Segregation Returns to US Schools

[The Lurker Below]

Sure, it's of course a very nice present for those who are already convincd but on a scale from 1 to 10, where would you put the argument, there are simply studies that take race into the equation. I haven't read them, but social-econonics and ethicity will always be a bit of a chicken&egg thing. I know what I expect, but no way I could ever be sure about it, it's impossible. But not t be dismissed in my humble opinion.

Maybe one of the reasons these studies are so bitterly debated and refuted is that they are all about math. ie "scale from 1 to 10". How valid can a measurement of human emotion, which frequently is not rational or logical, and defies math, really be? Having said that I'm sure somebody will respond with links to some psychological studies that claim to measure human motivation. Sorry Fragony, I guess to answer your question my opinion is that race is a 1 on that scale. Are there generations of training incorporated into our DNA that will take more generations to unlearn? But ultimately, race is not the underlying cause of the problems.

[Strike For The South]

And what is white? what is black? What is hispanic?

Will someone who believes in races explain to me how we classify them?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

And what is white? what is black? What is hispanic?

Will someone who believes in races explain to me how we classify them?

The only definitions that would remain valid are cultural definitions. "Race" per se is pretty well unsupportable. Once you open it up to a cultural definition, you have to accept that all of us embody a multiplicity of cultural identities, only one of which might be labeled -- for convenience -- based on melanin content.

[Strike For The South]

The only definitions that would remain valid are cultural definitions. "Race" per se is pretty well unsupportable. Once you open it up to a cultural definition, you have to accept that all of us embody a multiplicity of cultural identities, only one of which might be labeled -- for convenience -- based on melanin content.

But this per se invalidates any sort of suspicion based on race?

[HopAlongBunny]

Maybe the "meaningful" segregation is between have and have-not; even with this qualifier it is hard to explain why the US does so poorly in international comparisons - The US sucks, but parts can look good when compared to other parts within a system
that fails.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27442541

[HoreTore]

And what is white? what is black? What is hispanic?

Will someone who believes in races explain to me how we classify them?

For something that is claimed to be so obvious, it sure is hard to get a straight answer of just what it is.

[PanzerJaeger]

And what is white? what is black? What is hispanic?

Will someone who believes in races explain to me how we classify them?

Why don't we use the Census Bureau's model and allow people to self select, which is kind of the point. Race does exist in the US in 2014, at least in a social context; and it is clear that it has an effect on educational outcomes above and beyond economic factors. Unfortunately, intellectually lazy appeals to geneticism, while scientifically valid, ignore the impact that racially-derived cultural attitudes have on real people. Being born to self identified black parents automatically places one at a significant comparable disadvantage versus other racial groups, regardless of economic station. That's reality, and frankly, reciting the same line on race you read on Salon five years ago sidesteps the issue. (And this isn't targeted specifically at Strike. It just seems that any time race and the real impact it has on society is introduced into discussion, the usual suspects leap at the opportunity to repeat the same vapid 'race doesn't exist' line. It sounds intelligent but addresses nothing.)

[Beskar]

It just seems that any time race and the real impact it has on society is introduced into discussion, the usual suspects leap at the opportunity to repeat the same vapid 'race doesn't exist' line. It sounds intelligent but addresses nothing.

I disagree. The evidence based on socioeconomic factors just outweighs skin-colour so significantly, that sometimes people need to be repeatedly corrected, even though there is a small handful who seem obsessed at sticking to 19th century stereotypes for their own ideological superiority complexes.

It is usually the same handful where you point towards other minorities, they are often outspoken on those too. May it be on woman's rights, homosexuality, religion and name-it. Whilst it is common-consensus in day-to-day living to tolerate and accept others, without really much thought going into it, there are always those who seem to apply stigma where it is not really wanted or desired.

[Kadagar_AV]

I disagree. The evidence based on socioeconomic factors just outweighs skin-colour so significantly, that sometimes people need to be repeatedly corrected, even though there is a small handful who seem obsessed at sticking to 19th century stereotypes for their own ideological superiority complexes.

