motive. Moron.
Kaplan
Gould did nothing wrong.
Trumpy’s economic policies are objectively better for blacks than Clinton or whatever Manchuko leader.
The problem now is that because open borders has abolished K selected blacks, the only blacks reproducing these days are arsonists and barbarians who don’t care about working anyway. And you have a kind of cesspit effect going on in innner cities.
Sowell writes about a time when blacks where not deranged and had some family structure and the semblance of civilised lives in america in the 60s.
If you want to understand whats wrong with blacks read Sowell. [redacted by pp, june 28, 2018]
Well Swanky is right about one thing, you do need VIQ to not be brainwashed all your life and believe fuckin retarded things that people with higher VIQs than you make up.
The difficult thing is to determined wich class has a genetic interest to get their population being mixed with non nationals. Industrial can get rich by automation. I would say that the most suspicious class would be the administrative elite with revolving doors between government and business. Scandinavian have many billionnaires while they were homogeneous and heavily regulated societies.
The Jewish factor isn’t the explanation …. In France, Jewish communities are divided among sefardim and Ashkenazim , and they don’t represent more than 10% of elite groups.
I am quite intrigued not to find an obvious explanation as to whose interest among the elite are served better by massive influx of migrants since the end of the nineteenth century …
Its jews. Jews control france its obvious.
Most money isn’t Jewish . In France, we have a club wich really gather the powerful. It’s called Le Siecle. It’s much more powerful here than trilateral, Bilderberg, free mason or you name it.
This is a list of members in 2010. They have a formal dinner each month :
Click to access Participants-diner-du-siecle-27-01-11.pdf
It’s made of :
– top civil servants graduate (ENA and École Polytechnique )
– CEO
– anchors and media people
– industrial and billionnaires
There must be around 10% Jews (vs 1% in France)
There are also many influent politician
Alof de Louvencourt is the epitome of french elite : top civil servant, worked for Vichy while saying he was resisting, CEO of insurance companies, responsible of de Gaulle investments in Africa …
These arent the elites. The people that chose Macron and stopped Strauss Kahn from running are the elites.
For whatever reason you think you’re not brainwashed despite most of what you say consisting of rants about jews and against blacks…thoughts that you for whatever reason believe even approach original and have been historically used — fact — to brainwash.
Adventures in irony…
Yes but the context is different this time. Swanky lives in a parallell universe where it always the wrong time.
Yes, the context is so different. This ain’t your daddy’s ‘MONEY HUNGRY SLIPPERY TONGUED KIKES’ and ‘EVIL DIRTY SAVAGE STUPID NIGGER!’
We have new evidence. The evidence says these stereotypes are more or less accurate reflections of reality.
And in previous eras no one thought they had ‘evidence.’
phil is so silly.
Thomas Nagle writes in his book Mind and Cosmos:
“If evolutionary biology is a physical theory—as it is generally taken to be—then it cannot account for the appearance of consciousness and of other phenomena that are not physically reducible. So if mind is a product of biological evolution—if organisms with mental life are not miraculous anomalies but an integral part of nature—then biology cannot be a purely physical science.”
Thoughts on this? Evolution biology cannot account for what isn’t physically reducible. So evolutionary biology cannot account for the rise of consciousness.
But there cannot be a science of the mind.
when I have an intention, say “I want ice cream” or “I am going to eat ice cream”. Is nothing is happening in the brain at all corresponding to it?
How do intentions become actions if intentions are irreducible to the brain and thus do not happen in the brain nor can enter into the brain?
Mental states (intentional states) need to be “about something”. The mind being underdetermined by the brain means that we can know all physical facts about the brain but physical facts don’t explain mental facts.
Animals don’t have intentional states, for instance, they have non-intentional mental states—they behave, they have phenomenal states.
“Animals don’t have intentional states, for instance, they have non-intentional mental states—they behave, they have phenomenal states.”
Citation? Do you actually know what intentions are physically? Because I do
How can you exuberate such false confidence in this obvious bullshit when you aren’t even up to date with the most current neuroscientific matters? Or have at least a basic understanding of neurophysiology?
You’re creating non existent dilemmas.
Animals have beliefs and desires?
