Dismiss Notice
Thanks for being a member of our community. Please donate toward site expenses if you can.

The Pseudoscience of J. Philippe Rushton

Discussion in 'Race Relations' started by Egalitarianjay02, Sep 8, 2014.

Page 14 of 18
  1. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This applies more properly to egalitarians.
     
    mikemikev, Oct 18, 2014
    #326
  2. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Racists are the ones asserting biological inequality in innate ability. The burden of proof is on you to support that argument.

    Egalitarianism is a moral philosophy. Regardless of differences I believe in treating people equally. I don't need the world to be biologically equal to be an Egalitarian. Racial inequality is a strong part of your ideology. Without it your ideology has no strength.
     
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 18, 2014
    #327
  3. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You're asserting that observed IQ differences have an entirely environmental etiology. The burden is equally on you, and in fact your claim is more extreme and outside normal biological assumptions. Any number of lines of evidence suggest a significantly genetic ideology, as has been explained to you for years ad nauseam.

    I am referring to Egalitarianism as the belief that there are no between group genetically based psychological differences. Egalitarianism in the sense of how people are treated is a different issue. Racial inequality is something I believe to be a fact, much as I believe gravity to be a fact. You could say "Gravity is a strong part of your ideology. Without it your ideology has no strength.", but it sounds kind of weird. I'm really not trying to add "strength" to my "ideology", just stating what I consider to be the truth.
     
    mikemikev, Oct 19, 2014
    #328
  4. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I'm not done with the article yet, but what's funny is that Tobias claims corrections for height between White and Negro aren't made, but fails to account East Asians are historically shorter in stature than Whites and Negro yet have larger brain volume and mass.

    So, taking relative brain size into account, the East Asian will have even larger brain size than Whites and Negro.
     
    rayznack, Oct 19, 2014
    #329
  5. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    There has to date been no scientifically validated reasoning for why diverse human populations should be genetically differentiated in intellect. The racialist theory is not reasonable and not testable.

    On the other hand what we know about human evolution and genetics supports the Nil Hypothesis, that there is no genetic component to the IQ gap.

    That's not a proper definition of Egalitarianism.

    That's what Egalitarianism refers to. Equal treatment.

    I don't buy the claim that you think of racial inequality the same way you think of gravity. You have an emotional need to believe in racial inequality and the proof is in the blatant racism that you have expressed in the past. You may think that racial inequality is a scientific truth but you have an ideological basis for believing in such a thing.

    Tobias' article doesn't address East Asian brain size but given that the article is about the comparative anatomy of different racial groups I believe that his reasoning for rejecting structural differences in the brains of Blacks and Whites would also apply to Asians. Now this article was written in 1970 and there have been advances in scientific techniques in recent years that can analyze the brain including MRI studies. I'm going to read over the scientific literature on brain size and intelligence and come back to this thread for further input on the topic but I also intend to wind down discussion as I no longer have much interest in participating on this topic.
     
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 19, 2014
    #330
  6. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sure there is. The consistent differences in themselves are almost obviously genetic. And that's not considering other lines of evidence.

    Assertion.

    Well that's what I said I meant when I used the word. Do you get to define my words now?

    No, it means a person who advocates equality in any sense.

    Which is irrelevant. Everything you are reduced to writing is assertion and irrelevance. Would you like me to go through this thread and list your factual inaccuracies? Who's the ideologue?
     
    mikemikev, Oct 19, 2014
    #331
  7. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    The claim of consistent differences is bogus. Racialist research amounts to little more than seeking a genetic basis to racist stereotypes and the scholars who promoted this research (e.g. Rushton and Jensen) were not geneticists. They didn't understand evolutionary genetics and were refuted by real experts.



    It's a statement backed up by empirical evidence.

    An Anthropological Perspective on "Race" and Intelligence: The Non-Clinal Nature of Human Cognitive Capabilities Journal of Anthropological Research Vol. 55, No. 2, 3 JAR Distinguished Lectures (Summer, 1999), pp. 245-264

    I must correct you when you use words inappropriately.

    Not equality in any sense. Equality in the treatment of people. Equal rights. There are obvious differences in traits and abilities besides psychological differences. No one is saying that we are all the same in everything. We're obviously not. An Egalitarian values the moral principle of equal rights regardless of differences.

    Rejection of genetically based psychological differences between groups isn't being Egalitarian. You're basically redefining the word.

    Knock yourself out.

    It's not irrelevant. You claimed that you were not trying to strengthen your ideology but you clearly have an ideological agenda. Racism is an ideology. Racialist theories suit racist ideologies. You are an ideologue. You are misusing science to promote a belief that appeals to you emotionally.