It is usually the same handful where you point towards other minorities, they are often outspoken on those too. May it be on woman's rights, homosexuality, religion and name-it. Whilst it is common-consensus in day-to-day living to tolerate and accept others, without really much thought going into it, there are always those who seem to apply stigma where it is not really wanted or desired.

Source?

I don't know about Germany, but here in Sweden some skin colours is very over-represented when it comes to certain crimes... And this over-representation remains when you account for socioeconomic factors.

We have loads of East Asian people who have moved here. They work hard and they do quite OK, second generation even perform excellent.. Compare that to Middle Eastern or Sub-Sahara-Africans and you will notice that they do a LOT worse than any other immigrant group.

Please don't tell me that straight biological factors (such as brain size and will to jump into bed with a family member) doesn't have an impact. Don't tell me cultural factors don't have an impact.

And guess what, if you take a guy with a really bad biological background (such as intra-family-marriage for hundreds of years), and combine that with a culture that just isn't very successful in modern society... And you will get a member of society who... How should I phrase it... "Are less probable to benefit society at large overly much".

This should be easy enough for anyone to understand.

[Beskar]

Source?

Montmorency linked a very good one on the previous page. I suggest reading it.

Please don't tell me that straight biological factors (such as brain size and will to jump into bed with a family member) doesn't have an impact. Don't tell me cultural factors don't have an impact.

You mean like Iceland or ourselves before urbanization of our populations? Norse regions were especially prone due to this due to their sparse landscapes of resources, yet, we heard stories about those mead-swilling uneducated pagans which ambushed our shores. With their statistically higher crime-rates and ill-culture and now Norse society is deemed one of the pinnacles of human progress.

The thing is, you seem to fail to see how history is constantly playing out, over and over. Comparing some some random backwater which doesn't even have much access to water which doesn't have as many university degrees as a upper-class suburb is not taking note of reality. If the genetics of 'race' played such a significant difference, then I shouldn't be able to go to work and see doctors of colour who out-educate the both of us together many times over, they should be severely stunted to such levels according to your beliefs yet they are not. There is a great many reasons which come into play on a socio-economic level and you cannot really account for them at all due to the difficulty in able to manage it. Culture comes under socioeconomic factors, culture is not inherent in a persons being, there are different cultures in a city-by-city basis too, nevermind intra-city populations.

[Myth]

You mean like Iceland or ourselves before urbanization of our populations? Norse regions were especially prone due to this due to their sparse landscapes of resources, yet, we heard stories about those mead-swilling uneducated pagans which ambushed our shores. With their statistically higher crime-rates and ill-culture and now Norse society is deemed one of the pinnacles of human progress.
.

I know It's off topic, but I couldn't find mead anywhere in Copenhagen. They've gone soft, man. They've gone soft.

[Kadagar_AV]

Why don't we use the Census Bureau's model and allow people to self select, which is kind of the point. Race does exist in the US in 2014, at least in a social context; and it is clear that it has an effect on educational outcomes above and beyond economic factors. Unfortunately, intellectually lazy appeals to geneticism, while scientifically valid, ignore the impact that racially-derived cultural attitudes have on real people. Being born to self identified black parents automatically places one at a significant comparable disadvantage versus other racial groups, regardless of economic station. That's reality, and frankly, reciting the same line on race you read on Salon five years ago sidesteps the issue. (And this isn't targeted specifically at Strike. It just seems that any time race and the real impact it has on society is introduced into discussion, the usual suspects leap at the opportunity to repeat the same vapid 'race doesn't exist' line. It sounds intelligent but addresses nothing.)

I must honestly say that it is more than a common fact that some ethnic groups do better than other ethnic groups in different areas of physical and psychological abilities.

Again: It's a FACT.