————
(Melo is a physicalist?)
you did not answer the question RR.
how do nonphysical intentions become actions?
Through the agent.
The problem of dualism is the interaction of the physical with the nonphysical. How does the nonphysical intention interact with the physical brain to cause actions?
“Animals have beliefs and desires”
Why wouldn’t they?
“Through the agent.”
What agent?
“How does the nonphysical intention interact with the physical brain to cause actions?”
Good point. See, any intelligent individual would realize the dichotomy is redundant.
There is a connection with mental states and actions which are carried out by an individual in order to reach a goal. (Mental states are desires, beliefs, intentions and since the mental is irreducible to the physical, these mental states are irreducible to brain states; reasons are causes for actions.)
What’s your response to the rule-following and Moore-Frege-Moore pincer arguments?
The brain changes in response to internal and external feedback. It uses memory, short-term, intermediate and long-term to make decisions. Brainwaves are how feedback processes take place working with memory systems.
Decisions I make are internal workings adjusted for external happenings.
That are brainwaves and the memory system together.
(internal and external feedback)
“desires, beliefs, intentions ”
Words are not things. Desire and intention overlap and they are both based in beliefs. I can explain all of them neurophysically. Did you ever read rob west’s thesis? It completely debunks all of this garbage.
“What’s your response to the rule-following and Moore-Frege-Moore pincer arguments?”
So everyone is clear this is his 3rd or 4th time asking me this question after I’ve already responded to it.
I’m not sure what your goal is? Do you think their arguments buttress your claims? They don’t.
Intentional states are irreducible.
“Intentional states are irreducible.”
God of the gaps, and ad nauseam.
^^creationism
How’s that creationism? You’re aware that Thomas Nagle is an atheist, right?
Cause you’re essentially saying humans have a divine essence, a spirit, a soul, that could only have come from God & not evolved from the physical world
Where’s the error in his reasoning?
He’s not saying that “humans have a divine essence, a spirit, a soul, that could only have come from God”, he’s an atheist. You’ve committed the bulverism fallacy. Assuming he’s wrong and then explaining his error (which you believe is Creationism, which is also a strawman). (Bulverism is a combination of circular reasoning and the genetic fallacy).
Psychology does not reduce to biology (see physiologist Michael Joyner’s work on this.)
Theres no error in Nagle’s reasoning. Psychophysical and psychological reductionism are false.
You’ve committed the bulverism fallacy. Assuming he’s wrong and then explaining his error (which you believe is Creationism
Hahaha. That’s exactly what you’ve done in the above paragraph. Assumed I’m wrong & explained my error (which you believe is the bulverism fallacy)
The idea that mental traits are so special that they can’t be caused by our physical biology seems like the basis of all religions: we’re special, we have souls, God created us, we’re not confined to the physical body and thus live on in the afterlife after physical death
Where’s the error in his reasoning?
” Evolution biology cannot account for what isn’t physically reducible. So evolutionary biology cannot account for the rise of consciousness.”
This essentially ASSERTS that consciousness is NOT physically reducible because we cannot currently describe it in such terms.
That’s an error, ya’ll.
Its completely physically reducible. You see car crash victims with very impaired reasoning and awareness with head injuries.
This isn’t the smoking gun for the proof of a creator. Symmetry in everything is.
Im guessing Nagle might have autism. Only an autistic person would reason like that.
He doesn’t. But its a pretty circular argument he put forward. Something Terry Tao would like.
“That’s exactly what you’ve done in the above paragraph.”
I didn’t assume anything. Numerous arguments establish that the mental is irreducible to the physical so mental traits are irreducible to genes therefore genes cannot explain mental traits (i.e., consciousness, “intelligence”etc.). The irreducibility of the mental is not amenable to scientific investigation.
“The idea that mental traits are so special”
Mental states are irreducible to brain states. Mental traits are intentional states, thus they cannot be selected for.
“seems like the basis of all religions: we’re special, we have souls, God created us, we’re not confined to the physical body and thus live on in the afterlife after physical death”
Nope.
“consciousness is NOT physically reducible”
It isn’t.
It isn’t.
How do you know that, exactly?
Science cannot currently explain consciousness in terms of physical phenomena. Are you proclaiming that this will never, ever happen?
