*ends leftism*
>>25255386Wait, aren't IQ score and educational attainment both correlated with higher likelihood of left/lib beliefs?
>>25255394That isn't what the book is about but nice try
>>25255394kek
how can you reconcile being a right winger while also believing in literal materialist ideologies like iq?
>>25255403>How can you be a right winger and believe in natural hierarchies?What point are you trying to make here?
fbi open upeveryone deserves a sword
High IQ people are well known for engaging in the petty Left/Right political theater for the slave masses.
>>25255394Um...rightbros?T-thats not true, is it?
>>25255394yes.its rightcucks that are fear and feelings based scaredy cats. its wired in their brains, it seems.
>>25255394>>25255436>>25255449>100 and below (salt of the earth, experience the world intuitively, exposed to the realities of left wing policy): Right wing>100-130 (midwits, susceptible to propaganda and narratives from The Experts™, sneers at those below them while resenting those above them, chattering bureaucrat class): Left wing>130 and below (natural aristocrats, know it's their duty and privilege to administer society, understands the necessity of rigid class structures, men that can actually accomplish something): Right wingWe know all this already? That's the point of the book
i don't see the point of a bell curve if you can choose to stretch it out the same way you choose to do with your asshole
>>25255452You don't get to claim me as Right Wing.
>>25255459Well yes there are still many ostensibly left wing half wits due to gibs
>>25255463You don't get to assign me to either side of the aisle.
>>25255452this is patently false. nice try stinky diaper pants
>>25255394>>25255401>>25255436>>25255449I know you're not actually engaging in good faith but I'm going to explain why the methodology of these is (intentionally) badMost importantly their definitions of what makes a belief left or right is simply how liberal that belief is, if you think marijuana should be legal (actual question they use btw) you are classified as left but if you believe authority is good (i.e. like every communist does) you are classified as right wingSo the hordes of impoverished begging browns that the left relies on for votes get categorised as right wing while a libertarian that smokes weed is a leftistThey also almost always fail to mention in their headlines that higher IQ also correlates with more support for Capitalism (guess that isn't right wing for some reason...)And finally these studies don't actually focus on the extreme end of high IQ, the only one that I could find that looks at over 130 (ideally it should be 140) found no meaningful differences outside of "conservatise beliefs" (i.e. browns)You either realise these studies are bad or agree with the researchers that Libertarianism from 2008 is the high IQ position
>>25255452>Aristocrats and administrators are 130iqLmao even
>>25255521administering and administrators are obviously different things my 115 IQ friend
in reality, the elites are retarded
tell me more about how only the smartest people consume dank kushideally aim your voice at my right breast
>>25255403>materialist ideologies like iqiq exists and 100 years of jewish psychology can only say youre bad if you notice. today its materialism, simply because the enemies of the jews are Christians
>>25255524What kind of nonsense is this lol.
>>25255505your whole shit is so whack you arent even capable of good faith. Cunt.
>>25255394True, but it also is correlated with higher instances of suicidal ideation and trooning out. Pol Pot knew if the nerds took over everyone would a suicidal faggot, so in order to increase life expectancy he had to decrease it for a time, so that every smart person was rightfully killed given enough time. If he had succeeded the Khmer Rouge would have been undoubtedly retarded but everyone would literally be immortal and undoubtedly 100% heterosexual, with a population ten times higher than China. Of course he would have to conquer new lands in order to fit the growing population and we could have seen the 2nd Mongol empire by now.
>25255575Unhinged post desu
>>25255542I accept your concession
>>25255616fucking lol youre an "accept concession" poster? of course you are.i accept your concession that you huff your mommies dirty panties.
>>25255634Kek
>>25255394Classical liberalism, yesCommunism and Socialism, no
>>25255643i accept your panty-sniffing concession.
>>25255648>"Intelligence is correlated with a range of left-wing and liberal political beliefs. This may suggestintelligence directly alters our political views. Alternatively, the association may be confoundedor mediated by socioeconomic and environmental factors. We studied the effect of intelligencewithin a sample of over 300 biological and adoptive families, using both measured IQ andpolygenic scores for cognitive performance and educational attainment. We found both IQ andpolygenic scores significantly predicted all six of our political scales. Polygenic scores predictedsocial liberalism and lower authoritarianism, "Even your own study, says it though?Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were not socially liberal or against authoritarianism. Your ideas hated liberalism and love authoritarianism and murder, like you.
>>25255505>Libertarianism from 2008 is the high IQ positionIt is, that's why they killed Occupy Wallstreet. And propped up the big companies
>>25255386Funded by who?
>>25255657>lenin, stalin, mao, pol potnot marx though, huh?not hard to be mad at fascists and authoritarianism. like this trump guy, fuck him, right?
>>25255634I already accepted your concession
>>25255394History shows that this wasn't always the case so the trend is more culturally dependent.Institutions have made certain left wing beliefs an informal precondition of advancement which biases political development in a certain direction. An obvious thought experiment: Do you think the number of Maoists in high-ranking Chinese universities is higher than in the West? Of course it is. Because both systems are highly politicized.
>>25255713of course you did.youve never done anything else,let alone actually think.
>>25255394Shhhhh let them create more libs in their ignorance
>>25255719>Institutions have made certain left wing beliefs an informal precondition of advancement which biases political development in a certain direction.Shouldn't that be illegal in cultures which pride themselves on liberal democratic formality?
>>25255727lol im sorry what 'president' is actively suing colleges again? is it obama? biden? no. its orange cunt, you fucking idiot.
>>25255727Yes but it's difficult to legislate against informal practices. Nobody can prove that a left wing college is purposefully hiring left wing candidates exclusively. To be charitable, they likely aren't even aware that's what they're doing either. The statistics are really extreme though. If you considered "right wing" as a group like "black" or "female", they would be disproportionately the least employed within academia.
>>25255643Liberalism is the quintessential midwit position. All rise in intellect gravitates towards communism.
>>25255748Hegel himself was a constitutional monarchist and supportive of colonialism. Your own movement grew from the thought of a man that would be considered a right wing extremist today.
>>25255452I'd wager the people running the world rarely break the 120 IQ mark except the tech business bros. They compensate their deficiencies with a psychotic drive to succeed.
>>25255751not sure thats how ideas workbut cool thanks
>>25255740>To be charitable, they likely aren't even aware that's what they're doing either.Ignorance is not a worthy excuse of those who consider themselves intelligent. They of all people should at least be aware of that.
>>25255730I don't even support the guy but you need to go outside. Breathe some fresh or air or something. Hyperventilating isn't good for your health. Etc etc.
>>25255801fine.but im not wrong.
>>25255394It's funny when libs pretend to have arrived at their beliefs due to careful consideration rather than just osmosing whatever is most socially palatable and convenient for their lifestyles. The amount of highly educated NYC liberal women I know that espouse their love for black people then avoid the subway whenever possible because of their fear of black guys is striking, but it will not prevent them from still proclaiming their devotion towards the fight against racism of whatever. Conservative beliefs might be repugnant in many ways but liberal beliefs in their common upperclass form are sheer cowardice.
>>25255413kek
>>25255831glad to know you are a coward among coWARDS.maybe fuck off, coward.
This lowercase leftoid that has incoherent meltdowns on a daily basis is really funny lol
>>25255751This is why one reads The German Ideology
>>25255748Support for Capitalism correlates with a higher IQ (fact btw)
>>25255853lol no
>>25255857https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11308703/>Education, which may be in a reciprocal causal relationship with IQ scores, has been found to be associated with liberal values and support for capitalism
>>25255858you dont even know what you mean when write 'capitalism'. you live in bad faith.
>>25255860uh oh melty!
>>25255386denial of innate human differences is part of the more mystic/religious christian soul of what passes as left in the west, religious people aren't necessarily dumb there's a strong social component to it and I'd wager it's one of the second hand effects of neotenization, you get smarter yes, but also more locked into the prosocial matrix as sensibility to anti-social behavior(which might be required if some truth is intrinsically divisive) skyrockets
>>25255865yeah sureyou still got nothing
i am sick of trolls ruining the quality of 4chan
>>25255885If you want to complain about the quality of 4chan you're about as timely as it'd be to complain about the fall of the roman empire.It doesn't help that the mods are actively malicious.
>>25255885fantastic non-statement.now try doing something, cunt.
>>25255853Sympathy for communism is a sure shot sign of intellectualism. This has always been true to the point where they accuse academics of being Marxist hotbeds. The reason is simple, it's simply the right and smart position to hold.
>>25255942the only department that still has marxists is the english department and that's because of the complete lack of rigor.
>>25255394Yes
>>25255949If dishonesty and bad faith was an island, all bootalists would live on it.
>>25255942>Sympathy for communism is a sure shot sign of intellectualismactually toxic empathy is a sure shot sign of unearned privilege
>>25255979>toxic empathyBrainrot
>>25255837Struck a nerve?
>>25255813Why does it bother you so much, though?
>>25255850Someone should publish their "greatest hits" in a book.
>>25255394Those are luxury beliefs, yes.
>>25255831there's a small kerfuffle happening in the UK right now, because Nigel Farage promised to send all of the migrants to left voting areas, to which the leftists are naturally outraged, but can't articulate why.This happens literally every time.
>>25255386Leftism/Woke is solely about denying reality and waging war on nature and hierarchy fueled by resentment. They are biologically different and maladaptive. You cannot use empirical data or try to be rational to the irrational. The brain drain is palpable, at least crackpot soviets had theory instead of wearing a fursuit, getting in a discord server, pinning estrogen and using the surveillance state to live through people like sims characters and emulating africa.