Heck, look at it logically... Intelligence is very obviously different in different ethnical groups, no? I mean seriously, if one hold against this argument they are extremely hard pressed to then explain how it comes that a species (homo sapiens sapiens) will evolve in a totally uniform manner no matter what surroundings they have.

That kind of goes against everything and all that we have learnt about evolution. Am I wrong?

The people claiming that we, as ethical groups, are all equal - have a HUGE intellectual mountain to climb. I dare anyone to say that ethnicity doesn't matter when it comes to general trends about intelligence.

Again, it's been proven over and over again. East Asians are a little bit smarter than Europeans. Heck, I am European and openly admit that YES, yes indeed, they are smarter in general than my countrymen. Where is the shame in this?

Same with black people, they tend to run faster and be more enduring than us white people. Why should this be a reason of shame for me? I know myself well enough to know I can run faster than the absolute majority of black people, and if you put us on a ski slope I am sure i would win even against the worlds best black skier / snowboarder.

So, what exactly is the problem?

Should black people not be proud of being faster?
Should East Asian people, or jews, not be proud that they rock the IQ charts?

I just don't get it, why cant we just accept that we are different?

Same thinking should at least be understood by everyone in an enlightened society. No?

Again: If you don't "believe" that people are different - as well as different ethnical groups are being different, you will be hard pressed to prove it. The argument FOR ethnical groups being different is easily proved...

You know, different skin colour, brain size, medical conditions and so on and so on...



http://www.ibc7.org/article/journal_v.php?sid=312 <- <- <- this is the link that was broken before... It shows that East Asians are a little bit smarter than Europeans, and that black people are completely off the scale.

The study basically checked which genes are in common for prospering students, and then checked where these genes could be found. IIRC the average number of good academical genes was around:

36 for east asians
32 for europeans
16 fore africans

Draw your own conclusions from it, I hope the link works this go around :)

Oh, and to repeat the main point of this thread.

To say that ethnical groups have the same cognitive abilities as any other groups goes against everything we know about evolution.

[Tuuvi]

To say that ethnical groups have the same cognitive abilities as any other groups goes against everything we know about evolution.

We know why there are differences in skin color and other physical traits between populations, they are adaptations to different climates. But what would have pressured different groups to evolve differences in cognitive abilibities?

If Africans make such great athletes than how is it that they aren't evolved to be as good at skiing as white people?

[Fragony]

I don't think Kadagar understands evolution as he thinks he does. The very few proven differences that exist are negligible compared to life-style, education, and socio-economic status.

You can't be sure of that, that it might in fact be racial that some ethnicities don't perform as good as other should't be dismissed by default. It's perfectly possible. Why couldn't it be? Gimme that. I know it's an insulting thought to make but I am ok with that, also ok with possibly offending.

[Beskar]

You can't be sure of that, that it might in fact be racial that some ethnicities don't perform as good as other should't be dismissed by default. It's perfectly possible. Why couldn't it be? Gimme that. I know it's an insulting thought to make but I am ok with that, also ok with possibly offending.

The differences between people are statistically insignificant in the population when it comes to race, as it has been stated before, there is more intra-genetic differences than there are between said 'races'. In short, there is more variation in you and me, Fragony, then there is between one of us and a 'black' person. Certain people genetically are prone to various pros and cons in various situations but that is down to an individual basis, such as height and other measures but this isn't down as some mythical block-group of race. There are factors such as Sickle-cell which allowed some populations greater resistance against malaria at the cost of them blocking the blood vessels but this isn't some inherent trait on a race basis.

So are there genetic differences? Yes.
Do these differences reflect 'race' constructs ? No

[The Lurker Below]

Should black people not be proud of being faster?

To say that ethnical groups have the same cognitive abilities as any other groups goes against everything we know about evolution.

/ignoring the false premise

They should not, we'll take that away from them too!



It would also be disingenuous to declare your premise false and not acknowledge that a large portion of people share it. Case in point, the responses to the above video.

