I apologize to everyone.

[Greyblades]

Asia is a living cautionary tale of what happens when a society tries to skip a few steps in becoming a modern pseudo-european nation from a medeval society and ends up missing out on the lessons learned by doing it the long way.

[Fragony]

....and not a single one of those have any academic merit whatsoever. That was the point, Frags.

If you had any clue as to what you're talking about, you would've known those maps to be absolute rubbish.

Sure mia muca

[Papewaio]

Asia is a living cautionary tale of what happens when a society tries to skip a few steps in becoming a modern pseudo-european nation from a medeval society and ends up missing out on the lessons learned by doing it the long way.

Which Asia is that? Everything from Asia Minor to the Far East is fairly broad.

You've got Israel, Singapore, India, Japan and South Korea within that definition. As well as Syria, Afghanistan, North Korea and Iraq.

Might as well say that Greece is socially and economically the same as Norway.

[Greyblades]

Ah... Sometimes I forget I'm not only talking to americans and clueless north west europeans. When I said asia I mean eastern Asia: China, Korea, Japan.

[HoreTore]

with equal BNP% in schooling

Why on earth is the percentage important...? If you want to make your point, wouldn't it be less stupid to use the absolute numbers?

[Fragony]

Which Asia is that? Everything from Asia Minor to the Far East is fairly broad.

You've got Israel, Singapore, India, Japan and South Korea within that definition. As well as Syria, Afghanistan, North Korea and Iraq.

Might as well say that Greece is socially and economically the same as Norway.

China, South-Korea, Japan, they all got us whiteboys beaten. The Germans and the Dutch come close but must still accept defeat

[Papewaio]

Ah... Sometimes I forget I'm not only talking to americans and clueless north west europeans. When I said asia I mean eastern Asia: China, Korea, Japan.

North Korea certainly is medieval in its attitude.

China really isn't following a European Enlightenment or UK Westminister program to bootstrap itself. It has many issues to overcome from European colonialism.

Japan and South Korea are hardly basket case economies. Yes Japan seems to have peaked... It has an aging population and some of the longest lived people to look after... A cautionary tale for other economies.

South Korea has a lot of pros and cons. One of the obvious problems is North Korea. The less known one is that it is essentially a corporate run state.

[Fragony]

Maybe helpfull (and where your map with no science backing it whatsoever comes from Horetore)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_...lth_of_Nations

[HoreTore]

Maybe helpfull (and where your map with no science backing it whatsoever comes from Horetore)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_...lth_of_Nations

This is exactly what I mean.

Lynn has been discredited by just about everyone. He's a hack.

[Fragony]

This is exactly what I mean.

Lynn has been discredited by just about everyone. He's a hack.

No he wasn't, can't just decide things like that, it really has to be true; classical leftist mistake.

[HoreTore]

No he wasn't, can't just decide things like that, it really has to be true; classical leftist mistake.

You're using discredited science to back up your claim. Who's "just deciding things" now, eh?

Lynn is accused of both confirmation bias and methodological errors. In scientific terms, that's a death sentence. I can understand that you desperately want such things to be true, as it would fit your political views perfectly. Sadly, there is no science to back it up.

Kinda like how Stalin went with Lamarckism, another discredited theory, because it fit with his political aims. Lamarck was a hack, just as Lynn is.

EDIT: your wiki article contains a quote which sums up the scientific community's view on Lynn pretty well:

"(the book's) sweeping conclusions based on relatively weak statistical evidence and dubious presumptions seem misguided at best and quite dangerous if taken seriously. It is therefore difficult to find much to recommend in this book."

[Fragony]

You're using discredited science to back up your claim. Who's "just deciding things" now, eh?

Lynn is accused of both confirmation bias and methodological errors. In scientific terms, that's a death sentence. I can understand that you desperately want such things to be true, as it would fit your political views perfectly. Sadly, there is no science to back it up.

Kinda like how Stalin went with Lamarckism, another discredited theory, because it fit with his political aims. Lamarck was a hack, just as Lynn is.