>>25255386>daily reminder that no one has been able to come with an IQ test that every race scores the same
>>25255505why would anyone think capitalism works if it has produced libertine billionaires like drumpf and epstein? capitalism is also driving mass migration because "WE NEED WORKERS AND WE DONT CARE IF THEYRE SHITSKINS, WE LOVE EVERYONE!!!" and it commodifies religion, makes the sacred into merchandise. creates megachurches. >>25255831the lower-IQ libs are psychologically unable to engage with any viewpoint that might offend a particular group. case in point: was speaking to a liberal and the topic of homosexual men having biological children via some freaky artificial shit came up. i was disgusted by this but said liberal could not comprehend what could possibly be wrong here. the internal logic is "gays might want lab-grown babies. gays must be supported at all costs. therefore, i approve of lab-grown babies." i was saying how this is obviously biologically dangerous but this did not matter to her. same shit with trannies, it doesn't matter how dangerous the dickchopping surgeries are, if the minority wants it it's good and right.however, though people here hate nuance, there are leftists that genuinely believe their shit and have logical reasons for it, that are not as swayed by emotion and white guilt.
>>25255394someone SHUTHIMUP
>>25256254So being a right winger boils down to being a jewish materialist?
>>25255449left wing projection remains undefeatablehttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4dxZCfEjL7U&ra=m
>>25255866It's non-dualism except the retarded atheist materialistic version instead of the one that recognizes there's a conventional and ultimate truth. That conventionally there's difference and thus hierarchy, and that ultimately we all have the same essence. The problem is they're trying to make heaven on earth when their intentions are just paving the road to hell. Without recognizing the two truths and trying to smear everyone into a homogenous poop they're actually cutting themselves off the divine because in order to reach the absolute you must go through the relative. This means recognizing difference, recognizing hierarchy, recognizing the noble vs the ignoble, and the superior vs inferior.
>>25255866>denial of innate human differencesIs nothing but recognition of scientific truth
The same people who call leftoids materialist bugmen believe in an atheized form of calvinist predestination where your DNA (or usually some shorthand for it) has already determined you are a criminal element so it's okay for them to kill you.
>>25255394yes, and it's a well-studied and frequently replicated phenomenon, but if you say this to the bell curve crowd suddenly they start talking about selection effects and institutional bias KEK
>>25255505low-IQ cope after getting IQmogged by libs
>>25255452>100 and below>100-130 midwits>130 and belowLmfao "130 and below" means "everyone below 130 is right-wing" you fucking retard, way to prove his point
>>25256930woah man you pointed out a small mistake well done
>>25257144Kek
>>25256235He should force them to take them into their houses.I mean where the FUCK do they get off not opening their doors to these poor refugees? They need a place to stay and they're just going to leave them on the street?>>25255942It has nothing to do with the long march and elbowing everyone else out of academia I'm sure.And apparently holding onto a falsifiable and complete failure of an ideology has no correlation to intelligence.
>>25255942Stats disagree lil bro
wait do marxoids think their professors are high IQ???
>>25257187>>25257201These are really bad, worthless postst. advocate for the helicopter solution to marxism
>>25257207>I'm just like you I swearmarxoids don't need a solution because they're a non entity
>>25257144lol
>>25257218Yeah but I still wanna
>>25256930When you're so smart you don't understand clerical errors
>>25257393>clerical errorOh I'm sure
>>25255394fpbp
>>25257397Pretending that guy doesn't know what simple words like "below" mean -- in general but especially after he used it correctly first -- just makes you look like an even bigger retard. Also why did you post a picture of yourself?
>>25255386>Destroys rightwingers and Murray in a single pithy quote, long before he was even born.
>>25256787aint clicking, but hilary was right...
>>25256550Reminder that some races score way above the average even more than the average races score above the low scoring ones
>>25257942reminder that some people are just douche bags and i dont really care if they get smacked on the back of the head regularly
Low iq > high though.. Compare north (muslim) vs south nigeria (christian)7 tfr vs 4 tfrPolygamy vs longhousingN nigeria has less cases of aids then S nigeriaN nigeria is more trad---All the christcuck S nigeria has is MUH IQ
>>25255748>Liberalism is the quintessential midwit position. All rise in intellect gravitates towards communism.Commies consistently blame liberals for not taking power so that can't be trueCommunists believe the rule of law, separation of power, and protection of private property hurts their cause and makes liberals their arch-enemy
>>25255699You don't even have mention Marx because he influenced all their ideasHe loved terrorism and centralized control, called for it all the timeCommunists want an unrestrained state that does whatever they want without any considerations for human life or libertyIt's a mentally retarded ideology, really, for kids who don't work
Izzat is more important than muh intelligence as well
>>25258005Autistic
>>25258022keep toeing that party line, my guy
>>25257496keep up the cope
>>25258005Africa's TFR is completely propped by Western and Chinese (high IQ) money, low IQ populations simply can't scale civilisation on their own and there has never ever been an exception to this rule
>>25257187Stats like the ones in OP's book?
>>25255657The study is useless because "authoritarianism" is a useless buzzword.
>>25255885It's fucking jeets and pakis
>>25258296Someone with a low IQ would think that, yes.History shows that authoritarianism produces people like Stalin and Pol Pot. The best societies are always the societies that account for human fallibility. You just love authoritarianism because you're pussy to afraid to do anything in real life and want to live a power fantasy.
>>25255394IQ is pseudoscientific bullshit and educational attainment is essentially being a diligent worker
>>25258287The Bell Curve doesn't talk about ideology at all?>>25258335>IQ is pseudoscientific bullshitHas always and will always be total cope
>>25258309>History shows that authoritarianism produces people like Stalin and Pol Pot.Anyone who manages to type that sentence and hit post has no business talking about iq."Authoritarianism" always was, is and will be a midwit cope that appeals to 95iq liberals who wish to discredit nations they do not agree to, without having to provide a rational or intellectual justification. It's just another fake buzzword and fake buzzwords are the bread and butter of the midwit. Using that word alone is a sign of a man who cannot think critically and just absorbs whatever bullshit is peddled to him by MSNBC or fox news. These are traits quite anti-thetical to high intelligence and critical thinking skills. The primary purpose of the word "authoritarianism" is to obfuscate and confuse the discussion by hiding the actual ideologies being discussed. A smart person would easily see through such labels.
>>25258335No and no. Lying is a sin.
>>25258400HOLY DUNNING KRUGER
>>25258607>HOLY DUNNING KRUGERAppropriate reaction to anyone even uttering the word "authoritarianism"
>>25255386Murray is the modern Galileo
>>25258614no. just to that fuck head.
>>25258400Nobody is reading your unemployed midwit cope about authoritarianism being good, you retarded jeet.
>>25258640>authoritarianism being goodI agree. It cannot be good because it's not a real thing to begin with. It's a cope that can afford only ever inflict itself upon the muttoid brain.
>>25258644You live in a shit, corrupt country like India so you don't understand civilization. You're used to some local warlord telling you what to do because you're weak and ineffective.
>>25258653>You live in a shit, corrupt country like India so you don't understand civilization. lol wtf? Is this the part where your /pol/oid brain melts down due to lack of rebuttal so you start punching at imaginary Jeets floating in your room, like a schizo.>You're used to some local warlord telling you what to do because you're weak and ineffective.The irony of this coming out of a MAGAcoper
>>25258680Trump wonYou lostKeep crying, jeet
His other book also destroyed libtards coping about white/western civilization
>>25258745Is this surprising? Everything people use can be traced back to a white person. It’s just so overwhelmingly obvious people have become blind to it. It’s everywhere so it’s nowhere. But for some reason we are not allowed to talk about it. You get shamed for being proud to be a part of such a productive race.
>>25258696enjoy your blockade
>>25258761I don't live in Cuba though
Liberals really are the biggest dumbasses on the planet. Sixty-percent of Canadians think America is the greatest threat to the nation. Not China. Not Russia. America. This is what Libtardation does. It makes you stupid. Oblivious to reality. Survival instinct has been lost. But it’s also moral depravity. Democrats didn’t stand for a grieving mother of the girl who got fucking butchered by a black man because it doesn’t suit their political agenda. They also didn’t stand for a little girl who got fucking paralyzed because of an Indian driver. They didn’t stand when they were asked if their allegiance was to Americans or illegal immigrants.It has never been more hilarious seeing lefties coping about their side being the right side. It’s explicitly not the right. It’s the left. It’s explicitly not the right side of history. It’s in the words. Christ.
>>25258766ahh, very stupid i see>>25258767ahh also very stupid i see.how the fuck are you so unobservant and ignorant of whats going on around you?>da LEFT IS DA RIGHT is daq left right is dalool fuck offget help.
>>25258767Liberals lost to Trump and are now being cannibalized by communists like Hasan PikerIt's over for them
>>25258766It remains hilarious that when this happened there was a slew of neocon apologists on /lit/ saying it was a win for the American people because gas prices would be low again in a few months.
>>25258804enjoy your forever war with iran and trumps gas prices
>>25255394No, in fact most niggers vote shitlib and all failed nations are leftwing KEK
>>25258808It's hilarious communists cope like this in the lieu of fact we can find and kill them any place on the planet, and they think we need to take them seriously.Like, we can kill you and your entire family and the world couldn't a fucking thing about it.
>>25258809Hey, buddy. You wouldn’t lower your quality of life by like ten degrees for the sake of freeing the people living under the heel of a tyrannical theocratic regime? Of course you wouldn’t. Yo ite a first world consumer. You’re a hypocrite. You don’t actually care about Iranians. If you were living in Iran you’d be begging Trump to bomb the shit out of the Ayatollah too. If you’re anti war at least acknowledge WHY some people are pro war. Inaction IS worse than action. In the end, you’re only anti war because you’re much too comfortable and much too isolated within the safety of your own ignorance and lack of suffering.