[HoreTore]

Kadagar has posted one bogus "study", which is nothing more than ramblings from a non-scientist(who also dabbles in parapsychology, that's a sign of quality!), with no more access to cool scientist stuff than we do.

He has been given a proper source, a paper written by real scientists with credentials(you know, those you can't order by mail).

He has chosen to ignore the latter source, and continue to drone on with the assumption that the former source means something. As it's just nonsense, his posts are as unintentionally hilarious as they always are.

[Husar]

Why don't we use the Census Bureau's model and allow people to self select, which is kind of the point.

So how would that work? A guy with a black skin can select to be white and gets to live in an upper class neighborhood? And a white-skinned person can select latino and go live in a middle class neighborhood?

Race does exist in the US in 2014, at least in a social context; and it is clear that it has an effect on educational outcomes above and beyond economic factors. Unfortunately, intellectually lazy appeals to geneticism, while scientifically valid, ignore the impact that racially-derived cultural attitudes have on real people. Being born to self identified black parents automatically places one at a significant comparable disadvantage versus other racial groups, regardless of economic station. That's reality, and frankly, reciting the same line on race you read on Salon five years ago sidesteps the issue. (And this isn't targeted specifically at Strike. It just seems that any time race and the real impact it has on society is introduced into discussion, the usual suspects leap at the opportunity to repeat the same vapid 'race doesn't exist' line. It sounds intelligent but addresses nothing.)

I don't even know what Salon five is, and what is a self identified black parent? How many people with yellow, green and "white" skin self identify as blacks and how many people with black skin self identify as yellow? And why are economic factors the base of educational outcome? Does that mean if they're too poor they have a bad base anyway?

[Husar]

Like this?

http://www.policymic.com/articles/87...out-our-future

[Fragony]

Maybe one of the reasons these studies are so bitterly debated and refuted is that they are all about math. ie "scale from 1 to 10". How valid can a measurement of human emotion, which frequently is not rational or logical, and defies math, really be? Having said that I'm sure somebody will respond with links to some psychological studies that claim to measure human motivation. Sorry Fragony, I guess to answer your question my opinion is that race is a 1 on that scale. Are there generations of training incorporated into our DNA that will take more generations to unlearn? But ultimately, race is not the underlying cause of the problems.

You see, I am absolutily not sure of it. And even if it's rather obvious that some groups perform significantly worse I wouldn't want to be the one making the suggestion and having to explain it as the social-economic factors can't be denied. There is no difference when there is a level playing field, I won't deny that either. It's a rather hard and uncomfortable take on things, but I don't bite my to tongue when considering it, I think it's perfectly possible. To be honest, I really do think that there are differences between ethnicities, that doesn't come with any judgement. It might be prejudice and racist, but I can assure you that there is 0% harm in it. Those don't get that last part aren't invited when I give a party. This should be a discussion where I am totally willing to take my loss, but please don't make something out of me that I am not just for considerating it, that is not directed at you by the way. Discusion needs care, not instant insinuation, we are all less off because of doing that.

[Papewaio]

I wonder how high socially an African American could go with the same parenting as an European American.

Guess we will never know unless Obama puts some Federal grant money into the research...

[Fragony]

I wonder how high socially an African American could go with the same parenting as an European American.

The same, there is no difference then. For my argument I am my own worst enemy.

[Ironside]

I wonder how high socially an African American could go with the same parenting as an European American.

Guess we will never know unless Obama puts some Federal grant money into the research...

Weirdly enough, I think the best testing would be adopted children in Europe. Not because Europeans aren't going to treat the adopted as foreigners at times, but because we don't have that white vs black culture legacy in the way. We'll have much smaller range difference in how we treat them.

[Montmorency]

Intelligence: New Findings and Theoretical Developments (Nisbett et. al. 2012)

We can be confident that the environmental differences that
are associated with social class have a large effect on IQ.
We know this because adopted children typically score 12
points or more higher than comparison children (e.g., siblings
left with birth parents or children adopted by lower
SES parents), and adoption typically moves children from
lower to higher SES homes

[...]

