Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
Has Achieved Nirvana |
I recently watched the American Experience episode about James Watson. What a brilliant and strange character. Then there was this:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/0...a-genetics-race.html
| ||
|
Has Achieved Nirvana |
If by brilliant and strange character, you mean a fraud, a misogynist, and a racist, then, yes, he is a brilliant and strange character. | |||
|
Minor Deity |
In a different NYT article about Watson's views, he did stress that he believed it important the racial IQ distinctions he highlighted not be used to discriminate negatively against individuals (black) for instance applying for positions where intellectual skills are key. That was because (paraphrase) he acknowledged that statistical global group differences are not meaningful in predicting individual performance. Regardless of what one thinks of his conclusions, that has indeed always been true. He said that experience with "very talented" black people (his own experiences) illustrated this truism. Even someone like me with only a basic Soc Sci statistics background knows the dangers of misconstruing individual vs group predictions. ESPECIALLY when doing so has enormous repercussions both socially and personally. There has always been huge controversy about whether or not to suppress research with strongly negative social repercussions. I remember when he was tarred and feathered after first sounding off and this was a highlight of defense of him, apart from arguments about the relative impact of nurture. Since most people don't understand the concept of uncertainty especially in predictions about individual vs. group behavior, I think the answer is that emphatically, yes, such studies should be suppressed. This is a generalization without referencing Watson's specific pontifications - and without even going into detail about the impossibility of defining "race", especially considering among much else, the admixtures that exist. Then too, we have still completely failed to define IQ itself, except (as my then reigning cognitive psych profs agreed) that "IQ is what IQ tests define". Given such uncertainty in the concepts of both race AND IQ, makes it all the more undesirable to broadcast such generalizations. "Observor outcome" effect is one of many reasons to STFU in such socially significant research (already distorted by expectation in how it's conducted). Interestingly, such results are paralled in Physics, where Quantum research demonstrates that observation itself interferes with measurement. Watson's returning now to his original conclusions (once denied and the object of apology), is just one more instance of how Trump and ilk have not only unmuzzled but encouraged racists in modern society. Here, that effect is most harmful, because it comes from an accredited mouthpiece for Science. Funny, Trump supporters don't denigrate the value of this "expert's" message when dismissal of experts and overall anti-intellectualism are one of their unifying hallmarks.
| |||
|
Serial origamist Has Achieved Nirvana |
I wonder if some people never entertained the possibility that the tests tend to emphasize Western cultures and concepts. I recently came across the LAIT that was published in WIRED magazine around 1980. The verbal section is a very small part of the test and requires high fluency in English. From a global "this race/culture is more intelligent" twist, I'm guessing if we gathered a bunch of the really smart people in this forum and showed them a dozen Chinese characters and asked them to identify the radical in each character, only one or two would get any of them right. But if you asked a dozen Chinese smart people to identify the English word from among four words that is not a synonym for a fifth word, few would get any of them right. There's also that whole vertical/horizontal continent thing. Here in 'merica, you also need to control for educational opportunities. Black people, on average*, have less access to good schools due to the structural and systemic racism and segregation in the US. You can't take a representative bunch of students in Palo Alto and a representative bunch of students in rural-ish Alabama and show them a sequence of numbers and ask them to determine the next number in sequence then be surprised at the results. If grew up in constant poverty with poor nutrition and bad infrastructure and low-paid teachers, clever math may be something that didn't cross your path. *the least meaningful statistic
| |||
|
Has Achieved Nirvana |
Amanda, I would suggest watching the show and hearing Watson speak for himself. And also to hear his professional associates thoughts about him. https://www.pbs.org/video/decoding-watson-ua6jjx/
| |||
|
Minor Deity |
Looks interesting, WTG. Glanced at the beginnning and filing it. Thanks!
| |||
|
Has Achieved Nirvana |
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46856779 Amanda, just a heads up....PBS videos are usually only available online for a limited time...
| |||
|
Has Achieved Nirvana |
+1000 | |||
|
Minor Deity |
I'd speak more of language skills than hemispheric based learning (you spoke of Western cultures). And for the record this is a much touted argument against the validity of IQ tests. (Not to mention that IQ tests are conducted IN language.) There Are all kinds of IQ. After all, Asians overall score ~ 15 IQ pts higher than the "racial mean", at the very least on visual-spatial (~ mathematical).
| |||
|
Powered by Social Strata |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |