So you're saying that white men in particular are especially intelligent, creative, and empathetic - more so than any other race despite factual evidence otherwise? The top five countries with the highest IQs aren't European. In fact, Asians score better on IQ tests in both America and Asia despite the fact that it was constructed in the west. I also don't believe that you truly understand how questionable IQ tests are. According to data, in 1900 the average American had an IQ of 70 which is equivalent to mental retardation. It's gone up substantially due to the Flynn Effect (which I'll let you research on your own). Furthermore, I'm sure that an inherently empathetic people wouldn't own slaves. Creativity is entirely objective.
I support you appreciating European civilization. It has an amazing history! However, why ignore Egypt, China, Ghana, Mali, Nubia, and countless others? Hell, Arabic civilizations were perhaps the most impressive in terms of math and astronomy. central african "savages" were performing successful C sections in which the child and mother survived as early as 1879. The world is filled with beauty. Don't ignore half of it to fit your own racist (and yes, thinking white men are naturally superior is racist) ideologies.
Nice strawman, but I don't remember saying white men had the highest IQ scores. Let me copypasta what I DID say:
"There's something about us white guys: a combination of IQ, creativity, and empathy that is geared towards civilization-building."
Notice that I said it's a combination. Never said they (white men) were the single greatest at any particular attribute. Often it's not about being the best at a certain thing, but being good at several things in order to make something: be it a company, a country, a civilization and so on. It's really more about the skillset, which I argue white men have the best when it comes to civilizing.
The technological and societal advantages brought into the world by white men are so numerous that I don't believe I need to write an exhaustive list. But to put it into perspective: an advance made by a woman or person of color is notable because the norm IS the white male.
We can go into IQ some more if you want to carry the argument there. My perspective is that IQ is determined through genetics. Nature > Nurture. Do you agree with this?
You're not understanding. Whether your argument is that white men are the best or simply good, I addressed that each of these points is void. Let me recount my own arguments in an easily digestible manner.
1) IQ has questionable validity at best, hence the idea that people in 1900 were entirely mentally retarded. Even if it was valid, white men didn't do better than average at a test they themselves made.
2) Creativity is a vague concept that's completely objective and thus can't be measured.
3) An empathetic demographic doesn't continue to enslave human beings and treat them subhuman until 1960 - at a point where they were intelligent enough to understand how to build a nuclear bomb.
I'm not saying that white men are evil. They're just people like anyone else. They're not all especially intelligent or kind or creative - they just exist. I'm sure I don't have to tell you how women weren't seen as much more than baby machines while minorities weren't seen as much more than cattle until recently. When you're not allowed to read or speak without being beaten - it's difficult to achieve as much as a demographic where such things are encouraged.
I don't agree with that, and neither does science. It's agreed upon by developmental and behavioral psychologists that nature and nurture work in equal parts to shape who we become.
How about we try going at it with this approach: what attributes are we born with, and how would these attributes change our tendency towards crime, creativity or intellectual pursuits?
Here's a few attributes to consider:
1. Hormone levels: testosterone and estrogen
2. Skin pigmentation: melanin
3. IQ
Your most recent post seems to discount IQ but you were quite intent on it during your first reply, when you tried to disprove a strawman argument against me.
What if I said higher testosterone levels increases sexuality and aggression? You with me on that? Now what if I said melanin did the same?
Melanotan II is a peptide that bodybuilders use to help them tan. It works by stimulating the release of melanin from the skin. It is also increases sexual function.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanotan_II
Do you see where I'm going with this? Do you see the recipe for disaster? Aggression and sexual drive are absolutely huge variables when it comes to criminal activity. Do you agree with this statement?
Before I address this further, I want to allow you to reassess your arguments.
1. I need better sources than "science direct" and "wikipedia" like dude. Have you ever done research before?
2. In my first point I said, " I also don't believe that you truly understand how questionable IQ tests are. According to data, in 1900 the average American had an IQ of 70 which is equivalent to mental retardation. It's gone up substantially due to the Flynn Effect (which I'll let you research on your own)." I just repeated my point again in the second edition.
Luckily for me, Im in a Human Anatomy course in which we just discussed melanin and melanocytes so I'll be back with a more detailed scientific explanation soon! I just feel like these are major lessons you need to learn considering debate.
I appreciate your generosity and look forward to your more detailed, scientific explanation on melanin. I'm trying to think of an approach where we can actually engage in a debate and not simply try to lecture each other while trying to be as condescending as possible.
I propose we answer one question of the other's and then ask one of our own. No side-stepping, we'd each give honest replies addressing the question to the best of our ability. Since I proposed it, I'll go first:
Aggression and sexual drive are absolutely huge variables when it comes to criminal activity. Do you agree with this statement?