>>25258696Yes your warlord whose ass you clean with your tongue won. Next time look at the mirror before accusing someone else of bending their ass to warlords fucking MAGAdroid
>>25258767>>25258804>>25258982It’s actually fucking incredible how much psychological damage Trump has done. His sincere, trollish force of personality is just too much for the overly sensitive and spineless libtards. They cannot HANDLE that a man like that is currently president of the most powerful nation on the planet. It doesn’t help that he isn’t playing by the rules of political etiquette (and thank god for that; how gross it has gotten). “Trump needs to be more polite!”. Lol how about no? He outright mocked the death of that mega liberal Rob Reiner; unsurprising to anyone after Reiner had wished death on Trump for a long fucking time, or how the left mocked the death of Charlie Kirk (the cheering of the death of free speech).
>>25258999I saw a video of a woman crying snotty tears and running face first into a wall after the election results came in. She was just totally unaware of her surroundings. This is the result of being conditioned by mentally ill people who instilled into their noggins that Trump is the literal fucking Devil. Oh, and there were those finger painting classes for the adults who couldn’t cope with it. Trump turned adults back into children.
I like how liberals will support Iran even though Iran tells its youth to surround their infrastructural bases.“Don’t bomb us! There are children here!”They will gladly use kids as PR fuel.
>>25258831Buddy I am literally just a guy in Ohio who thinks it sucks that gas costs five dollars a gallon.
Funny seeing liberals like Bill Maher realize slowly in real time (lol) that their side is fucking mental and batshit crazy and has been hijacked for decades
>>25257634You don't need statistics to know niggers are stupid.
>>25259031Ugh so much this, first the "Epstein" panic, then turning on our greatest ally. The antisemitism on the left is off the charts.
>>25258767>They also didn’t stand for a little girl who got fucking paralyzed because of an Indian driver. Would the liberal apathy be more palatable to you if the girl got paralyzed by a white driver?
>>25259123White truck driver accident rates are near zero. If they aren't, it's due to mestizos and jews being considered "white". Besides, whites are often punished with multi-decade sentences for minor crimes due to the great replacement, at least twice the incarceration rate as blacks (again, jews/mestizos obscure these facts). Your inability to comprehend institutional biases when they really exists is really stunning.
It’s okay to be racist toward white people apparently Even though white people are the true minorities globally
>>25259128You haven't answered my question. Would you care less about the liberal silence on this girl's death if the driver was white? Why do you expect liberals to show selective outrage just because the driver was non-white?
oil is back under a 100 a barrel
>>25258339>>25258407IQ is almost as scientific as astrology
>>25259397The idea that biological variance exists even in the brain is a dumb idea?No anon. The idea that biological variance stops once it reaches the brain is what is astrology tier thinking.
>>25255386This book was debunked within 5 years of it's release. Multiple book length refutations of it's methodology and fallacies exist. Only chuds looking for an excuse to not give black people their fair due quote this.
>>25259411>This book was debunked within 5 years of it's releaseNope. You can’t just say “debunked debunked debunked!” and expect it to happen.
>>25259419That's rich coming from someone who would never even read the refutations in the first place. Or just reject them altogether without critically dealing with the content. You just can't say "nope" and wish your fantasy into reality.
>>25259501Well, the refutation would require me to just believe that biological variance stops once it reaches the brain. That is absurd. Do some kids do well at math? Yes. Do some kids do awful at math? Yes. Is this a forever trait in a lot of kids? Yes. Ergo brain variance exists.You can take issue with the test itself, but you cannot take issue with what it tries to measure, not without coming across as denying the very basics of biology.
>>25259511>the refutation would require me to just believe that biological variance stops once it reaches the brainnta but no, it doesn't. it requires you to believe that the thing called "intelligence" has hundreds of contributing factors that are extraordinarily difficult to isolate with any degree of confidence other than the blurriest, most big-picture sort of claims -- education good, lead bad, early childhood nutrition good, that sort of thing>brain variance existsonly retards deny that the thing called "intelligence" is real, obviously some people are geniuses and some are retarded>denying the very basics of biologyyou don't have to deny biological fundamentals to think the bell curve is a retarded chud meme book
>>25259511>You can take issue with the test itself, but you cannot take issue with what it tries to measureMost refutations do take issue with the test itself. Nobody is trying to believe that difference between iq scores between two individuals cannot exist. That would be absurd. The Bell Curve does not claim something so trivial
>>25259522Sigh. Okay…Let’s take the politics out of it and go back to the basics of biology.Take two populations of the same species. Not humans- let’s say rabbits.Isolate them genetically for a significant period (usually such isolation is caused by geography but it doesn’t matter why so long as interbreeding is minimal and is over enough generations for natural selection and genetic drift to occur).Will there be a divergence of traits between the two populations?The answer is yes, of course. Some traits will diverge becasue of natural selection, some because of sexual selection and some just becasue of genetic drift.After all that is how evolution works - it simply must be the case.Evolution isn’t just about when two populations diverge so greatly that a new species or sub-species forms - it is happening daily for all sorts of traits and characteristics of an animal. Any animal. And the traits that most directly impact on fitness will tend to be subject to strong selection.So wind it back to humans.Have certain populations of humans being genetically isolated from each other for many generations?Yes. We tend to call them ethnicities.Will their traits vary as between population groups?Yes. Hair type, blood group, eye colour, facial features, ability to digest certain foods, average height, body shape etc. All these traits demonstrably differ between ethnic groups.Is intelligence a trait of humans that will likewise vary?You can logically only choose one answer:A) Yes - and as intelligence is one of a human’s key traits it is likely to be selected for quite strongly in different environments and communities,B) No - intelligence is a special trait - alone amongst all traits it’s not possible for it to vary between groups at all - all groups of human beings have the same average intelligence.If you pick B fine, but don’t expect to pass a biology class any time soon.
>>25259411I gave them their fair due and it turns out they suck.
>>25259532>SucksOpinions do not really matter when the methodology is proven to be bogus beyond doubt.
>>25259522>nta but no, it doesn'tWhat even is IQ to you? Christ Almighty
>>25259525If there are differences amongst groups of different peoples then naturally this means there will be higher and lower variants, and thus the bell curve suffices quite nicely.Not sure why this is so hard to understand. Hm.
>>25259529it's much easier to observe trait divergence when you're looking at something very specific with a very small group of biological causes. like a rabbit's VO2 max depends mostly on lung size. increase lung size, increase vo2 max. easy. but like I said, intelligence has at minimum hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of contributing biological causes. brain size, but not always and not overwhelmingly. processing speed, but not always and not overwhelmingly. early childhood education and nutrition play a major role, but it's unclear exactly how or why they contribute to intelligence, we just know they do. etc, etc, etc, etc, etc>Have certain populations of humans being genetically isolated from each other for many generations?yes, but not as isolated as you think (people travel and have travelled all the time for all human history, which sounds like a "lol okay" point until you think about it) and there simply hasn't been enough time to cause massive polycausal trait divergence for something like intelligence. height, skin tone, eye color, lactose intolerance, all these things have less genetic/epigenetic/environmental causes than intelligence, and thus diverge easier and quicker>all groups of human beings have the same average intelligenceprobably, on average, yeah. it's just a simpler explanation. most people are in this height range, most people have this blood pressure range, most people have this IQ score range, it makes sense. somewhat off topic but it fits into our convo -- as I'm sure you know, it is astonishingly difficult to design a test that isn't culturally biased. I'm not talking about the bluehaired leftwing "reeeeee cultural bias reeeeee" I mean if the test asks you "a mobius strip is to 2d as a klein bottle is to what" and you don't know what a mobius strip is or a klein bottle is or what 2d means you're going to get the question wrong no matter how intelligent you are. take picrel; the answer is D but getting the right answer requires you to read the grid left-to-right. if your native language is Arabic, you might get it wrong because you'll read it right-to-left, if you speak some language that's written vertically etc etc. good thing to keep in mind when you're comparing cross-cultural IQ tests
>>25258982The people of Iran have nothing to do with the reason that America is currently attacking Iran. It's all about China. Venezuela, Cuba, and Iran are America's first moves. 130+ IQ btw. Confidence Interval 133-155.
>>25259537>what even is IQ to youa fuzzy approximation of general intelligence; a flawed measurement that tracks something real
>>25259529>Let’s take the politics out of itOnly if the chuds who shill this book could do the same. It's quite impossible anyway because the part 4 of this work is author's own weird political beliefs. >Evolution isn’t just about when two populations diverge so greatly that a new species or sub-species forms - it is happening daily for all sorts of traits and characteristics of an animal. Any animal.>Have certain populations of humans being genetically isolated from each other for many generations?There's a caveat here. As you mentioned, evolution happens daily, therefore the variance depends on how long the populations have been isolated and what whether they were subject to truly divergent evolutionary pressures. Depending on that the variance can be great or insignificant. >Yes. We tend to call them ethnicities.Ethnicities are socially determined not biologically or genetically.>Is intelligence a trait of humans that will likewise varyThere's actually little proof that intelligence is heritable. (Fyi "heritable" is different from "genetically determined". Intelligence is known to be strongly genetically determined, or so I've heard. But it's heritability is questionable)Another issue is that just like another comment mentioned in this thread, intelligence is too complicated to be defined as a singular trait or entity. It's not some easy observable like hair color or height.
Chuds believe that Africans shouldn't be treated as humans because 48 half starving village school kids in bumfuck Kenya performed 20 point lower than their european counterparts in a test administered in a foreign language.
>>25259584>>25259577Check the IQ of black children adopted by white parents.
>>25259584How horrible. Let‘s send them back to Kenya where they‘ll never have to deal with us again.
>>25259592Sure . Gimme the source.