Of course he is accused of both comfirmation errors and methodological errors, that's normal, did you ever spend a day in university. Where they have occured isn't left out, it is perfectly obvious to the writers that their calculations aren't set in stone but merely a statistical probability

[HopAlongBunny]

To paraphrase a psyc prof I had: IQ tests accurately and reliably measure how well people score on IQ tests. So the question becomes what exactly does that prove?

[HoreTore]

Of course he is accused of both comfirmation errors and methodological errors, that's normal, did you ever spend a day in university. Where they have occured isn't left out, it is perfectly obvious for the writers that their calculations aren't set in stone but merely a statistical probability

Nah, I went to a university college, as they have a much higher focus on didactics than the university does.

Lynn's theories simply aren't accepted by the scientific community, and thus becomes junk science. A theory isn't fact when only supported by a few, it needs to be supported by many. Lynn's theories just aren't. They're hardly accepted by anyone outside white supremacist groups.

To paraphrase a psyc prof I had: IQ tests accurately and reliably measure how well people score on IQ tests. So the question becomes what exactly does that prove?

Indeed.

[Fragony]

Lynn's theories simply aren't accepted by the scientific community, and thus becomes junk science. A theory isn't fact when only supported by a few, it needs to be supported by many. Lynn's theories just aren't. They're hardly accepted by anyone outside white supremacist groups.

Leftist reflex, mistaking how you want things to be and how things are. The authors even have good intentions on how to improve things, that white-supremacy groups use it, well sure they do. But I doubt they read it.

[HoreTore]

Leftist reflex, mistaking how you want things to be and how things are. The authors even have good intentions on how to improve things, that white-supremacy groups use it, well sure they do. But I doubt they read it.

I'm not commenting on whether his theory is true or not. My point is that his theory isn't accepted by the scientific community, and is thus invalid.

Stalin wanted Lamarckism to be true because it fits with his political views. You want Lynn's theory to be true because it fits your political views. Both of you disregard the fact that it's not accepted by other scientists. I see little difference between the brains of you and Stalin.

EDIT: Here is a short paper which highlights many of the criticisms other scientists have on Lynn's "research". If you have access to jstor(or similar), I can give you much more.

[Fragony]

I read that. It remains a chicken and egg story. But of what use is it to dismiss statistically sound results? You should really be happy with the conclusions as the aim is on development, not a genetical defect even if it might look like that at first. But it is a pretty solid examination on IQ-differences and wealth, making it more of a question rather than statement

[HoreTore]

I read that. It remains a chicken and egg story. But of what use is it to dismiss statistically sound results? You should really be happy with the conclusions as the aim is on development, not a genetical defect even if it might look like that at first. But it is a pretty solid examination on IQ-differences and wealth, making it more of a question rather than statement

The bolded part is completely irrelevant.

It's pseudoscience, and one cannot be "happy" with pseudoscience. Until a proper scientific theory comes along, any possible IQ differences will remain a black spot. We simply don't have any knowledge of it.

[Fragony]

Until a proper scientific theory comes along, any possible IQ differences will remain a black spot. We simply don't have any knowledge of it.

That much I can agree with

[Montmorency]

Asians...

Of course, the so-called "Arabs" will often be included in that classification.

Is it really surprising that East Asians - and East Asian immigrants - perform well academically? As surprising as the fact that they are quite accomplished cheaters?

Note that Southeast Asian immigrants chronically underperform.

And note that even Han Chinese is not so genetically or even culturally homogeneous to be counted as a race.

What is the sense, Kadagar, in trying to organize a universe that is built up out of certain fundamental particles into molecules or cells?

While it's certainly nice to think of the world as a simple place, it is most certainly not simple. Not nearly simple enough to dismiss a broad abstraction on the basis of other abstractions no-less-broad.

That there are differences between groups is obvious - an extension of the fact that there are differences between individuals. This broad principle, however, does not at all license you to declare, 'All the darkies are just stupid'.

There is more basis to legitimate groupings than sheer aesthetic distaste. Come back when every single human's genome has been sequenced and catalogued as only then may we begin to discuss these matters.

[Major Robert Dump]

East Asians aren't necessarily smarter, they just have far harder work ethics.

