Too bad they had to do it just as I was contemplating to leave Canada.
Oh, my dear country, the one I chose. After all these years you still tempt me so.
Mmmm, maybe I'm misreading jb's posts. Seems to me she can separate moral intuitions from policy considerations just fine:
I didn't say it should be illegal. I said I hate it and I think it's greedy. I also think the same thing about really large house lots, and people who consume a great deal and don't give to charity.
I hate driving in downtown, smoking in public, living in the suburbs and all sorts of stuff. I'm dead against legislations to ban them. Still hate them though. [shakes fists] Also, my intense bias against milk (severe lactose intolerance) makes me hate the entire dairy industry and people who put milk in bread and scrambled eggs.
Sort-of related...
Back when I was in elementary school in Taiwan, our standard Chinese textbook had a lesson called "Days Without Sunlight" depicting the harsh life under Chinese Communist rules. For years I believed the mainland Chinese subsisted on grass.
Japan has thousands of rocks islands that nobody cares about, and so does the Philippines. Indonesia has more useless islands than those two combined. It's impossible to know how many Japanese WWII vets are still hiding out there.
I know all this because I once read a detective manga where a bunch of people were trapped on one of those islands and got offed one by one. The killer appeared to be one such WWII vet (or was he?). Mangas teach you about life, universe, and everything.
I think what people mean by saying that they aren't culture only is that they believe genetics does matter on an individual level ... It is possible that the herditarian group could be right about it being 50% genetic while being totally wrong about racial differences being any bit genetic.
True, but my point still stands. The dichotomy between the two models regarding racial differences is very real, and it's what this debate is about.
Do we agree that Rushton and Jensen's results, such as they are, are highly questionable, if not wrong?
I do. But I'm not sure how better research is possible at present, when the very concepts of race (as a biological characteristic) and IQ (as a measure of intelligence) are under debate.
One example where Sternberg lost me, other than the values stuff:
I also believe they inadvertently create "straw men." These straw men take the form of false dichotomies, such as between the culture-only model and the hereditarian model (as though there is nothing in between)
R&J's hereditarian model is "in between" - 50% genetic, 50% environmental. Regarding IQ (which may or may not measure intelligence), the ill-defined racial groups do score differently. The culture-only model attributes 100% of the difference to the cultural bias inherent in the tests; the hereditarian model attributes at least half to genetics. This is neither false dichotomy nor straw man. Sternberg himself clearly leans toward the culture-only model regarding IQ.
Science should be about bettering the human condition.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. I think science is/should be about the search for truth/understanding, which may or may not benefit us. That leads to my main problem with Sternberg's rebuttal: the first paragraph, the talk of "values" in the second, and so on until the last paragraph, which you quoted.
As a layman, when I read one scientist's rebuttal or another's work, I expect discussions of counterexamples, methodological flaws and/or logical fallacies. The motives/values of the authors, the horrible history/implication of the research subject... they distract. Sternberg's few good points are buried under numerous such distractions.
And I nearly choked when Sternberg gives examples of "undesirable correlates of higher IQ."
I have read the study. We are discussing it. Moreover, where are the ad-hominem attacks on Rushton and Jensen? Certainly not in the published rebuttals.
I was replying to mechagrue, who said there's no need to read/discuss the study. The ad-hominem attacks happened here, and I never claimed otherwise.
In preview: what rocket88 said.
there is no pressing need for this sort of study
True, but one can say that about all sorts of studies. Science isn't always about pressing need.
there's very little need to either read the original study or give it serious discussion. The original study was flawed, biased, based on bad data, and poorly-researched.
We're supposed to know the study is that bad without reading or discussing it? How? Ad Hominem against Rushton and Jensen?
Frankly I find both the study and the rebuttals to be lacking.
The biggest fault of their report, which also plagues The Bell Curve and similar works, is that they treat the concept of 'race' as well-defined.
Exactly. "East Asians" is not a racial group - there are dozens of distinct races in China alone, if one insists on the concept of race. Neither is "blacks" or "whites", for that matter. Furthermore, black-white is categorized by skin color, East Asian by location. Apples and oranges.
Intelligence is real.
Absolutely. So is love. The question is whether they can be measured objectively.
I wait with bated to see how they'll catch overenthusiastic fans who share pre-release music in locked LJ entries. Will they send spies into fandoms? Will the fans fight back with fandom-wide witchhunts? What awesome possibilities!
Good news for a change. One can only hope Hu Jintao returns the gesture of goodwill.
I've lost all hope for the nationalist mobs. May calmer heads in government prevail. And wow, I'm counting on the CCP to be calm. How low my confidence in the people has fallen...
HK voices join Japan protestsHong Kong's demonstrators were peaceful in contrast to their often raucous, rock- and paint-throwing counterparts on the mainland. And there were explicit calls here for China also to reassess its history by revisiting the June 4, 1989, Tiananmen massacre.