>>25259592they show if the white parents get the black kids in early childhood and provide good education + nutrition their IQ scores increase, and if they get them in later childhood there's little effect because they've missed the critical window, so to speak. this isn't very surprising
>>25259596>Let‘s send them back to Kenya where they‘ll never have to deal with us again.That didn't work out did it though. Not having to deal with would've been ideal.
>>25259566It’s not really flawed. In fact it’s quite accurate in regards to assessing what is perhaps the most standardized form of intelligence; one based on speed of assessment and reaction times. People who are more ponderous (those who like to digest their information in no rush at all) or more prone to ADHD won’t excel at it. If Einstein did an IQ test he probably would have been higher than what it showed. But it’s still pretty standard.
>>25259559>>25259577This is some really adorable coping / wall of text diarrhea to deflect from reality >Ethnicities are socially determined not biologically or genetically.This is just wrong; Africans are noticeably apart from Asians and Europeans; these are ethnicities (genetic cluster packages) to anyone who isn’t in denial
>>25259584That’s not it at all. What’s annoying is pretending that we’re all the same inside and out. Sorry. That’s just not true. Some races and some generations are just flat out better at things compared to others. So fucking what? Do people really expect every single high school generation to score the same every year?
>>25259617>really adorable coping / wall of text diarrhea to deflect from realityYou are the one refusing to read counter-points. You shouldn't even talk about "deflecting from reality" when that's your entire game.>Africans are noticeably apart from Asians and Europeans; There is no such thing as an "African" in the realm of biology or genetics. That group simply doesn't exist.>ethnicities>genetic cluster packagestwo entirely different things
>>25259617then why is there more genetic divergence within ethnic groups than between ethnic groups? two africans are more likely to have more genetic variation between them than two europeans, and while the african and the european will be genetically different from each other, the two africans will be more different from each other than an african and a european are different from each other. in population genetics this called the serial founder effect
>>25259625I refuse to read your “counter points” because it, again, requires me to assume that humans are magical creatures exempt from the fineries of biological variance. The majority of Chinese can’t really tolerate dairy. It’s possible that some people out there just can’t tolerate intellectual matters.
>>25259625>There is no such thing as an "African" in the realm of biology or genetics. That group simply doesn't exist.you're correct but you're making a human genetics 301 level argument when the anon you're talking with is failing out of human genetics 101, gotta explain yourself more than this
>>25259633>then why is there more genetic divergence within ethnic groups than between ethnic groups?Because it would be weird if it wasn’t? Why do you want everyone to be even more same-y than they are? Good lord. Do individual personalities also freak you out?
>>25259636>you're wrong about human intelligence>oh yeah? well tell me WHY>okay, here's why you're wrong>I ain't readin allat sheit fascinating
>>25259623>What’s annoying is pretending that we’re all the same inside and out. Literally nobody says that. Be specific about the claims you want to discuss.>Some races and some generations are just flat out better at things compared to others.Any comparison between populations presumes a seperation of population and how that seperation is done reveals the political bias and agenda of the tester. In that regard, testing the iq differences between races is as irrelevant and unproductive as testing the iq difference between two villages on opposite banks of a river in Poland. The only purpose this discourse serves (besides obscure academic pursuits) is to find an excuse to dehumanise certain groups of people because a random sample of them did not perform as good as another random sample from another group.
>>25259633That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that there are observable means of those two groups which are substantially different.
>>25259633>more diversity within than without blah blah blah Your blending together argument is like saying “there are 10 year olds whose biological age is 15 and vice verse. There’s so much overlap that age is a social construct.” Yeah but is there any doubt about the average traits of different age groups? Imagine going around saying age is a social construct. It wouldn’t be taken seriously. That’s why no one is taking you seriously ITT.
>>25259636>because it, again, requires me to assume that humans are magical creatures exempt from the fineries of biological varianceYou need no such assumption but you'd know that if you actually read the points (let alone argue against them). Instead you are busy punching a strawman. I'll leave you at it, just don't drag your knuckles too much
>>25259640It’s basic logic anon. If you’re not on my side you’re by default against biology and evolution.You need to be hit in the face with a brick honestly. >Literally nobody says that. Be specific about the claims you want to discuss.For the past twenty years they’ve been peddling “diversity is our strength” and yet they don’t actually mean that. They’re forcing DEI as though we’re all the same.
>>25259649The alternative to my argument rests upon one not actually understanding what biology is. I’ve already won this, if you’re bothering to argue me at all. Sorry.
>>25259652anon he did the "different distributions overlap therefore no difference between them" thing, that should've been your hint to not bother with the bioleninist kid
>>25259643>Literally nobody says thatWhere have you been for the last decade? Are you one of those libtarded morons who will try to remember things for me? How about no? If you deny the existence of IQ at all you are denying that there is real variety within the realm of life.
>>25259643>distinctions between racial groups can‘t be observed if we first deny the ability to test along racial linesSo this is the power of Human Genetics 301
>>25259643Nobody is dehumanizing anybody. We’re just acknowledging that some humans can do more/less than others. You are the one who is projecting because you are the one who is unhappy about this.
> There are physiological differences between population groups due to geneticsThis is what most people are referring to when they use the term "race". There is no race gene. It’s a collection of traits. > Race is a social constructI find this to be a fairly empty statement. Either "race" is being used to describe obvservable physiological differences, in which case the statement is just wrong. Or, it's being used to describe cultural differences, in which case it's like saying "cultural differences are cultural".Also, most people I encounter who say it are trying to make some profound argument about something or other, but if it's just semantics, then there's nothing profound or even useful about the statement. Leave the word "race" out of it, and we have "observable physiological differences exist between population who have been geographically isolated from each other for long periods of time", and "cultural differences are caused by social effects". I feel like when people say "race is a social construct", most of the time they're trying to conflate the two notions to support whatever argument they're making.
>>25259654>>25259656>>25259659The chud brain is truly fascinating to behold. > if you’re bothering to argue me at all. Sorry.I know that. You've already decided to hate black people and everything you say comes from that starting point. So I do not expect rationality or evidence to work on your lot.
I love how people (liberal scum) deconstruct the world to the point where they believe things aren’t anything. “Race isn’t real! There is no race gene!”. “Love isn’t real Morty! It’s just a bunch of chemicals Morty!” (this isn’t even how he said it, they just ran with love not being real) It’s like they think something can exist without an essential makeup. Obviously for love to exist it would need to be made up of something.
>>25259638>because it would be weird if it wasn'tyes? do you not see how this is a counterargument against >Africans are noticeably apart from Asians and Europeansbecause you're claiming that "africans are noticeably apart from asians/europeans [because of striking genetic divergence] and there are ethnicities that are clearly observed by genetic clusters." but if there's more genetic divergence among africans than between africans and another group of people, that means that either africans are not noticeably apart from asians/europeans other than surface-level differences like skin tone and hair texture, or that genetic divergence matters less for intelligence than you think it does, or that it does matter but the story is far more complex than you're making it out to be, or that genetic markers of ethnicity matter very little in intelligence, or or or. (>>25259645 does that make sense? this paragraph also applies to what you said)>Why do you want everyone to be even more same-y than they are?what?>Do individual personalities also freak you out?what relevance does this have to the current topic?>>25259647>Imagine going around saying age is a social construct. this is a very poor example; we measure age by mass social convention. other societies in the past (and currently) can and do measure age differently -- by season, by lunar calendar, by physical markers, blah blah blah. "one year = one rotation of earth around the sun = what age is" is a social construct. that doesn't mean "age is heckin fake and made up bro!," it means "age is a real phenomena but how we measure age is an invention that maps onto but is not determinate of the underlying biology." also, age and intelligence are different things entirely, and age/intelligence/genetic variation within groups are different concepts. in this paragraph I'm talking solely about your age example, not the other two things. I think I've addressed the substance of what you're saying earlier in this reply>>25259652You seem too upset to have a discussion, have a nice one
>>25259668Except I don’t hate black people. I hate white people more for hating themselves so much. For shaming their fellow whites for wanting to survive. To have the gall to claim that white people aren’t the reason why the modern world is even a thing. Go fuck yourself. Being a white supremacist doesn’t mean you think all other races are inferior the way you think it means. It means being proud to be part of the race and culture that built the modern world. I’m tired of people who shame whites for being a part of this massive trend of progression. White people don’t pretend that there aren’t retarded trailer trash white people. There are retarded trailer trash Jews living in Florida making crystal meth too, and Jews are pound for pound the people with the highest IQs on the planet. It sounds like you hate rate more than race. The odds of success and just how present and prevalent they are. There are brilliant high IQ blacks like the Igbo who are noted mathematicians. They just are not the norm. See >>25258745 it’s not even a possibility to debate against this fact.
>>25259673>what relevance does this have to the current topic?So you’re too stupid to even follow; must be that overly emotional immigrant brain Are you even white?
>>25259640This is what happens when you talk about human intelligence with retards. What did you expect? That you'd be swapping Nature DOIs? Lmfao
Cope can determine race through testing samples loool
>>25259685Believing in IQ is the equivalent of believing that biology has variety within the brain.It’s really that simple. The above anon is just having an argument to try and make himself feel better. He’s probably black and hasn’t yet figured out how to be at peace with this information.He thinks that just because white people have higher IQs on average this means there are no black people smarter than white people. That’s preposterous.
>>25259665Physiological differences are just phenomenal observables and pointers. But they are not what race is about.You are physiologically different from your brother that doesn't make you a different race. Having dark skin does not make you "black" either. Considering the genetic diversity in Africa itself we know that race is not about genetics. When someone like me is genetically closer to one African than that African is closer to another African. There is absolutely no genetic, biological, or cultural theorem that justifies the racial groupings that exist today. If race is just "collection of physiological differences" then all this discussion is meaningless and chuds don't really have a point.