“Its completely physically reducible. You see car crash victims with very impaired reasoning and awareness with head injuries.”
That’s not evidence for the reducibility of the mental to the physical. The brain is a necessary pre-condition, not a sufficient condition, for consciousness and human mindedness.
“But its a pretty circular argument he put forward”
How? It’s established that the mental is irreducible to the physical. So physicalism cannot explain consciousness.
“How do you know that, exactly?”
Because the mental is irreducible to the physical.
“Are you proclaiming that this will never, ever happen?”
Yes. Physical explanations are ruled out by the arguments that establish that the mental is irreducible to the physical.
But science can. We know what parts of the brain are used in different types of functioning and awareness. People with a damaged hippocampus can’t form new memories.
Stroke victims have problems with verbal reasoning and language.
Alzheimers people are barely aware of whats going on.
Nagel basically made up a false situation that we don’t know anything about the brain. And then circular reasoned from it. We do. We know certain pharmaceuticals change our moods and senses.
Its like those econ professors making up a flase situation that humans are autistic hyper rational agents and then drawing inferences from falseness.
Of all the areas of philosophy. the thinking around consciousness is probably the most inane and boring to me. Like Puppy says it borders on religion.
There is some elements of it that are interesting like how free is free will and whether things exist outside our senses. Most of the consciousness floating stuff is rubbish.
The only time where I’ve questioned it is reading people who have near death experiences and say they could see themselves in the ambulance or the surgery theatre. This is something that has yet to be explained physically.
About 100 years ago people like RR said there was no way to explain dreams. And some people said it was god communicating with them. Now we know its the subconscious processing information in REM.
In my dreams Im aware its my subconscious, so I sometimes ask it questions about my paranoid obsessions: Is it really true? I get garbled answers. Its quite a fascinating thing to do.
I sometimes even comment on my subconscious. Ill say, “this is an illusion and shows my yearning for X or Y. I thought I accepted this”.
Philosopher that’s not evidence for psychophysical and psychological laws. The brain is a necessary pre-condition. Though not a sufficient one.
Near death experiences are interesting. I wonder if we’ll ever be able to explain it.
But the fact of the matter is, genes, or anything physical, cannot explain consciousness or other mental abilities because psychophysical and psychological laws do not exist.
This is also a ‘god of the gaps’ argument. Why assume that because a science is incomplete that this incompleteness necessarily springs from some kind of impossibility?
Just because biology can’t explain something in physical terms currently doesn’t necessarily mean that that thing is not or cannot be physically described…
..just everyone settle down.
There are no answers yet which means the matter is inconclusive. Sometimes agnosticism is the way to go.
“Why assume that because a science is incomplete that this incompleteness necessarily springs from some kind of impossibility?”
Because numerous arguments establish that the mental is irreducible to the physical. So that’s ruled out.
“Just because biology can’t explain something in physical terms currently doesn’t necessarily mean that that thing is not or cannot be physically described…”
Does everything reduce to physics?
“Sometimes agnosticism is the way to go.”
I doubt we’ll ever be able to explain the rise of consciousness and human mindedness.
Because numerous arguments establish that the mental is irreducible to the physical. So that’s ruled out.
‘numerous arguments have logically established’ many things in history that turned out to be wrong, so what?
“Does everything reduce to physics?”
I don’t know. It could.
“I doubt we’ll ever be able to explain the rise of consciousness and human mindedness.”
Lol, based on what? Current understanding?
That’s usually not a good metric.
“so what?”
Examples?
“It could.”
Based on what?
“based on what?”
Based on the arguments that establish that the mental is irreducible to the physical.
Examples?
Science has generally been a story of things only thought describable by myth/religion being increasingly described by ‘the physical.’
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science
Based on the arguments that establish that the mental is irreducible to the physical.
So a priori arguments dictate reality? No a priori argument has been rendered wrong or inaccurate due to later observation?
The presence of many counter-arguments to the arguments you’re bringing up and the popularity of materialism itself suggests that even at an ‘a priori’ level, what you say has been established has not been established.
“Science has generally been a story of things only thought describable by myth/religion being increasingly described by ‘the physical.’”
Examples?