Demonstrating once again the fundamental difference between China and Hong Kong. But that's no cause for joy, because...
While the protesters were asking the Japanese government to respect history, the majority were not happy when it was suggested that the Chinese government do the same.
Oh the brain-dead hypocrisy. Apparently reunification hasn't done Hong Kong much good.
As China won't stop using coal until the environmental damage and human death toll pass the breaking point, so it won't stop lending to America until either economy crashes. Risk, however great, does not propel the Chinese government to take effective action that will result in significant short-term pains.
Japan doesn't seem much different. They still haven't gotten around to deal with the bad loans in their banking sector after... how many years? And they have arguably the worst population-aging crisis among developed countries, with the biggest baby-boomer group entering retirement during 2007-9. Domestic cosumer spending will drop, and China's not a market Japan can rely on (hi, topic). They need American consumers.
I don't think anyone should count on anything indefinitely; all I'm saying is that America's creditors will end up worse off than itself whatever happens.
fuyugare: When it comes to quitting addictive bad policies, the Chinese government is rarely up to the task. See: coal.
StoryBored: Modern China has actually been the least dangerous as a neighbor during the self-inflicted catastrophes you mentioned. When the Chinese were too busy starving and killing each other, they did't bother anyone else.
There is over a century of anger and distrust
True. The anti-Japan racist vitriol in Chinese writings go back centuries.
StoryBored: Beyond justice, there is always struggle over power and resources. China wants to remain the sole Asian nation in the UN security council, while Japan wants in. China and Japan compete to secure oil supplies from around the world, most notably Russia (the latest round went to Japan iirc). Both claim sovereignty over the oil-rich Diaoyu islands. A great number of Chinese fear that Japan may invade its neighbors again one day (I know, ain't people stupid?); many Japanese fear the rising of a fascist superpower. So on and so forth.
he has many female fans who aspire to be just like his wife AhahaHAHAHA. That is awesome. So this is going the Densha Otoko route? Yet more awesome.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
In "Curious George: Remembering the dotcom era."
Life was better for me then. I miss the illusions. Thought I was meant for a fabulous career in IT...
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
In "China invades!"
I thought Chinese used 國 instead of 国 The former's traditional Chinese, the latter simplified.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
In "Same-sex marriage legislation passes!"
Too bad they had to do it just as I was contemplating to leave Canada. Oh, my dear country, the one I chose. After all these years you still tempt me so.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
In "The biggest financial bubble in history is about to burst ."
Mmmm, maybe I'm misreading jb's posts. Seems to me she can separate moral intuitions from policy considerations just fine: I didn't say it should be illegal. I said I hate it and I think it's greedy. I also think the same thing about really large house lots, and people who consume a great deal and don't give to charity. I hate driving in downtown, smoking in public, living in the suburbs and all sorts of stuff. I'm dead against legislations to ban them. Still hate them though. [shakes fists] Also, my intense bias against milk (severe lactose intolerance) makes me hate the entire dairy industry and people who put milk in bread and scrambled eggs.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
In "Dear Japan, We hate you. "
Sort-of related... Back when I was in elementary school in Taiwan, our standard Chinese textbook had a lesson called "Days Without Sunlight" depicting the harsh life under Chinese Communist rules. For years I believed the mainland Chinese subsisted on grass.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
In "Bugger me!"
Japan has thousands of
rocksislands that nobody cares about, and so does the Philippines. Indonesia has more useless islands than those two combined. It's impossible to know how many Japanese WWII vets are still hiding out there. I know all this because I once read a detective manga where a bunch of people were trapped on one of those islands and got offed one by one. The killer appeared to be one such WWII vet (or was he?). Mangas teach you about life, universe, and everything.posted by kenshin 18 years ago
In "Study claims IQ differences at least 50% genetic"
I think what people mean by saying that they aren't culture only is that they believe genetics does matter on an individual level ... It is possible that the herditarian group could be right about it being 50% genetic while being totally wrong about racial differences being any bit genetic. True, but my point still stands. The dichotomy between the two models regarding racial differences is very real, and it's what this debate is about. Do we agree that Rushton and Jensen's results, such as they are, are highly questionable, if not wrong? I do. But I'm not sure how better research is possible at present, when the very concepts of race (as a biological characteristic) and IQ (as a measure of intelligence) are under debate.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
One example where Sternberg lost me, other than the values stuff: I also believe they inadvertently create "straw men." These straw men take the form of false dichotomies, such as between the culture-only model and the hereditarian model (as though there is nothing in between) R&J's hereditarian model is "in between" - 50% genetic, 50% environmental. Regarding IQ (which may or may not measure intelligence), the ill-defined racial groups do score differently. The culture-only model attributes 100% of the difference to the cultural bias inherent in the tests; the hereditarian model attributes at least half to genetics. This is neither false dichotomy nor straw man. Sternberg himself clearly leans toward the culture-only model regarding IQ.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