>>25255394the trvke that launched a thousand copes
>>25259690>Physiological differences are just phenomenal observables and pointers. But they are not what race is about.Chinese and Europeans are different enough. The conclusion is that [these guys are different from me] = a whole other different category of person = “race”, “ethnicity”, etcThis is an empirical fact.
>>25259690This is too high IQ for these people, they won't understand what you're saying. They'll reply with shit like>so you're saying that I'm the same as a black guy>that can't be possible because he's got black skin and I've got white skin so we're different so you're retardedand think they've made a cogent, conversation-ending rebuttal. Good on you for trying, though
>>25259690>There is absolutely no genetic, biological, or cultural theorem that justifies the racial groupings that exist todayYou keep repeating this like some sort of desperate mantra. Do you not know how transfusions work?
>>25259696And look at >>25259695, doing the exact thing I just said they'd do. Proven correct immediately lol
>>25259680I'm confused. If your intentions are as you stated then what does proving an iq difference between white people and black people do for your position? Only thing I can imagine is an anti-immigration stance because blacks are dumb or whatever. Even though most immigrants engage in low iq jobs anyway
>>25259695The thing is these people are too used to seeing themselves as a racial identity and seeing other races as fundamentally "different" to see what the science and logic actually says. >>25259698>Do you not know how transfusions workOh so the racial groupings fundamentally come from who can transfuse blood to whom. Why didn't you tell me that? Now I can, on the basis of this theorem redefine races. Let's see what other people now fall into the white category according to this definition, shall we.
I got cancelled from academia due to this very topic so here is my answer even though I don’t think anyone from this thread is ready to accept, not at least in this generation. Let me give you a generic answer (answering most of the misconceptions in this thread) and if it gains interest I will provide more information.Humans are in fact 99.8% similar in regards to our DNA. Genetic differences among individuals account for 93 to 95% of genetic variation. Differences among major groups account for just 3-5%.Subspecies sharing the overwhelming majority of genetic variation and only a few percent of the variation accounted for by between group differences is the standard for every single species on the planet. 3-5% of the total genetic variation being accounted for by intergroup differences is standard when comparing different subspecies let alone race. To say humans are "99.9% genetically similar" without context is a specifically misleading statement within biology. Humans share about 50% of our DNA with bananas and 99% with Neanderthals. A 0.001% could be important depending on the kind of genes. 30-40% of our genome affects brain development and the idea than any two groups with any distance at all will independently evolve identical group average capacities is ludicrous.Despite the fact the "lines" between racial(subspecies) groups at their genetic borders is somewhat fuzzy due to introgression and hybridization, this does not invalidate the main groups existence as a valid and useful category just as the few percent of Neanderthal DNA present in Caucasians and Asians does not mean that the species Homosapiens as a group doesn't exist. Introgression and hybrid speciation is common in nature, such as wolf subspecies hybridization and introgression with domestic dogs.(cont)
(cont)At the end of the day not only can you categorize humans into 5 races, those races would be classified as subspecies if it weren't for a combination of humanities arrogance to place ourselves above phylogenetic classification. There are more politics involved for this travesty and why people are so in the dark about anthropology. I am not sure you are ready for that answer either so to avoid my comment being deleted I will stick to biology. The fact that we cannot talk about this openly should actually make you more suspicious why you know so little about the facts I aforementioned and why they choose to silence any dialogue about it.The instant the races become phylogenetically grouped, as with every other subspecies and biological group on the planet; habitat encroachment, demographic replacement, excessive hybridization, all indisputably become a threat to the existence of a given group these acts are committed against. The only justification required for that group's particular survival is existence for existence's sake. Nature needs diversity for diversity's sake as means for protecting itself against black swan events in ecosystems. In mixed populations, if a threat shows up the outcome would be catastrophic for all species. The same way the extinction of the black rhino through interbreeding, out breeding and habitat encroachment by the white rhino would be a tragedy without needing to say the black rhino is "superior" to the white rhino.
>>25259703>just ignore the truth so everyone can be happy No. Logic first, feelings second.
>>25259731>Logic first, feelings second.Except race realists operate entirely on feelings. The post that I replied to betrayed it's paranoia regarding, I don't know, white race culling? I can't keep up with the chud fantasies.
lol
lmao even
kek
kekaroo even
hehehe
chairs thrown
>>25259749>>25259754>>25259763>>25259766>>25259771Are you the schizo who posts those IT DA JOO IT DA JOO schizojpgs? I thought you'd gotten back on your meds and quieted down
>>25259775Nah. I’m actually in favour of the Joo. They are technically the master race if you consider that their IQs are the highest on the planet. Also they make Muslims seethe and that’s based.
The people getting angry at the reality of IQ don’t even realize that it’s only partially why the white man came out ahead.It was a mixture of cognitive sharpness and robust creativity. We shaped culture to support this sort of thing.
>>25259719>At the end of the day not only can you categorize humans into 5 racesDo you have genetic data that has gone through proper statistical analysis to back up this claim that humans indeed are genetically distinctified into exactly 5 different races? Or are you talking out of your ass?>habitat encroachment, demographic replacement, excessive hybridizationHybridization and extinction due to habitat enroachment are entirely different phenomena. The genes of both groups get passed down in only one case. And it's extremely negligent or dishonest of you to group these together.>. In mixed populations, if a threat shows up the outcome would be catastrophic for all species. In mixed populations the traits of all involved groups co-exist so the threat you speak of doesn't exist. Just because the population has become mixed does not mean it has become homogenic. If anything, this line of reasoning actually favours mixing otherwise entire groups of people may go extinct in case of a catastrophe.>The same way the extinction of the black rhino through interbreeding, out breeding and habitat encroachment by the white rhino would be a tragedyBlack rhinos went extinct owing to human causes
>>25259749>>25259754>>25259763>>25259766>>25259771There's a point to be made here. /Pol/cels who post these memeographic jpgs NEVER read the original research they have screenshotted from. The original research almost never comes to the conclusions chuds are trying to draw from it. And in all cases they don't have nefarious agendas like dehumanising and hating certain groups of peoples.I've debunked quite a few of them myself just by googling and reading the original work. Something the chud wouldn't do because he doesn't seek the truths, he dishonestly cherry picks whatever fits his agenda.
>>25259798>>25259813All you’re doing is confirming that you hate the idea that brains are wired differently for everyone, and indeed wider groupings as a whole. You hate biology.
>>25259821>confirming that you hate the idea that brains are wired differently for everyoneNo I actually love that idea. How else do we get troglodytes to laugh at, such as yourself
>>25255394Rightoid sisters… not like this…. NOT. LIKE. THIS!!!
>>25259826So you agree that IQ is real since troglodytes like myself exist?
>>25255394Higher cognitive capacity =|= the ability to think critically Sorry to have to tell you this There are brilliant Chinese mathematicians in China who still worship Mao in their bathrooms
>>25259829>So you agree that IQ is realWhat kind of question is that? Real in what sense
>>25259830>the ability to think criticallyYes....the defining trait of right wing.....critical thinking
>>25259834Varying intellectual capacities. To assume someone is a troglodyte is so imply that you believe in IQ. They probably wouldn’t do well on an IQ test compared to yourself. That is what you believe. It’s ironic.
>>25259856Just lmao.
>>25259859Your brain = broken
>>25255394Is it really this easy to oneshot chuds?
>>25259864>238 replies and 19 images>oneshot
>>25255386>tfw graduate degree in a neuroscience field>tfw forced to share an imageboard with newfags who can only type random directions in their postsMust be some low-IQ nigger bitch.
>>25259864Well it took a while before >>25259830 refuted it so…
>>25259899pathetic samefagging kek
>>25259916How is he wrong? The Chinese are a very good example of this. Supposedly higher IQs and all, and yet they still led themselves into the single worst famine in human history. “They plan the long game!” my ass.
>>25259923>how is he wrongwhy are you talking about yourself in the 3rd person
>>25259943Stop hitting yourselfStop hitting yourself
>>25255394rightoids BTFO
>>25259411feel free to summarise those refutations
>>25259969>The Mismeasure of Man - Stephen J Gould>Inequality by design, cracking the bell curve myth. -Ficher, Hout et. Al. >How Heritability Misleads about Race- Ned Block.>Race , Genetics and Pseudoscience: an explainer - Ewan Birney et. Al. >Intelligence, Genes and Success: Scientists respond to The Bell CurveThese are only some of them. Also Murray draws a lot of his data from research conducted by people associated with eugenicists and neo-nazi groups. Which explains the bad data and misrepresentations.
>>25260007>Murray draws a lot of his data from research conducted by people associated with eugenicists and neo-nazi groups. Which explains the bad data and misrepresentations.word to the wise -- you're on /lit/, "zomg he gets his data from heckin nazis" won't convince anyone. you need to show that the eugenicists and neo-nazis aren't wrong because they're heckin bad people, they're wrong because they're fucking retarded
>>25255394conservasisters, is this correct?
>>25260007this is a list of books and not a summary of what's actually in them
ITT seething midwits
>>25260007That you actually think this is a refutation is hilarious. At least the imagines in >>25259749 >>25259754 >>25259763 >>25259766 have actual context in them. All you’re doing is going “nononono”.
>>25260049>imaginesImages* you stupid fucking phone
>>25260049>hmm, should I trust the schizoposter's jpgs or should I trust books published by actual geneticists, biologists, and evolutionary scientistsyour minds are so interesting to me
>>25260022>they're wrong because they're fucking retardedHuh. I thought eugenicists and neo-nazis being retarded was just common sense. >>25260040Alrighthttps://youtu.be/UBc7qBS1Ujo?si=fBO-vQNydFRexuwjThis is a short summary of some of the arguments but I would still recommend reading the material first hand as written by actual scientists
>>25260053Those images contain the citations of actual professionals you ding bat. Did you even LOOK at them? You know the guy who discovered the dna helix also believes in IQ right? They only labeled him a dark wizard because he upset the collective.