“So a priori arguments dictate reality? No a priori argument has been rendered wrong or inaccurate due to later observation?”
Check out Davidson’s anomalousness of the mental. That, along with many others, establish that the mental is irreducible to the physical. I’ve explained the reasoning before.
“The presence of many counter-arguments to the arguments you’re bringing up and the popularity of materialism itself suggests that even at an ‘a priori’ level, what you say has been established has not been established.”
What counter-arguments?
I dont understand the way RR thinks at all. He looks for evidence on the most blatantly obvious things and then becomes a hindu mystic on other things. It doesn’t make any sense how he thinks.
I bet RR worships cows.
And then becomes hyper PC empirical if someone says women are not the same as men.
genotype has at least 0.7 correlation with phenotype.
if I am 113 IQ and my friend is 170 IQ they have 57 points more than me
0.7 * 57 = 40
at least 40 of those points must be explained by genes
I bet swank understand how a person is 40 points below himself.
But RR will say gene have no effect on intelligence at all.
He has no idea what a 57 IQ difference means.
He thinks IQ is intentional. if I will myself to be 170 IQ the mind can do it. Its all in the mind how intelligent you wish to be.
Intelligence is a social construct. and shit like that.
genes are the reason I am not 57 IQ point higher than I am right now.
genes determined my phenotype for intelligence at least 40 points relative to my friend.
“genes are the reason I am not 57 IQ point higher than I am right now.
genes determined my phenotype for intelligence at least 40 points relative to my friend.”
If intelligence is a mental state then no it doesn’t. There are no psychophysical or psychological laws so genes can’t “determine” your “intelligence”. But if intelligence is a behavior then it can be selected for but it can’t be a mental ability—genes underdetermine intellectual ability.
It doesn’t make any sense how he thinks.
the most parsimonious explanation is that he does not think.
Examples?
Lol. It’s your position that science has not ever explained anything society once thought to be confined to the realm of myth and religion?
Hohkay.
That, along with many others, establish that the mental is irreducible to the physical. I’ve explained the reasoning before.
Yes, and as a heuristic matter, do you believe the presence of (1) objections to those arguments and (2) counter-arguments to those arguments has any impact on whether the matter has actually been “established?”
There are plenty of neuroscientists who don’t seem to agree with you. Does that not give you pause?
What counter-arguments?
😀
“Lol. It’s your position that science has not ever explained anything society once thought to be confined to the realm of myth and religion?”
Because it’s the case then means it’s the case now? The arguments establish what I’ve claimed.
“Yes, and as a heuristic matter, do you believe the presence of (1) objections to those arguments and (2) counter-arguments to those arguments has any impact on whether the matter has actually been “established?””
Which counters to which arguments that establish that (1) psychophysical and psychological laws do not exist (Davidson’s argument, for example) and (2) that the mental is reducible to the physical?
“There are plenty of neuroscientists who don’t seem to agree with you.”
I don’t care. There are plenty of philosophers who don’t seem to agree with the thesis that the mind is reducible to the brain. Does that not give you pause?
“😀”
So what? Anomalous monism entails epiphenomenalism—it’s false, but that doesn’t mean that (1) the mental is reducible to the physical and (2) that psychological and psychophysical laws exist.
1) The Principle of Mental Causation: At least some mental events interact causally (directly or otherwise) with physical events
2) The Principle of the Nomological Character of Causality: Where there’s causality, there must be strict laws
3) The principle of the Anomalism of the Mental: There are no strict laws on the basis of which mental events can be predicted and explained.
Where’s the error in his reasoning?
The Libet Experiment: Is Free Will Just an Illusion?
The reasoning is very simple:
Genes cause physical traits; the mind (and “intelligence”, presumably if it is a mental trait) isn’t physical; therefore genes can’t explain the mind, psychological traits and mental abilities (e.g., intelligence).
This is why there can’t be a science of the mind and this is why the mental is not amenable to scientific investigation
Genes are necessary causes (without genes you have no organism), just like the brain is a necessary pre-condition, but not sufficient condition, for consciousness and human mindedness. Genes are difference-makers (see Sterelny and Griffiths, 1999). But genes are not difference-makers for psychological traits; genes don’t even indirectly cause psychological traits because there are no psychophysical or psychological laws.