Science should be about bettering the human condition. We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. I think science is/should be about the search for truth/understanding, which may or may not benefit us. That leads to my main problem with Sternberg's rebuttal: the first paragraph, the talk of "values" in the second, and so on until the last paragraph, which you quoted. As a layman, when I read one scientist's rebuttal or another's work, I expect discussions of counterexamples, methodological flaws and/or logical fallacies. The motives/values of the authors, the horrible history/implication of the research subject... they distract. Sternberg's few good points are buried under numerous such distractions. And I nearly choked when Sternberg gives examples of "undesirable correlates of higher IQ." I have read the study. We are discussing it. Moreover, where are the ad-hominem attacks on Rushton and Jensen? Certainly not in the published rebuttals. I was replying to mechagrue, who said there's no need to read/discuss the study. The ad-hominem attacks happened here, and I never claimed otherwise. In preview: what rocket88 said.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
there is no pressing need for this sort of study True, but one can say that about all sorts of studies. Science isn't always about pressing need. there's very little need to either read the original study or give it serious discussion. The original study was flawed, biased, based on bad data, and poorly-researched. We're supposed to know the study is that bad without reading or discussing it? How? Ad Hominem against Rushton and Jensen? Frankly I find both the study and the rebuttals to be lacking.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
The biggest fault of their report, which also plagues The Bell Curve and similar works, is that they treat the concept of 'race' as well-defined. Exactly. "East Asians" is not a racial group - there are dozens of distinct races in China alone, if one insists on the concept of race. Neither is "blacks" or "whites", for that matter. Furthermore, black-white is categorized by skin color, East Asian by location. Apples and oranges. Intelligence is real. Absolutely. So is love. The question is whether they can be measured objectively.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
I doubt science is above anything. Just saying.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
In "Share files, get 3 years in jail"
... bated breath. Being an overenthusiastic fan who's shared much pre-release music has made me such a dumbass.
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
I wait with bated to see how they'll catch overenthusiastic fans who share pre-release music in locked LJ entries. Will they send spies into fandoms? Will the fans fight back with fandom-wide witchhunts? What awesome possibilities!
posted by kenshin 18 years ago
In "The war on history"
Good news for a change. One can only hope Hu Jintao returns the gesture of goodwill. I've lost all hope for the nationalist mobs. May calmer heads in government prevail. And wow, I'm counting on the CCP to be calm. How low my confidence in the people has fallen...
posted by kenshin 19 years ago
HK voices join Japan protests Hong Kong's demonstrators were peaceful in contrast to their often raucous, rock- and paint-throwing counterparts on the mainland. And there were explicit calls here for China also to reassess its history by revisiting the June 4, 1989, Tiananmen massacre. Demonstrating once again the fundamental difference between China and Hong Kong. But that's no cause for joy, because... While the protesters were asking the Japanese government to respect history, the majority were not happy when it was suggested that the Chinese government do the same. Oh the brain-dead hypocrisy. Apparently reunification hasn't done Hong Kong much good.
posted by kenshin 19 years ago
As China won't stop using coal until the environmental damage and human death toll pass the breaking point, so it won't stop lending to America until either economy crashes. Risk, however great, does not propel the Chinese government to take effective action that will result in significant short-term pains. Japan doesn't seem much different. They still haven't gotten around to deal with the bad loans in their banking sector after... how many years? And they have arguably the worst population-aging crisis among developed countries, with the biggest baby-boomer group entering retirement during 2007-9. Domestic cosumer spending will drop, and China's not a market Japan can rely on (hi, topic). They need American consumers. I don't think anyone should count on anything indefinitely; all I'm saying is that America's creditors will end up worse off than itself whatever happens.
posted by kenshin 19 years ago
fuyugare: When it comes to quitting addictive bad policies, the Chinese government is rarely up to the task. See: coal. StoryBored: Modern China has actually been the least dangerous as a neighbor during the self-inflicted catastrophes you mentioned. When the Chinese were too busy starving and killing each other, they did't bother anyone else. There is over a century of anger and distrust True. The anti-Japan racist vitriol in Chinese writings go back centuries.
posted by kenshin 19 years ago
StoryBored: Beyond justice, there is always struggle over power and resources. China wants to remain the sole Asian nation in the UN security council, while Japan wants in. China and Japan compete to secure oil supplies from around the world, most notably Russia (the latest round went to Japan iirc). Both claim sovereignty over the oil-rich Diaoyu islands. A great number of Chinese fear that Japan may invade its neighbors again one day (I know, ain't people stupid?); many Japanese fear the rising of a fascist superpower. So on and so forth.
posted by kenshin 19 years ago
(limited to the most recent 20 comments)