There appear to be significant differences between the IQ means of various racial groups indicating Ashkenazi Jews & East Asians at the top, Europeans in the middle and blacks at the bottom.
However whilst it is clear IQ is measuring something, arguably it's not all that clear what it is measuring. For example Europeans 100 years ago would have scored an average IQ of 70 on today's tests which falls into the 'mentally disabled' category and well below the acceptable minimum to join the US Army.
Clearly my great grandad and everyone he knew were not morons and the continual re-calibration of IQ tests has been described by the Flynn effect.
What does this mean for the racially different means recorded for IQ tests?
What can be learnt from the reaction to your role in the Arday affair about the rising crisis of antisemitism building in academia and the double standards prevalent towards Jews compared to other minorities?
What will it take to get an investigation into the Cambridge officials who hired Jason Arday? Do they not have a fiduciary-type responsibility to the public to serve it's interest?
Tired's answer should include: for background for those not familiar with academia, explain the typical committee process including the infighting and back stabbing and contrast to Cambridge's treatment of Arday.
I saw him on the Winston Marshall show. My mind was blown how far academia has fallen away from critical thinking and debate. It is probably why the West is in a mess. Meritocracy has been run over by factions and that is very dangerous in academia and in all walks of life. I am not sure I have a question other than how do we fix this (in academia), hoping that we are not too far gone down the rabbit hole.
In academia you survive by publishing but you can only publish if you discover something or have positive results. This makes people very risk averse as every project has to work from a master's to post doc. How can we reinclude the ability to fail?
Thomas Sowell addressed this and made the point "two brothers can be brought up , same parents, same love, same social circle, same environment, same country, same laws, same finacial input, same school etc etc but STILL grow up and make widely different choices and outcomes of their lives"
Why do you think universities are “protecting” people because of their skin colour, and beliefs? Why have they deviated from the search for truth and settled for not offending people?
Do you think the underlying problem is one of errors, bias or lies?
i.e. Accuracy vs precision.
Errors are morally acceptable and hopefully correctable.
Bias and lies requires punishment.
To me the problem with academia is one of bias and lies. not errors / mistakes. There is high precision, in that outcomes are predictable based on knowing the bias of the people within the academy, but they are clearly not aligned with truth.
When the IQ differences are measured, I'm assuming the same, or very similar test / variables are administered to all, and then broken out by race. Is that correct? The environment / genetic question is critical to the discussion. How confident are you that we can answer which is a bigger influence on IQ...if either one is at all? The "what" is the test scores. The "why" is "what" influences the test scores. "Why" and "how" are critical to answering that question in a meaningful way.
When Woke idealogues demand that people affirm an obvious lie we often observe that demand as Orwellian in that it encourages doublethink. Beyond the immediate goals of the Woke to get the public to go along with specific policy goals, do you think there is a more fundamental objective in that the real goal could be to train the rest of society to be comfortable with doublethink?
O’Brian really didn’t care if Smith thought 2+2 was actually 5, he cared that he could convince Smith to engage in doublethink that 2+2=5 was true.
Hi Nathan. I also got red pilled by Charles Murray and the race-IQ literature, and agree with you that it’s the best way to have an existential crisis.
However, I recently stated moving away from this position given the history of ‘inferior peoples’ becoming non-inferior peoples given the passage of time. Racist stereotypes of the Chinese in the 19th century parallel the ‘starving Africans’ narrative we hear more recently. What’s to say that, say, Nigeria, or some other random African country will be a growing economy, much in the same way Britain used to be a cultural backwater in the 15th century, and Japan in the 18th, and various other examples which have now flipped in the global rankings?
There appear to be significant differences between the IQ means of various racial groups indicating Ashkenazi Jews & East Asians at the top, Europeans in the middle and blacks at the bottom.
However whilst it is clear IQ is measuring something, arguably it's not all that clear what it is measuring. For example Europeans 100 years ago would have scored an average IQ of 70 on today's tests which falls into the 'mentally disabled' category and well below the acceptable minimum to join the US Army.