So swank, Pumpkin, Anime kitty, and even philosopher get it, but RR doesn’t. LMAO this is gold, and fully encapsulates his stupidity!
“Genes are necessary causes (without genes you have no organism),”
Feedback loops are irrelevant to prescribing descriptive factors on particular physical phenomena. Do you get what that means retard? It’s a completely different argument from irreducible complexity: then one you’ve been propagating.
“Does that not give you pause?”
Why woudl it? Philosophy is dead.
Because it’s the case then means it’s the case now? The arguments establish what I’ve claimed.
Not necessarily but as a matter of probability, why not?
Which counters to which arguments that establish that (1) psychophysical and psychological laws do not exist (Davidson’s argument, for example) and (2) that the mental is reducible to the physical?
Go meta on this and just think that you being convinced of or by an argument does not mean that the argument has established anything as a matter of reality and that, assuming even the a priori reasoning is flawless, a well-reasoned argument necessarily reflects reality.
“It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.”
I don’t care. There are plenty of philosophers who don’t seem to agree with the thesis that the mind is reducible to the brain. Does that not give you pause?
YES, which is why I’m not the one making a pronouncement one way or the other. You are.
So what?
You’re the one who asked for counter-arguments….there are a ton. We’re not discussing the merits, we’re discussing how we should consider the issue — established/proven, or open.
1) The Principle of Mental Causation: At least some mental events interact causally (directly or otherwise) with physical events
2) The Principle of the Nomological Character of Causality: Where there’s causality, there must be strict laws
3) The principle of the Anomalism of the Mental: There are no strict laws on the basis of which mental events can be predicted and explained.
Where’s the error in his reasoning?
(3)
he confuses the inability to describe and predict mental events with there necessarily being NO WAY to describe them and that, regardless of our ability to describe them, there definitely is no mechanistic purely physical process that describes them.
It’s like saying ‘biology has not currently found a way to formulate and predict X phenomenon, therefore X phenomenon CANNOT be reduced to formula or predicted.’ You can’t assert non-existence on the basis of current ignorance.
Pretty plain error. Secular version of ‘god of the gaps.’
I think Im going to stop doing the SJW routine Pumpkin if you dont mind. I feel ill when I say such nonsense and can’t keep my repulsion in check. Ban me all you want I dont care.
I knew .Welcome back !
My dad is pretty retarded. He just watched the news twice in a row. Hahaha.
If you arent homosexual or a minority, and have a >top 1% VIQ and arent an autistic mental retard like Bill Gates or Terry Tao, you get really pissed off turning on the TV or picking up a magazine.
i need to start my own 4chan where comments will never be redacted or deleted…
EVER!
You should start your own blog, either on 4chan or wordpress. You’d be good at it. It would give you and pill a forum to discuss topics that are too taboo for even me.
You could call the blog: MUG OF PEE
i forgot.
no comment moderation except [redacted by pp, june 28, 2018]
you can’t joke about stuff like that. Sadly we live in a society that has no sense of humor, as you learned the hard way.
what the fuck are you talking about peepee?
the joke emails you sent
i never sent any joke emails peepee.
fair enough
no comments will ever be moderated except the ones from a commenter who loves oprah so much she can’t stand it.
P, please delete my previous comment. The redaction is a negation of purpose. Thank you. Respectfully, JC
No problem. Thanks for understanding.
I found this website, humanbenchmark, the other day and noticed that it had more than just reaction time tests. I know that you’ve spoken about reaction time before, and it’s correlation with IQ. However with the addition of numerical, verbal & visual memory tests, theoretically this could be used as a more accurate an IQ test. Or at least as an analog. The question is how strongly would this correlate with G? And would it correlate similarly, or less than, say; a currently available highly G-loaded test like the WAIS?
I took a screenshot of my results (if you can hazard a guess at my IQ :P) https://i.imgur.com/i4CAFZB.jpg
BTW, i’ve been following your blog for a while and have decided to join in for once.
Cool stuff. I always speculated the creators of that website had an interest in psychometrics.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/jun/28/how-to-get-away-with-financial-fraud
Very good article the Philosopher/Social Justice Warrior might like. About financial fraud in high-trust vs. low-trust societies…