    Pseudoscience begins with a hypothesis—usually one which is appealing emotionally,
    and spectacularly implausible—and then looks only for items which appear to support it.
    Conflicting evidence is ignored. Generally speaking, the aim of pseudoscience is to rationalize strongly held beliefs, rather than to investigate or to test alternative possibilities. Pseudoscience specializes in jumping to "congenial conclusions," grinding ideological axes, appealing to preconceived ideas and to widespread misunderstandings. - Rory Coker, Ph.D.
     
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 21, 2014
    #332
  8. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Like Joseph Graves who publishes in sociology journals? Just google his quotes for extensive refutations (copy pastes courtesy of the same guy).
     
    mikemikev, Oct 22, 2014
    #333
  9. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Graves has the scientific credentials to address Rushton's evolutionary arguments, which he did. No one has ever taken Graves to task on his critique of Rushton. No one with any expertise that is. You tried but Graves responded to you.
     
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 23, 2014
    #334
  10. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Danth's_Law
     
    mikemikev, Oct 23, 2014
    #335
  11. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 23, 2014
    #336
  12. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Danth's_Law
     
    mikemikev, Oct 23, 2014
    #337
  13. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Danth's_Law

    Mikemikev, I find it ironic that you would cite a "law" by a banned poster on the internet to make a logical argument. :wink:

    Logically speaking Danth's Law can not possibly be a universal truth because it is possible for someone to demonstrate that they have won an argument based on reasonable criteria for victory. What I said about no one taking Joseph Graves to task on his critique if Rushton's research is a factual statement. Saying that he has the scientific credentials to critique Rushton is also a factual statement. There's no objective score being kept for who wins and loses debates but if we define winning debates as making a positive argument your opponent can not refute then Graves won the debate with Rushton as I outlined in the OP.

    Your only counter argument to this is that Graves published articles in sociology journals which is irrelevant.
     
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 23, 2014
    #338
  14. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nonsense. Graves' roundly ignored garbage has been fully dismissed but you would never admit that.
     
    mikemikev, Oct 23, 2014
    #339
  15. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    No, it hasn't. Graves has been cited by several scholars who support his work and there have been no rebuttals to his work by actual scholars.

    You tried to refute his research but you failed.

     
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 23, 2014
    #340
  16. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As usual you dishonestly fail to copy paste the response.
     
    mikemikev, Oct 23, 2014
    #341
  17. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Dr. Joseph L. Graves Jr.Associate Dean for Research Joint School of Nanoscience & Nanoengineering

    :roll:
     
    mikemikev, Oct 23, 2014
    #342
  18. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Why would I need to do that? If you're going to defend your arguments feel free to do so.

    What's your point?
     
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 23, 2014
    #343
  19. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Interesting excerpt from a book that reviewed Rushton's research:

     
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 23, 2014
    #344
  20. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You don't see how it's dishonest to claim no-one addressed Graves then fail to copy paste the next post where someone addressed Graves? You'd be sent down for contempt of court for such dishonesty. You are here to deceive people.
     
    mikemikev, Oct 23, 2014
    #345
  21. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    More lame Jew supremacist anti-White pseudoscience. Nice treatment of Rushton's data. Nice cherry picking and lies. I see why you like this guy Sussman. Why does Jude Suss only offer second hand quotes?

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/cr/0674417313/ref=mw_dp_cr
     
    mikemikev, Oct 23, 2014
    #346
  22. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    mikemikev, Oct 23, 2014
    #347
  23. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I said no scholars have criticized Graves for his critique of Rushton. I did acknowledge that you challenged Graves but as I pointed out Graves responded to you. You did reply but there's no reason for me to paste that reply or my reply to that reply. I don't feel it's relevant since your response was not adequate.

    Ignoring your anti-Semitic gibberish I see that racists have bombarded Amazon with junk reviews. Are you aware that Amazon now has a tracking system and shows "proof of purchase" for every reviewer that bought the book through their website? Notice that none of the negative reviews indicate that the reviewer bought the book. One of them even admits they didn't read it.
     
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 23, 2014
    #348
  24. mikemikev

    mikemikev Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,796
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No facts are adequate. You are a mindless dishonest ideologue.

    How many lies must be on one page to dismiss a book?
     
    mikemikev, Oct 23, 2014
    #349
  25. Egalitarianjay02

    Egalitarianjay02 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,289
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    You are a mindless, dishonest, racist ideologue. :nana:

    Point out the lies on the page I quoted.
     
    Egalitarianjay02, Oct 23, 2014
    #350
Page 14 of 18

Share This Page