>>25260049I will refer back to my previous post here on the topic of /pol/tard memeographics>>25259813
>>25256930Congratulations on noticing a typo and taking the time to write/edit a post highlighting it for everyone, midwit bro.
>>25260007>Also Murray draws a lot of his data from research conducted by people associated with eugenicists and neo-nazi groupslol, lmao evenYou think eugenics is bad? Hard, forced eugenics I can understand, but the idea that better and better traits lead to better and better individuals isn’t really weird. It just only works softly. You just hope that parents are genetically compatible, and that’s that. If you force people to breed with certain people you’re going to have a big backlash. Probably. Our psyches are not equipped for that.
>>25260063>You think eugenics is bad?I don't "think" eugenics is bad. I KNOW that it is unscientific. I don't think of it as good or bad. It just doesn't work.
>>25260054>Huh. I thought eugenicists and neo-nazis being retarded was just common sense.you're on 4chan, come on. look at >>25260063, he's doing the exact thing I said people would do >shaun videookay this makes more sense, you're new here and you don't really know the culture. your cause is good but your approach is retarded and you need to lurk moar
>>25260067You think natural selection isn’t scientific? Dear Lord.
>>25260067Eugenics absolutely works. It’s how we got here. Some humans are better equipped to do certain tasks. Some of the aboriginals up north can digest things that others *just cannot* after years and generations of genetics accustoming itself. Did they see it as eugenics? No. But their genetics allowed them to make do with what others couldn’t.Just stop posting. Please.
>>25260054>Huh. I thought eugenicists and neo-nazis being retarded was just common senseYou know the woman who founded Planned Parenthood was a eugenicist and you still hear esteemed libtards defending baby murder by arguing that "the right people are being aborted", right? Ruth Bader Ginsburg made that argument.
>>25260054You haven't watched that video (by a nasally midwit mind you) or read any of those booksLet's have a quick look at The Mismeasure of Man>According to Gould, these methods possess two deep fallacies. The first fallacy is reification, which is "our tendency to convert abstract concepts into entities".[2] Examples of reification include the intelligence quotient (IQ) and the general intelligence factor (g factor), which have been the cornerstones of much research into human intelligence. The second fallacy is that of "ranking", which is the "propensity for ordering complex variation as a gradual ascending scale"So typical "IQ is an imperfect measure therefore intelligence can't actually be measured" hippy nonsense, the whole book relies on this semanticsfag argument btw>The book received many positive reviews in the literary and popular press, while scientific reception was highly polarized.[3] Positive reviews focused on the book's critique of scientific racism, the concept of general intelligence, and biological determinism, while negative reviews criticised Gould's scientific arguments, historical accuracy, and political bias.LOL
>>25260067Leftoids will literally deny natural selection if it means avoiding uncomfortable truths about race
>>25260068>okay this makes more sense, you're new here and you don't really know the culture. your cause is good but your approach is retarded and you need to lurk moarIdc desu. If chuds are retarded enough to reject basic facts due to the political affiliations of the presenter of those facts, then they are basically admitting that they are not interested in forming opinions based on actual reality but are more interested in their fantasies. >>25260071Eugenics is not natural selection.
>>25260083It isn't just race. They deny it because they believe people are interchangeable cogs whose lives are determined by their environment. This is why commies are harder on people who criticize the regime than they are on murderers and rapists.
Coincidental Eugenics is an informal term used to describe the unforced, accidental pairing of two individuals with highly desirable genetic traits (such as superior intellect, health, or fitness) who create offspring with advantageous genetic combinations without having intended to perform explicit "selective breeding". It is often contrasted with historical, unethical "positive eugenics" movements that aimed to encourage reproduction among the "genetically advantaged" to improve the human race.
>>25260084>Eugenics is not natural selection.Splitting hairs. There is coincidental forms of eugenics. See >>25260095That’s literally just natural selection. The difference between the artificial and the natural isn’t really there when you’re just trying to imitate nature.
>>25260084Please explain how you think "eugenics" is unscientific
>>25260084>t. never realized abortion is a form of eugenics
>>25260084We enforce eugenics in dogs. Dog breeding is scientific. It’s unethical and wobbly for sure but it’s still a formula. The only reason why people doubt eugenics in humans is because it is seen as morally abhorrent and it won’t actually work when humans value the freedom of choice.
>>25260091>They deny it because they believe people are interchangeable cogs whose lives are determined by their environment.They are. But the commies seem to think that this doesn’t transpire over eons, and that humans can just totally choose to be whatever they want. “I’m a woman now”. “Actually I’m just as smart as Einstein”. “We are all the same when we want to be :)”. Jesus Christ. They REALLY think the world is playdough or something. They don’t WANT to see the sophistication that led up to our time.
>>25260073Nothing that you typed about aboriginals has anything to do with the practice of eugenics.>>25260075Political affiliations do not matter here. Eugenics simply doesn't work and that's a scientific fact. I don't care if it's a neo Nazis or a liberal who makes that claim. >>25260078One question. Why did you even ask me for refutations in the first place (assuming it was you) if you were only going to engage in the chud trick of rejecting everything with no real justification. Look I get it, you want to hate black people. You feel good about yourself when you are told that you are innately better than them because 35 students in London scored 20 more points higher than 37 students in Kenya. If facts cannot change your mind then what's even the point? If you don't give a fuck about methodology and intellectual dishonesty then why you do you even try to appear rational? If the evidence you accept or reject is entirely based on your hatred of black people then does that evidence matter at all? There's so much material out there but all you'll do is go "nuh uh" and move on. Because hating black people is more important than science, biology, facts, statistics. I just don't get the psyche here.
>>25260111Yup.“If I pluck out my dick and turn it inside out and install the dilation package I’m now a woman right?”They think the world is Legos. Maybe one day. Not today.
>>25260112>Nothing that you typed about aboriginals has anything to do with the practice of eugenicsYes it does. Successive generations led to them being able to eat and digest things that Europeans just couldn’t.If you took a bunch of Chinese who aren’t lactose intolerant and had them breed over successive generations you’d probably get a strain of Chinamen who won’t have the shits when they drink milk or eat cheese.Most Chinese are lactose intolerant. Not all.
>>25260112I asked for refutations and you didn't provide any? You provided a list of politically motivated books and papers that you haven't read and don't even understand>35 students in London scored 20 more points higher than 37 students in Kenya.Do you think this is what The Bell Curve measures?
>>25260112>Eugenics simply doesn't work and that's a scientific fact.You keep stating that but it simply isn't true. It works but it's immoral. Convincing midwits like you that it doesn't work while reaping the benefits of it via examples like abortion, usually couching them in arguments relating to choice and individual liberty, is simply the path of least resistance.
>>25260120>you haven't read and don't even understanddamn dood you bodied that freak
It is impossible to talk sense into libtards. Don’t even try it. It will just lower your IQ.
>>25260112If it doesn't work why are IVF clinics able to charge a premium to allow a given customer to select specific eggs with which to create embryos? Note that such has nothing to do with the viability of pregnancy and is specifically about managing health outcomes for the yet to be conceived human.
>>25260193Remember when Jacinda Ardern went around pouting in a hijab after Christchurch? I'd forgotten about it until I tried to look up if the guy who wrote Gattaca, which was critical of eugenics, is a libtard (Wikipedia says he caught shit for developing a movie about Christchurch that focused too much on her than it did Muslims). Anyway, libtards are fine with eugenics as long as it isn't explicitly outlined as such. They love abortion and selective IVF but will still argue eugenics is pseudoscientific via mental gymnastics and language games.
>>25260227>Anyway, libtards are fine with eugenics as long as it isn't explicitly outlined as such. They love abortion and selective IVF but will still argue eugenics is pseudoscientific via mental gymnastics and language games.Trvke (trvth nvke (truth nuke))
>>25260250What are other books about eugenics? The main thing I though of aside from Brave New World was Gattaca. The Elementary Particles/Atomized ties it in too I guess and you could connect Frankenstein and Never Let Me Go to if you count the idea of playing God.
>>25260120>politically motivated booksThis is what happens when your political beliefs are not derived from facts. Opposing facts simply transform into political beliefs in such a head.
>>25260133When has abortion in practive ever been a vehicle of eugenics?
>>25260279read some of william shockley's late career papers lol
>>25260305Go look up why Planned Parenthood was created.
>>25260311Post it for me
>>25260305Its entire history? Just look at which demographics get the most abortions
>>25260317You think poor people getting more abortions owing to their financial condition is a form of eugenics?>>25260318I guess that's one case. But overwhelmingly abortions are used to terminate pregnancy itself. Doesn't matter if the seed comes from a 6'5 150iq chad
>>25260329It has a eugenic effect whether it's intentional or not
>>25260313You don't have access to Google? >>25260329>You think poor people getting more abortions owing to their financial condition is a form of eugenics?You've never heard anyone justify abortion by saying it lowers the crime rate by premtively terminating undesirables? RBG even said it. Also, look up the Eugenics Board of North Carolina.
>>25260334How? If the abortion is not based on culling certain traits it's not eugenics
>>25255394Yeah, that's why right wing "success" means voting for a pedophile and making gas $5 a gallon. Hopefully AI exterminates these people over the next few decades.
>>25260342Abortion selects for poverty and poverty selects for low IQ
>>25260344what about all the ppl who got pregnant in college and had an abortion so it doesn't interfere with their career?
>>25260351What about them? They're a small minority of people that get abortions
>>25260342It was the main reasoning behind establishing access to abortion in the US, anon. Acting like it's merely a secondary indirect benefit is for the convenience of diverting attention away from the immorality of eugenics.
