'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science? • Hacker News Board

Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?

#211

Post by lazyasciiart » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:46 AM UTC

tenpies wrote: post #113

ratsmack wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about a correlation between IQ and race. It seems that no one will touch the subject out of fear the it would end their career.

Not even race, but just suggesting that evolutionary psychology is a valid scientific field can get you crucified in some circles. Somehow the human brain avoided all sexual selection forces, environmental pressures, and even difference between the sexes; but everything else in our bodies was at the complete mercy of these factors.

" can get you crucified in some circles."

That's....not exactly the same as being globally suppressed. Stephen Pinker seems to have not only survived but done quite well.

Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?

#212

Post by barry-cotter » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:51 AM UTC

spicymaki wrote: post #161

barry-cotter wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we’re not going to find research because it’s useless that’s the humanities gone. All of the topics you mentioned have been done and are being done. The point of IQ research is that it effects real life outcomes that we care about, like health, education, social status, criminal behavior, STI status, having children outside marriage, many others. If two groups are assumed to be identical but they have different ou…

Funny how environment is continually dropped from the conversation of race in favor of heritability. You note that there is now East African dominance in marathon running. That has not always been the case however. As East Africans were provided opportunity to compete on a level playing field their talents whether inherited, conditioned by demand, and/or environmental were demonstrated. Now there is intense competiti…

> West Africans and East African are of the same race, but differ in the case of marathon outcomes. Why can’t this be true for intellect?

It can be. Among Africans Igbo show much higher levels of educational attainment than others. I’m sure there are other groups this is true of.

> Discrimination is not some leftist fantasy. Black Americans have been systematically deprived of quality environments for over 400 years. I am talking about truly horrific intellectual deprivation from making it illegal to read during slavery to living in highly polluted sections of segregated cities today. When we talk about intellectual disparities history needs to be part of the conversation.

I agree. For example Irish IQ scores were historically lower than English and this is no longer true.

Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?

#213

Post by toomim » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:54 AM UTC

jdauriemma wrote: post #165

barry-cotter wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every result ever has pointed that all races and genders are equally "intelligent" and well-suited to the same tasks. This isn’t true. Ashkenazi Jews and East Asians have higher IQ scores than whites. Male and female scores on IQ tests are identical by construction. They have different scores on the component sub tests. http://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1997mainstrea... Mainstream Science on Intelligen…

Those bell curves don't control for environmental and other non-genetic factors, making your statements - insofar as they are based on the document you linked - irrelevant to the conversation.

He wasn't commenting on which factors cause difference in test scores. He was simply saying that the test scores are different.

But it's become an unfortunate pattern that when people bring up the difference in scores, other people (like you) presume that mentioning the correlation data itself is akin to arguing that they are caused by genetic factors, and then attack them for not mentioning the environmental factors.

Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?

#214

Post by michalf6 » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:54 AM UTC

Herbert Marcuse's essay "Repressive Tolerance" is required reading when discussing these issues, it's where it all started:

https://www.marcuse.org/herbert/publications/1960s/1965-repr...

Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?

#215

Post by rfdbsd » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:55 AM UTC

frogger23127 wrote: post #201

specialist wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're claiming that Watson's views of IQ, genetics, and race are scientific?

Absolutely. Your negative emotional reaction to scientific research is not a valid refutation of that research. Science is based on logic, not emotions. Facts do not care about your feelings.

None of his racist, sexist and homophobic comments are conclusions drawn from his work. He is just a foul and bitter man whose terrible personal views are sadly and foolishly taken seriously, due to his prestige and authority.

YOU tell me how any of these bold and outlandish claims are actually based on sound research and logic.

Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?

#216

Post by plumednom » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:56 AM UTC

barry-cotter wrote: post #94

alasdair_ wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'm not suggesting choosing between left and right, only pointing out that the bias is pervasive and undeniable. Can you point to specific examples of this where the science is actually robust and well documented but has somehow been blocked from being published or otherwise stopped due to this pervasive bias?

