the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

Ah, the marriage of science and racism, how lovely.

Don't forget to mix in deliberate outrage for clicks and capitalism!

I worked at ETS --the company that creates the standardized tests. Forget about IQ tests; they can change during anyone's lifetime. It's also possible to practice and prepare for them. But, say IQ tests are like other standardized tests --like the SAT, LSAT, MCAT, and GRE-- which are often used to determine college admittance, for ex.

Anyway, while at ETS, I became friends with the chief statistician. If you've seen the movie "Stand and Deliver", he's one of the people who contested the scores received by the Chicano students on the calculus exam. He had his reasons, but we got into a conversation about the differences in scores among the various groups (races, ethnicities, etc). The fact is that the group that scores the best in these tests categorize themselves as "Other." The groups that score second highest are Asians and South Asians. The third highest --in the early 2000s-- were Eastern European Jews. All of those groups had higher scores than "Whites," "Blacks," and Hispanics.

So, I asked the statistician why Black scores were compared to White scores. Actually, I was hired to do research as to why Black test takers didn't do as well on specific questions on these tests. It was called the "DIF," or differential item function. There was/is also a DIF when it comes to the scores of Whites versus Asians. I asked why "Other" wasn't used as the comparator, since that group had the highest scores. His answer was "Nobody cares about Others."

You see. It's not about the scores. It's about the conclusions that are made about them. The English disparaged the intelligence of the Irish. No one today is really interested to comparing the intelligence of Germans to Serbs, or Irish to Italians. What would we do with the results? But, Graham, what do you think about the "Black" boy in London with an IQ higher than Gates or Einstein?
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-england-london-46788534

Otoh, it's ok to watch people arguing about the capacities of other people --it's just dumb for anyone they're talking about to take them seriously.

Have the people who posted so far seen the video completely?

'The only thing that is equal across all beings is being.'

My point was about the conclusions that people come to because of inequalities in results. I didn't say anyone was equal -no one did. The question is why Asians have higher IQs than Whites. Or, why Italians have higher IQS than the Irish? So, the results are not equal. What do we do?

My other point is that no one with any intelligence believes people who argue they are superior. Genius and talents are equally distributed in the human population.

One question I have is whether or not the mind can function without any prejudice at all.

Quigga wrote:One question I have is whether or not the mind can function without any prejudice at all.

I don't bother looking for excuses for my prejudices. The question is how that prejudice affects others, particularly those someone is prejudiced against.

Like I said, it's not about the data, it's about the conclusions drawn. Even if the statistics are valid, no one studying them ever comes to the conclusion that they or their group is inferior or that others should be prejudiced against "them."

Admission of innate or inherent prejudice only suggests that one group's assessment of another will be unavoidably flawed --and should be ignored by the subject group. It may be impossible to remove someone else's prejudice. They have to figure that out for themselves.

Nah, the question is rather about don't you have any expectations about the world around you? Projections about the course of your day, your week when you wake up? Categories you think in? Or is the mind able to function in a continouus blank state?

Yes.I expect that some people will hold on to their prejudices about others no matter what I do. That's a prejudice. It's not racial or cultural. The result is that my prejudices should have nothing to do with how anyone imagines their reality. I.e., it's a blunder to let someone's opinion of you become your opinion of yourself.

oragami_itto wrote:Ah, the marriage of science and racism, how lovely.

Exactly right.

And another thing, watching Jordan P uncritically is certainly dangerous for your IQ! The idiot's smart guy.

Quigga wrote:One question I have is whether or not the mind can function without any prejudice at all.

That's not really a question. It's an implication. And, why makeup excuses for reactionary bigots?

You asked if anyone had watched the whole clip. I'm left wondering if you did.

For a far more sensible explication on IQ

Steve James wrote:I worked at ETS --the company that creates the standardized tests. Forget about IQ tests; they can change during anyone's lifetime. It's also possible to practice and prepare for them. But, say IQ tests are like other standardized tests --like the SAT, LSAT, MCAT, and GRE-- which are often used to determine college admittance, for ex.

Anyway, while at ETS, I became friends with the chief statistician. If you've seen the movie "Stand and Deliver", he's one of the people who contested the scores received by the Chicano students on the calculus exam. He had his reasons, but we got into a conversation about the differences in scores among the various groups (races, ethnicities, etc). The fact is that the group that scores the best in these tests categorize themselves as "Other." The groups that score second highest are Asians and South Asians. The third highest --in the early 2000s-- were Eastern European Jews. All of those groups had higher scores than "Whites," "Blacks," and Hispanics.

So, I asked the statistician why Black scores were compared to White scores. Actually, I was hired to do research as to why Black test takers didn't do as well on specific questions on these tests. It was called the "DIF," or differential item function. There was/is also a DIF when it comes to the scores of Whites versus Asians. I asked why "Other" wasn't used as the comparator, since that group had the highest scores. His answer was "Nobody cares about Others."

You see. It's not about the scores. It's about the conclusions that are made about them. The English disparaged the intelligence of the Irish. No one today is really interested to comparing the intelligence of Germans to Serbs, or Irish to Italians. What would we do with the results? But, Graham, what do you think about the "Black" boy in London with an IQ higher than Gates or Einstein?
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-england-london-46788534

Otoh, it's ok to watch people arguing about the capacities of other people --it's just dumb for anyone they're talking about to take them seriously.

Thanks for these insights, Steve. I especially like your question about why Whites are held up as the yardstick. It betrays the entire project.