Clearly my great grandad and everyone he knew were not morons and the continual re-calibration of IQ tests has been described by the Flynn effect.
What does this mean for the racially different means recorded for IQ tests?
What can be learnt from the reaction to your role in the Arday affair about the rising crisis of antisemitism building in academia and the double standards prevalent towards Jews compared to other minorities?
What will it take to get an investigation into the Cambridge officials who hired Jason Arday? Do they not have a fiduciary-type responsibility to the public to serve it's interest?
damn, that's a good quesiton. second.
Tired's answer should include: for background for those not familiar with academia, explain the typical committee process including the infighting and back stabbing and contrast to Cambridge's treatment of Arday.
I saw him on the Winston Marshall show. My mind was blown how far academia has fallen away from critical thinking and debate. It is probably why the West is in a mess. Meritocracy has been run over by factions and that is very dangerous in academia and in all walks of life. I am not sure I have a question other than how do we fix this (in academia), hoping that we are not too far gone down the rabbit hole.
In academia you survive by publishing but you can only publish if you discover something or have positive results. This makes people very risk averse as every project has to work from a master's to post doc. How can we reinclude the ability to fail?
What evidence would convince you that average group differences in cognitive ability are entirely environmental rather than partly genetic?
Thomas Sowell addressed this and made the point "two brothers can be brought up , same parents, same love, same social circle, same environment, same country, same laws, same finacial input, same school etc etc but STILL grow up and make widely different choices and outcomes of their lives"
Good. I know KK loves Sowell, so let's see if he brings that up.
My Lord I used to think Nick Ferrari was his own man.
Not heard him in ages but obviously he’s gone down the Piers Morgan route.
Gaslighting , over talking and hoping to provoke his victim into miss speaking.
For evermore using that as proof he’s a forensic journalist brilliantly exposing the flaw in someone’s character.
What a disappointment! Another one’s taken the easy ride of secure employment adhering to LBC bias!
Sorry not a question just a frustrated rant!
Why do you think universities are “protecting” people because of their skin colour, and beliefs? Why have they deviated from the search for truth and settled for not offending people?
Can academia regain the trust?
Get him to explain exactly what “race realism” is - with examples.
Do you think the underlying problem is one of errors, bias or lies?
i.e. Accuracy vs precision.
Errors are morally acceptable and hopefully correctable.
Bias and lies requires punishment.
To me the problem with academia is one of bias and lies. not errors / mistakes. There is high precision, in that outcomes are predictable based on knowing the bias of the people within the academy, but they are clearly not aligned with truth.
Has Mr Cofnas considered moving to the United States?
When the IQ differences are measured, I'm assuming the same, or very similar test / variables are administered to all, and then broken out by race. Is that correct? The environment / genetic question is critical to the discussion. How confident are you that we can answer which is a bigger influence on IQ...if either one is at all? The "what" is the test scores. The "why" is "what" influences the test scores. "Why" and "how" are critical to answering that question in a meaningful way.
Geezus ! That Nick Ferrari guy should try that sh*t with Konstantin !
When Woke idealogues demand that people affirm an obvious lie we often observe that demand as Orwellian in that it encourages doublethink. Beyond the immediate goals of the Woke to get the public to go along with specific policy goals, do you think there is a more fundamental objective in that the real goal could be to train the rest of society to be comfortable with doublethink?
O’Brian really didn’t care if Smith thought 2+2 was actually 5, he cared that he could convince Smith to engage in doublethink that 2+2=5 was true.
Hi Nathan. I also got red pilled by Charles Murray and the race-IQ literature, and agree with you that it’s the best way to have an existential crisis.
However, I recently stated moving away from this position given the history of ‘inferior peoples’ becoming non-inferior peoples given the passage of time. Racist stereotypes of the Chinese in the 19th century parallel the ‘starving Africans’ narrative we hear more recently. What’s to say that, say, Nigeria, or some other random African country will be a growing economy, much in the same way Britain used to be a cultural backwater in the 15th century, and Japan in the 18th, and various other examples which have now flipped in the global rankings?