You’re asking people to prove a negative, and also assuming that there’s no chilling effect as people learn that certain topics are not a good idea if you want a career. The premier example of robust, well documented science with vociferous opposition has to be intelligence. Besides scholars with a fiercer attachment to their politics than the truth like Gould you also have introductory psychology textbooks that go o…

Whoa crap, I googled hypatia and realized I've been seeing her profile on OKCupid for like 15 years now. Glad I'm the only nerd who can't keep a relationship together!

Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?

#217

Post by frogger23127 » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 7:00 AM UTC

rfdbsd wrote: post #215

frogger23127 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. Your negative emotional reaction to scientific research is not a valid refutation of that research. Science is based on logic, not emotions. Facts do not care about your feelings.

None of his racist, sexist and homophobic comments are conclusions drawn from his work. He is just a foul and bitter man whose terrible personal views are sadly and foolishly taken seriously, due to his prestige and authority. YOU tell me how any of these bold and outlandish claims are actually based on sound research and logic.

No, you should tell us how they are not based on sound research and logic.

Of course, some of what he says may just be his personal opinions. You say that he is a foul and bitter man with terrible personal views, but that is your own opinion and not objectively true.

Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?

#218

Post by barry-cotter » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 7:02 AM UTC

soyiuz wrote: post #190

barry-cotter wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we’re not going to find research because it’s useless that’s the humanities gone. All of the topics you mentioned have been done and are being done. The point of IQ research is that it effects real life outcomes that we care about, like health, education, social status, criminal behavior, STI status, having children outside marriage, many others. If two groups are assumed to be identical but they have different ou…

"East Africans are crushingly dominant in marathon running." To be more precise, East Africans from East Africa. The effect of biology dissipates in East African communities living abroad.

Yes, if people have other better opportunities then they’re likely to pursue those. I highly doubt they dissipate entirely, if only because biomechanics don’t change. Being tall and skinny with long legs compared to most people will place those of East African ancestry at an advantage for long distance running regardless of culture. As the East African diaspora increases you’ll see more nationalities represented among successful long distance runners but I doubt there’ll be much dispersion in the ancestry of successful long distance runners. The West African diaspora are dominant in sprinting worldwide to a ridiculous extent. I think there are two men ever who don’t fit that profile among those who have run 100m in under ten seconds.

Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?

#219

Post by rfdbsd » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 7:03 AM UTC

deogeo wrote: post #125

Fishysoup wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Two and two may equal four" being a bunch of nonsensical racist slandering based on no evidence. Every result ever has pointed that all races and genders are equally "intelligent" and well-suited to the same tasks. And trust me, there's been no lack of racist scientists. It's just that bullshit doesn't stick.

> Every result ever has pointed that all races and genders are equally "intelligent" and well-suited to the same tasks. Really? The strongest rebuttals I ever saw boiled down to "it has not yet been conclusively proven impossible that all races are equally intelligent". Large meta-analyses certainly always find correlation, this one goes a long way towards showing there is causation as well: https://doi.org/10.1111%2…

> Large meta-analyses certainly always find correlation

No legitimate study has actually shown that such correlations are caused by genetic factors. However, numerous studies have shown that social factors (i.e. not having access to good schools, not having access to decent healthcare, etc, which statistically and historically correspond with racial divisions) play a major role.

Re: 'Cancel Culture' Comes to Science?

#220

Post by toomim » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 7:05 AM UTC

soyiuz wrote: post #187

toasterlovin wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A racial label doesn't tell you much of anything about their underlying ancestry or genetics. It absolutely does, which is why medical practitioners ask for race. Different races have different susceptibility to various medical conditions, for genetic reasons (even if we don’t understand the causal mechanisms yet).

Please review your basic understanding of race as per my comments above. If you still think there are five races or whatever, you are living way in the past century.

Your argument is that people do not teach Race in the same way anymore. I think that your implication is that the previous way of teaching Race was wrong -- however, this very article is making the point that political activism is changing the way that people teach, and politics has certainly affected how we teach Race -- the most politically-charged topic of them all!

So when you say "you are living in the past century", that could be a compliment -- it could say that the author is not being censored or brainwashed by a political orthodoxy.

If you actually want to improve his understanding of Race, I'd suggest providing him with some data that contradicts his statements, rather than just dismissing him as old-fashioned. Because on the other side of that, it implies that you could just be getting lost in a fashion.