>>25260343lmao the left had to drop the "fine people on both sides" hoax finally, but just like that they move on to new hoaxes
>>25260343Do you hear yourself? kek
>>25260344>poverty selects for low IQThe poor are not poor because they have lower potential for intelligence. >>25260338>You don't have access to Google?Not interested in a wild goose chase. >You've never heard anyone justify abortion by saying it lowers the crime rate by premtively terminating undesirables?People who make that argument do so on the ground that undesirable children are more often born in poverty and face negligence from unwilling parents which leads to crime. Not on the ground that poor people have some innate crime gene in them.
>>25260360the main reason for abortion is so when some boss knocks up his married secretary he can pay for her to abort it
>>25260289>>25260308I was thinking in terms of literary fiction. Most of what I find via Google is whitewashed crap barely a step above YA.
>>25260193I know being corrected makes you feel less intelligent, but that's only relative to the person who was forced to remediate you. You are actually slightly more intelligent than you were before.
>>25260360>It was the main reasoning behind establishing access to abortion in the US.I won't deny the possibility here.
>>25260376Ah true I should be thankful for a government led by a dementia ridden pedophile, paying tax money to pay back corporations for the tariff scam, and paying extra for gas (and everything else), my mistake.
hey libtards, if genetics aint real then explain pic relatedbig poppa pump dabs all over you weaklings
>>25260379>Not interested in a wild goose chase.Lol. You mean you're incapable of researching something that isn't lockstep with the beliefs you've internalized like a good little NPC. >People who make that argument do so on the ground that Culling undesirables from the population improves society.
>>25260296The lack of (yous) seems to suggest that chuds think I am speaking on their side. Lol no. The people who criticised Murray and the bell curve raised valid objective points that bring down the whole house of cards.It is only through his propensity for denial of reality that the chud must misconstrue objective analysis and criticism as "politically motivated books"
>>25260400100% true kill yourself immediately
>>25260379>The poor are not poor because they have lower potential for intelligence.A significant amount of them are>poor people have some innate crime gene in them.The "innate crime gene" is just low IQ, which is heavily correlated with impulsiveness, lack of long term thinking and an inability to understand consequences
>>25260400>You mean you're incapable of researching something that isn't lockstep with the beliefs you've like a good little NPC.You can post whatever point you are trying to make . No need to be obtuse about it. >>25260400>Culling undesirables from the population improves society.Alright. Post one.
>>25260401The lack of (You)s is because you posted a poorly worded comment stating the obvious, midwit.
>>25260401>The people who criticised Murray and the bell curve raised valid objective points that bring down the whole house of cards.Feel free to state those points
>>25260404>The "innate crime gene" is just low IQ, which is heavily correlated with impulsiveness, lack of long term thinking and an inability to understand consequencesI don't believe this to be the case. Sheer desperation, culture and general immorality seem to be far bigger motivators here than a lack of intelligence.
>>25260401You're a fool for wasting your time trying to argue anything with these morons, as soon as you catch them in a lie they will immediately pivot a different stream of bullshit for you to wade through.
>>25260407>You can post whatever point you are trying to makeI made my point and it up by appealing to common knowledge. However, this exists outside the scope of your ideological blinders so you're begging me to give you an out by crying "SOURCE!" like a Redditor. >Alright. Post one.See? In this context asking for a source doesn't even make sense, lol. Try harder, lil midwit bro.
>>25260411https://youtu.be/UBc7qBS1Ujo?si=qLpkgNTUWLUYV7yA
>>25260375The hoax that right wingers have anything resembling moral fiber?
>mfw a libtard shows up and starts drawing heat in my fucking thread
>>25260417>as soon as you catch them in a lie they will immediately pivot a different stream of bullshit for you to wade through.Yes. I've noticed this as a typical tactic. Whenever their bullshit is called out they will quickly shift goalposts .Like this guy >>25260418. I asked him to post one example of a public figure who claims that poor people abortions are good BECAUSE it eugenically removes the criminal genes from society and he started seething about reddit or something. These weirdos aren't capable of honest discussion
>>25260418Case in point. This isn't someone actually interested in discussing policy or ethics, it's all just a game to them.
Notice how the libtard/left coalition lost the debate and immediately shifted to sperging about Trump while stimming themselves with their unearned pretense of moral superiority? Lol.
>>25260419Again this is not you stating any posts but linking a video you haven't even watched yourself
>>25260429Lol already mentioned the retard here >>25260427
>mfw a redd1ter jobber shows up tryin to shoot on me but i got other plans
>>25260427>I asked him to post one example of a public figure who claims that poor people abortions are good BECAUSE it eugenically removes the criminal genes from societyWho started Planned Parenthood, anon? What was the Eugenics Board of North Carolina all about, anon?>>25260429>This isn't someone actually interested in discussing policy or ethicsSOURCE?!
>>25260433We didn't earn you, you handed it to us on a silver platter. I suppose everything is a totally incomprehensible shift when you are too retarded to connect the dots between your own beliefs and the real world.
>>25260429Here's another example of this phenomena. This moron here >>25260434 has to be taught that videos have words and sentences in them that could be making a point. It really is a game to them. In their inner universe of middling intellect this is some kind of "own"
>>25260441yeah we get it you are a retard, no need to belabor the point
>Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe [v. Wade] was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.
>>25260443I am not having a discussion with the man in the video, I'm having a discussion with youFeel free to make a point at any time
>>25260445Stay mad, faggot. When you're incapable of learning it's all you can do.
It's insane the way genetics seems to drive leftists into a frenzy that resembles psychosisThese last ~100 posts by them have been barely coherent
>>25260449As if there is anything to learn from you besides a cautionary tale in trusting "honest liars" lmao. Unlike the bleeding heart moron I completely agree regarding eugenics. Kill yourself immediately before you do any more damage to my country.
>>25260458>long-winded seetheLol.
>>25260456Three sentences is a lot for you isn't it
>>25260441>Who started Planned Parenthood, anon? What was the Eugenics Board of North Carolina all about, anon?Since you've managed to derail this long enough with your obtuseness let me Harken back to my original comment.>>25260305Which is still true irrespective of the original intent of abortions. I'm not even some pro-abortionist or anything. It's just the reality of the situation. One must genuinely believe that aborting poor people leads to loss of the "crime gene" for this to count as eugenics. A claim that is NOT made by statements such as these>>25260446
>>25260465This is exactly what I meanYou're saying nothing at all and just lashing out for hours at a time
>>25260468>Since you've managed to derail this long enough with your obtuseness let me Harken back to my original commenHoly shit you're a fag. >When has abortion in practive ever been a vehicle of eugenics?You know biology concerns itself with populations and not just individual organisms and their inner workings, right? Did you see the RBG quote above?>One must genuinely believe that aborting poor people leads to loss of the "crime gene"No, retard. Nice try at a strawman but it betrays your ignorance of biology and genetics. I know you're a midwit and adverse to learning uncomfortable things but why don't you go ahead and look up the history of Planned Parenthood after using Google AI to give you a rundown of population genetics dumbed down to a level your midwit brain can understand?
>>25260469kek what a limp-wrested response. Love when right wingers go into whiny cuck mode because someone stopped entertaining their sophistry.
>>25260479>No counter-argument against the fact that no one of importance ever advocated for abortions of poor as a method of removing undesirable genetic traits from the gene poolI accept your concession. Your definition of "eugenics" has to be broad enough to include any kind of culling of socioeconomic groups , which has nothing to do with culling specific genetic traits, for your claim to make sense.
>>25260479midwit midwit midwit midwit please learn a different way to insult someone's intelligence, your writing is very repetitive
>>25255386I really don't get the debate, isn't it just common sense that some people are faster, some people are stronger, some people are smarter, and that some of this is "innate"? And that we could furthermore recognize patterns at a group level? We recognize these differences between species yet it's not like you can't sub-divide even more. Like there are lowland gorillas and mountain gorillas, there are northern lions and southern lions. Yeah, I guess at what point you draw the line is somewhat arbitrary and there is grey area but the patterns and differences are real.
>>25260487>No counter-argument against the fact that no one of importance ever advocated for abortions of poor as a method of removing undesirable genetic traits from the gene poolThat's literally why Planned Parenthood was founded and you have a quote from RBG talking about how the rationale behind Roe v. Wade involved the diminishment of unwanted populations, midwit. >I accept your concessionMy concession that you're a midwit NPC? Cool. >Your definition of "eugenics" has to be broad enough to include any kind of culling of socioeconomic groupsGenetics concerns populations, midwit. I'm not arguing there exists a "crime gene" because anyone with basic knowledge of biology knows that strawman is retarded. You lost.
>>25260494>t. midwitLol
>>25260496it is but right wingers insist on intellectual DEI
>>25260501>the right argues for diversity of thought Correct.
>>25260498all that time and you still couldn't think of something else, embarrassing
>>25260507the right argues for participation trophies for subservient, incompetent morons
>>25260511Thanks for letting me know that pointing out your midwittery cut you deep, midwit. You have my permission to go back to your heavily moderated Reddit echochamber and cry about it.
>>25255394Is this actually true? That being said, being logically smart doesn’t mean you’re necessarily “smart”. I’ve met some low IQ cavemen who had more common sense than the most smarmy college nigger and woman.
>>25260487>Your definition of "eugenics" has to be broad enough to include any kind of culling of socioeconomic groups , which has nothing to do with culling specific genetic traitsThere is a clear genetic component to poverty and especially criminality
>>25260514Lol, k.
I remember there was a faggy Australian on youtube that deboonked this book and his argument essentially boiled down to “I disagree with the conclusion, therefore the methodology is bad”
>>25260518Oh, reddit, there we go. C'mon man you are so close to an original thought.
>>25260520Not to mention we're talking about populations and not some individual "crime gene" that retard keeps insisting upon for some reason. >>25260527Didn't read. Not interested in your attempt to distract from the fact you lost.