Is it normal to think civilization lags in South America and Africa?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
So you're saying that white men in particular are especially intelligent, creative, and empathetic - more so than any other race despite factual evidence otherwise? The top five countries with the highest IQs aren't European. In fact, Asians score better on IQ tests in both America and Asia despite the fact that it was constructed in the west. I also don't believe that you truly understand how questionable IQ tests are. According to data, in 1900 the average American had an IQ of 70 which is equivalent to mental retardation. It's gone up substantially due to the Flynn Effect (which I'll let you research on your own). Furthermore, I'm sure that an inherently empathetic people wouldn't own slaves. Creativity is entirely objective.
I support you appreciating European civilization. It has an amazing history! However, why ignore Egypt, China, Ghana, Mali, Nubia, and countless others? Hell, Arabic civilizations were perhaps the most impressive in terms of math and astronomy. central african "savages" were performing successful C sections in which the child and mother survived as early as 1879. The world is filled with beauty. Don't ignore half of it to fit your own racist (and yes, thinking white men are naturally superior is racist) ideologies.
1. https://iq-research.info/en/average-iq-by-country
2. https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf
3. http://www.mhs.ox.ac.uk/scienceislam_education/docs/Science_and_technology_in_Medieval_Islam-Teachers_notes.pdf
4. https://fn.bmj.com/content/80/3/F250
--
bubsy
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Nice strawman, but I don't remember saying white men had the highest IQ scores. Let me copypasta what I DID say:
"There's something about us white guys: a combination of IQ, creativity, and empathy that is geared towards civilization-building."
Notice that I said it's a combination. Never said they (white men) were the single greatest at any particular attribute. Often it's not about being the best at a certain thing, but being good at several things in order to make something: be it a company, a country, a civilization and so on. It's really more about the skillset, which I argue white men have the best when it comes to civilizing.
The technological and societal advantages brought into the world by white men are so numerous that I don't believe I need to write an exhaustive list. But to put it into perspective: an advance made by a woman or person of color is notable because the norm IS the white male.
We can go into IQ some more if you want to carry the argument there. My perspective is that IQ is determined through genetics. Nature > Nurture. Do you agree with this?
--
cinderfloof
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
You're not understanding. Whether your argument is that white men are the best or simply good, I addressed that each of these points is void. Let me recount my own arguments in an easily digestible manner.
1) IQ has questionable validity at best, hence the idea that people in 1900 were entirely mentally retarded. Even if it was valid, white men didn't do better than average at a test they themselves made.
2) Creativity is a vague concept that's completely objective and thus can't be measured.
3) An empathetic demographic doesn't continue to enslave human beings and treat them subhuman until 1960 - at a point where they were intelligent enough to understand how to build a nuclear bomb.
I'm not saying that white men are evil. They're just people like anyone else. They're not all especially intelligent or kind or creative - they just exist. I'm sure I don't have to tell you how women weren't seen as much more than baby machines while minorities weren't seen as much more than cattle until recently. When you're not allowed to read or speak without being beaten - it's difficult to achieve as much as a demographic where such things are encouraged.
I don't agree with that, and neither does science. It's agreed upon by developmental and behavioral psychologists that nature and nurture work in equal parts to shape who we become.
1) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4513026/
--
bubsy
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
How about we try going at it with this approach: what attributes are we born with, and how would these attributes change our tendency towards crime, creativity or intellectual pursuits?
Here's a few attributes to consider:
1. Hormone levels: testosterone and estrogen
2. Skin pigmentation: melanin
3. IQ
Your most recent post seems to discount IQ but you were quite intent on it during your first reply, when you tried to disprove a strawman argument against me.
What if I said higher testosterone levels increases sexuality and aggression? You with me on that? Now what if I said melanin did the same?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912000840
Melanotan II is a peptide that bodybuilders use to help them tan. It works by stimulating the release of melanin from the skin. It is also increases sexual function.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanotan_II
Do you see where I'm going with this? Do you see the recipe for disaster? Aggression and sexual drive are absolutely huge variables when it comes to criminal activity. Do you agree with this statement?
--
cinderfloof
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Before I address this further, I want to allow you to reassess your arguments.
1. I need better sources than "science direct" and "wikipedia" like dude. Have you ever done research before?
2. In my first point I said, " I also don't believe that you truly understand how questionable IQ tests are. According to data, in 1900 the average American had an IQ of 70 which is equivalent to mental retardation. It's gone up substantially due to the Flynn Effect (which I'll let you research on your own)." I just repeated my point again in the second edition.
Luckily for me, Im in a Human Anatomy course in which we just discussed melanin and melanocytes so I'll be back with a more detailed scientific explanation soon! I just feel like these are major lessons you need to learn considering debate.
--
nikkiclaire
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
bubsy
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
How often do you need to repeat yourself?
I appreciate your generosity and look forward to your more detailed, scientific explanation on melanin. I'm trying to think of an approach where we can actually engage in a debate and not simply try to lecture each other while trying to be as condescending as possible.
I propose we answer one question of the other's and then ask one of our own. No side-stepping, we'd each give honest replies addressing the question to the best of our ability. Since I proposed it, I'll go first:
Aggression and sexual drive are absolutely huge variables when it comes to criminal activity. Do you agree with this statement?