But it is funny that in the USA they are pretty much wholesale excluded from talks of race, quotas, affirmative action, etc because the left does not consider them a true minority even though, by definition, they are, and they most certainly suffer from discrimination. It is also funny that racism against non muslim Asians is often ignored and brushed under the rug, especially when the racism is levied by a black or Hispanic person.

[Tuuvi]

Some people have already hinted at this but I'll put it more bluntly: race is not a valid biological concept. There are more differences among groups of people than there are between them, and there is no easy way classify people into different races because there is no feature that's exclusive to one group. Take for example black skin and curly hair. Africans as well as Melanesians and Australian Aborigines share these traits, but there are also traits they don't share, so you can't lump them into one racial category. Africans don't have prominent brow ridges, but Aborigines do. In Africa there are differences in skin color, hair texture, stature, build, facial features, etc. between various groups.

[Hax]

Of course, the so-called "Arabs" will often be included in that classification.

Classified as Caucasian in the United States, interestingly.

[Kadagar_AV]

Asians...

Of course, the so-called "Arabs" will often be included in that classification.

Is it really surprising that East Asians - and East Asian immigrants - perform well academically? As surprising as the fact that they are quite accomplished cheaters?

Note that Southeast Asian immigrants chronically underperform.

And note that even Han Chinese is not so genetically or even culturally homogeneous to be counted as a race.

What is the sense, Kadagar, in trying to organize a universe that is built up out of certain fundamental particles into molecules or cells?

While it's certainly nice to think of the world as a simple place, it is most certainly not simple. Not nearly simple enough to dismiss a broad abstraction on the basis of other abstractions no-less-broad.

That there are differences between groups is obvious - an extension of the fact that there are differences between individuals. This broad principle, however, does not at all license you to declare, 'All the darkies are just stupid.

There is more basis to legitimate groupings than sheer aesthetic distaste. Come back when every single human's genome has been sequenced and catalogued as only then may we begin to discuss these matters.

Because I have declared that all darkies are stupid?

It's a hard topic to debate, as people put way to much emotion into it, often to the degree where they shut of their analytic part of the mind. Heck, even in some cases doing extremely stupid things like completely making up statements from the opposition.



Will get back when I have more time, just wanted to put some sort of a dampener on the more... special ways to interpret me.

[Major Robert Dump]

Hispanic/Latino was also classified as White for most of our Beaurocratic history.

Racial Divides are invented because humans have an innate desire to turn everything into an Us vs. Them scenario. Its science. Its fact. People will always find a way to be prejudiced if given the opportunity, and especially if given any kind of fuel for their confirmation bias. It is telling of our times that people spend a lot of time trying to figure out how to be more racist when by all rights its something that should have gone away with the Enlightenment in western culture. Object Lesson? You can't kill ignorance with words. People turn to Us vs. Them scenarios when they feel under pressure. A liberal democracy should spend almost all of its resources trying to relieve that pressure and create an environment of liberty and prosperity, so people have no good reason for that mentality. And even then, it will never go away, because it is a habit that probably evolved over time to help us survive. Quite a pickle.

Kind of hard to do when brutal double standards that existed for generations are replaced with more subtle double standards that turn the tables. People in this country cannot have legitimate discussions about race. "Racist" is the new N-Word

[Papewaio]

Us vs them. We as a society go out of our way to maximize that emphasis.

It's called sports. We give young people heaps of cash to play games in which we glorify them as heroes and set about to chest thump how our team is better then your team.

Yeah us, our team of spoilt brats from around the country beat your spoilt brats from around the country therefore I'm a better person.

[HopAlongBunny]

and in the end, it's only 'round and 'round:



careful GC you're beginning to sound like Mark Twain :p

[Major Robert Dump]

Classism, yes, but greed probably more so. Or maybe they are a bit of the same. Funny you mention a race screwing its own race. I can think of a few Indian Tribes in Oklahoma like that, and a couple in New England who are asking for bailouts because the leaders pissed away all their profits instead of using them to build their communities.