Hart and Risley also found a
large difference in the ratio of encouraging comments made
to children versus reprimands. The child of professional
parents received six encouragements for every reprimand,
the child of working-class parents received two encouragements
per reprimand, and the child of unemployed African
American mothers received two reprimands per encouragement

[...]

It is almost surely the case, however, that a substantial
fraction of the IQ advantage is due to the environments
independent of the genes associated with them. This is
because we know that adoption adds 12–18 points to the IQ
of unrelated children, who are usually from lower SES
backgrounds

. See Nisbett, 2005, 2009,
for the view that the direct evidence indicates that the
difference between the races is entirely due to environment.)

Nisbett (2009) maintains that there is actually a substantial
amount of direct evidence stemming from the fact that the
“Black” gene pool in the United States contains a large
amount of European genes. He maintains that almost all the
research indicates no higher IQs for Blacks with a significant
degree of European heritage than for those with much
less. One of the most telling of the studies was available at
the time of the Neisser et al. (1996) report but was apparently
not known to them. This is an adoption study by
Moore (1986). She examined the IQs of Black and mixed
race children averaging 81⁄2 years of age who were adopted
by middle-class families who were either Black or White.
The children who were of half-European origin had virtually
the same average IQ as the children who were of
exclusively Black origin. Hence European genes were of
no advantage to this group of “Blacks.” Children (both
Black and mixed-race) adopted by White families had IQs
13 points higher on average than those adopted by Black
families, indicating that there were marked differences in
the environments of Black and White families relevant to
socialization for IQ; indeed, the differences were large
enough to account for virtually the entire Black–White gap
in IQ at the time of the study.

[Beskar]

Intelligence: New Findings and Theoretical Developments (Nisbett et. al. 2012)

Thank you for that post, Montmorency.

[Papewaio]

Weirdly enough, I think the best testing would be adopted children in Europe. Not because Europeans aren't going to treat the adopted as foreigners at times, but because we don't have that white vs black culture legacy in the way. We'll have much smaller range difference in how we treat them.

Like Obama's home environment.

[The Lurker Below]

There is no difference when there is a level playing field, I won't deny that

Just remember this when other instincts consider jumping in the way.

That there are certainly negative traits to certain communities, I'm quickly on board with you brother. Just remember that it is not as simple as where the community came from and you're golden.

[Fragony]

Just remember this when other instincts consider jumping in the way.

That there are certainly negative traits to certain communities, I'm quickly on board with you brother. Just remember that it is not as simple as where the community came from and you're golden.

Aren't certain instintcs a bit on on the side I kinda have a problem witb. The problem is political correctness. No discussion can be held within the very narrow margins that have been set. You can't have a discussion if it's confined. That should be a principle.

[Viking]

Presenting the topic of 'human races' as something black and white does it a great disservice, methinks.

I suggest that human genetics is like a mulitidimensional spectrum. If I go from Norway to Italy, I'll find that the average hair colour and eye colour is darker. Facial features are probably also slightly different. Perhaps even a slight change in average genetically induced pigmentation. Different races? Hardly. Many ethnic Norwegians could probably pass as ethnic Italians (if they'd been living under the Italian sun for some time) and vice versa.

Travelling even further south, to Libya; where Arabs live. Now the average hair and eye colours are even darker. Average pigmentation has also changed. Very few (if any at all) ethnic Norwegians could pass as ethnic Arab Libyans, and vice versa. Different races? Certainly starting to make a lot of sense now.

Move even further south and...you get the idea.

I think the concept of race - ironically, given the local obsession that can sometimes be found here - makes even less sense in the US, given the great mixing of different ethnicities that has taken place there. 'white' is no race, neither is 'black' - it's just skin colour and does not indicate whether the rest of the DNA is shared or not.