Race is just a discussion diversion to deflect attention from who is really screwing who, and it is not always just about class. A lot of people are in the dumps because they put themselves there or didn't crawl out when given the opportunity. Classism goes both ways, as evident from the profession victim mentality.

In the end, the leaders and puppeteers want us to tune out to what they are doing, except come time to vote, then back under the rug the issues are swept. I recall Lemur predicting the voter ID issue going away after the election, and it largely has, which is sad because a legitimate compromise would be easy to reach, but hey that doesn't get votes like good old fashioned sabre rattling

[HopAlongBunny]

You want to see race on race, go to a political nomination rally. The mud really begins to fly.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I don't agree with racism in the sense of "negroes = dumb" at all, but I think there is a lot of laziness and double standards shown by certain people who like to claim the high ground in those respects.

Firstly - this idea that racists are bogged down by human frailties such as the 'us v them' mentality, while those who oppose racism somehow transcend all form of bias or social influence. The reality is they do not. As a social species, it is a natural reaction to want to live in a hormonious society, and racial equality is obviously essential to that. At the more individual level, it is natural to want to avoid confrontation or awkward social situations that would naturally arise from a society that recognised racial differences when different races live side by side every day. Hence why regardless of the truth of the matter, many people will lazily say that they don't believe in racial differences, just.... because they don't.

Secondly - the old gem that since race is not something clear cut by visible indicators such as skin colour; but instead, a fluid transition from groups and sub-groups down to the family and then individual level - we should because of this avoid speaking of race at all and point blank refuse to assess human capability differences beyond the individual level. Of course, refusing to do this is purely willful ignorance, what more can I say about it?

And thirdly - the claim any racial differences observed in terms of IQ performance or other indicators of development are irrelevant since they are the result of differing levels of education or differing work ethics. Now, first of, let me say that I completely agree with what these people say about the inadequacies of IQ tests and supposed controls put in place to account for educational/cultural differences. However, where I think they take liberties is when they simply proclaim that if IQ differences are acknowledged, then the causation must be entirely from education -> IQ, and not the reverse. If a correlation is recognised, then you have to question if there is causation, and if so, in which direction. You can't just decide based on nothing.

Right, and how much do we know about this particular period? I'm not deliberately picking this example to muddy the waters, it's because this is a subject I know a lot about.

Whatever, Yemen/Malta. Could have picked Morocco or Algeria, where self-identification as an Arab still has much more to do with the language people speak at home, rather than haplogroups or whatever. The cultural legacy I can *sort of* understand, but you don't honestly believe that all the Arabic-speaking inhabitants of Egypt (the largest Arabic country in the world) were imported from the Arabian peninsula? The same goes for the inhabitants of Iraq, large parts of the Levant and the entirety of North Africa, up to Sudan and Niger. Additionally, there are more Arabic-speakers in Africa than there are in Asia. Have you ever looked at a Somali? You of all people, would you go along gladly if you were identified as "English" because you speak English?

I chose the example of Arabs and Arabic to demonstrate that the notion of a ethno-linguistic notion doesn't really make any sense.

Of course ethnic and liguistic groups are not synonymous, but we all can agree that their historic roots have tended to be interconnected on some level - the question is to what degree. As far as I am aware, actual population displacement is often regarded as necessary for one linguistic group to replace another in a particular geographic area, as happened across North Africa and the Middle East with Arab language, culture and religion - thus giving credence to the idea of a modern Arab ethnic identity.

Yes, I realise that analysing population movements and their impact on culture, language, and modern racial identification is a complicated and murky business, especially from a time period we have little information on. But that is precisely why I think it is so inadequate on your part to simply declare that the concept of an 'Arab' means nothing, or has no historical foundation. Or for you to declare that cultural and linguistic developments were entirely independent of population movements. In doing so without any foundation (other than "its not clear cut!), I think you are being every bit as ideologically motivated as you accuse Fragony of being.

Also, the example you give with English in reference to me as a Scot is a great example - the English language is thought to have originated in southern Scotland and Northumbria, as Angles displaced the native Celts in southern Scotland and brought their language roots with them. So even though national identity remains different on either side of the border, the linguistic ties are rooted in a shared ethnic history.