>>25260528Bro if you didn't read that without trying in the time it took to reply you might actually have a learning disability.
>>25260524Very insightful, thank you for your analysis
>>25260535>still seethingDidn't read. You lost.
There is nothing, and I mean NOTHING that triggers a cult-like response in leftists more than the heritability of IQ, for examplehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQBefore this article can be read, they must disclaim>Although IQ differences between individuals have been shown to have a hereditary component, it does not follow that disparities in IQ between groups have a genetic basis.[8][9][10][11] The scientific consensus is that genetics does not explain average differences in IQ test performance between racial groups.[12][13][14][15]So you think "oh ok it's well sourced it must be true", but once you look at the sources you'll see The Guardian and Vox being used as authoritative sourcesSo then you think "oh but there's some sciencey look ones too", now let's take a look at one of those sourceshttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.24216If you look at this in depth you'll notice>Only measures educational attainment>No hard numbers in the results, just a vague conclusion>The author has a PhD in... Horticulture?>All of his other articles (which are about plants) are publicly available, this is the single exceptionYou must understand just how much energy and money has gone into this cover up
>>25260552You've made that clear, although I should have guessed from your earlier posts. You should get that checked out.
>>25260571>>25260552
>>25260574The brainrot is progressing quickly, poor guy can't even type now
>>25260580See: >>25260574. Seething about the fact you lost a debate by trying to get the last word which no one will read except (You) is really sad, lil midwit bro. Do better.
>>25260558You'll also note, that despite all these "debunkings" of The Bell Curve, none of them have actually attempted to recreate the twin adoption studies that Charles and Murray conducted
>>25260582What a miraculous recovery! Maybe you'll regain the art of introspection as well, if you ever had it to begin with.
>>25260586Still not reading, lil midwit bro. You have my permission to cope you lost via having the last word. You can even pretend I'll read it. Bye.
>>25260587>You have my permission to cope you lost
>>25260519>Is this actually true?without taking a position in the broader fight happening in this thread, yes, this is true. there's a strong positive correlation between educational attainment and lib/left beliefs, and a weaker but still present correlation between IQ score and the same
>>25255394created so much seethe thread hit bump limit KEK
Libtard melty thread.
>>25260498>RBG talking about how the rationale behind Roe v. Wade involved the diminishment of unwanted populations, midwit.Did not imply eugenic goals. She might as well be talking about just not letting too many poor people breed and the eugenicist component of this is an open question in this very thread>Genetics concerns populations, midwit.Taking any random social group and culling it is not necessarily a practice in geneticism moron. God chuds don't have to be this retarded but they always turn out to be.>You lost.Lol troon>>25260520>There is a clear genetic component to poverty and especially criminalityThe idea you need here is that the correlation aspect of poverty and crime are genetic in nature. I.e. poor peoples are both poor AND criminal because of genetic low iq.>>25260528>Eugenics is not about genesAre we at the part already where you twist your ankle in your attempt at mental gymnastics and fall to the ground? I think we are.
>>25260447I made my point and it up by appealing to common knowledge. However, this exists outside the scope of your ideological blinders so you're begging me to give you an out by crying "TYPE IT OUT!" like a /pol/cel
>>25260816>The idea you need here is that the correlation aspect of poverty and crime are genetic in nature. I.e. poor peoples are both poor AND criminal because of genetic low iq.Yes that's correct
>>25260827The issue is you can only establish a correlation between these attributes. Making any further reasoning circular. We don't know if low iq, on a fundamental level, causes criminality. We don't even know if low iq fundamentally causes poverty because we don't live in a perfect intelligence based meritocracy
>>25260816>Did not imply eugenic goals.Diminishing a population to improve society overall is the definition of eugenics. You're simply wrong. >Taking any random social group and culling it is not necessarily a practice in geneticismThat's not the argument being made, retard. Roe was influenced by a want to decrease a subset of the population toward the overall betterment of society as a whole and Planned Parenthood was started by a eugenicist for the sake of...eugenics. >Eugenics is not about genesWho are you quoting? Do you think eugenicists in the past had any idea about the human genome and were targeting individuals via technology that didn't exist? No, retard. They targeted populations.
>>25260836You really need to learn stats beyond the "correlation doesn't mean causation" line they teach undergrad mathlets to parrot, anon.
>>25260827Next time he replies to you bring up conduct disorder. It's genetic and around half of the male prison population has it.
>>25260864More sophistry. Your assessment on my stats skills does not in any way refute the "correlation does not equal causation" line you speak of. Using words like "parrot" and "mathlet" is not an argument and it's not anyone's fault that your shitty worldview is built on rotten foundations. Just like that other anon said, all you can do is constantly shift goalposts and come up with another vague and empty "gotcha" everytime your bs is called out.
>>25260855>Diminishing a population to improve society overall is the definition of eugenics. You're simply wrong.The fact that you cannot notice the subtle difference between "improving society by not having poor people breed more poor people and straining the economy" and "improving society by culling the hereditary trait that leads to poverty by not having poor people breed" is telling. You conflate the two and that's probably why you misrepresent people arguing for the former as eugenicists. >Planned Parenthood was started by a eugenicist for the sake of...eugenics.Unless you source this I am going to assume that this conclusion of yours is a result of the same misunderstanding I stated above.>Do you think eugenicists in the past had any idea about the human genome and were targeting individuals via technology that didn't exist? No, retard. They targeted populations.Useless nitpicking. Would you feel better if I used the term "biologically heritable".
Damn there are lots new posts since I went to sleep
>>25260882>More sophistry.Fuck off, pseud. It's a basic fact that Planned Parenthood was founded for the sake of eugenics and laws concerning abortion were motivated by eugenics. There's no "crime gene" but there are genetically rooted disorders that increase the likelihood someone will end up in prison (e.g. conduct disorder/anti-social personality disorder) and poverty creates an environment wherein it's more likely a given person with a genetic propensity towards these will end up in prison. Thereby, targeting the poor via abortion is a form of eugenics (e.g. the dramatic decrease in crime following Roe is frequently linked to increased abortions). >Your assessment on my stats skills does not in any way refute the "correlation does not equal causation" line you speak ofCorrelation is used to measure the likelihood of causation, retard. Yes, you can look at a graph that says the amount of hats bought in December correlates to the number of automobile accidents but this isn't the same thing as x number of people in prison have x disorder therefore having the disorder increases the likelihood of ending up in prison. You're a moron. >Using words like "parrot" and "mathlet" You are a mathlet who parrots nonsense, though. Cry about it. >your shitty worldviewWhat's my worldview, anon? Lol. >all you can do is constantly shift goalpostsWhen have I shifted the goalposts, anon? You're a fucking retard.
>>25260899>subtle difference between "improving society by not having poor people breed more poor people and straining the economy" and "improving society by culling the hereditary trait that leads to poverty by not having poor people breed"I don't need to argue in line with any specific hereditary trait, retard. Eugenics concerns population and not individuals. Sure, in the (not so distant) past individuals were targeted for sterilization but you see greater results when you go after a population. Abortion came out of the eugenics movement and I'm sorry that this upsets you but it's the truth. >Unless you source this I am going to assume that this conclusion of yours"SOURCE?! @grok IS THIS TRUE?!">Useless nitpickingNice hand wave, retard.
>>25260918>there are genetically rooted disorders that increase the likelihood someone will end up in prison (e.g. conduct disorder/anti-social personality disorder) and poverty creates an environment wherein it's more likely a given person with a genetic propensity towards these will end up in prison. Thereby, targeting the poor via abortion is a form of eugenics (e.g. the dramatic decrease in crime following Roe is frequently linked to increased abortions).>I personally believe that poverty is caused by heritable factors>Founders of planned parenthood wanted poor pregnancies aborted>Therefore planned parenthood was a eugenicist programme.>The actual intentions and beliefs of it's founders be damned.Wow. Now that's an exercise in projection if I've ever seen one. >Correlation is used to measure the likelihood of causation, retard. Yes, you can look at a graph that says the amount of hats bought in December correlates to the number of automobile accidents but this isn't the same thing as x number of people in prison have x disorder therefore having the disorder increases the likelihood of ending up in prison. You're a moron.That's a lot of crying and seething about the fact that you cannot demonstrably establish that lower intelligence is the root cause of both poverty and criminal proclivity. >You are a mathlet who parrots nonsense, though>You are nonsensical if you do not draw unjustified conclusions from correlations, driven by misguided political beliefsOk? Cry about it then?>Eugenics concerns population and not individuals.Just lmao. It's not a matter of individuals or populations. It's a matter of heritable traits and populations that carry those traits. You cannot just prevent some random group of people from pro-creating and call it eugenics. Stopping every chemistry major from reproducing is not an exercise in eugenics lol. Eugenics is fundamentally a practice in selecting for preferred biologically heritable traits. Without that distinction it's not eugenics. Again you are projecting your beliefs about biological heritability of poverty onto abortionists. >SOURCE?! @grok IS THIS TRUE?!"I was just playing around at first but it's becoming obvious that you actually do not have any evidence for planned parenthood being eugenicists. And to think that I actually entertained the idea considering what mid 20the century America was like
>>25260918>>25260922>>25260949Even the nazi holocaust of jews cannot be defined as a eugenicist programme until "jew" and "Aryan" are defined as immutable heritable traits, which the Nazis did. Otherwise it's just plain old genocide. Poverty, in and of itself, is not some immutable hereditary condition. It's an economic state of being. So genociding the poora is not an eugenic programme until the immutable heritability of poverty is firmly established. This is something you do and most likely the founders of planned parenthood don't.
>>25260956You have been arguing about a definition of eugenics that you completely made up
>>25260949>I personally believe that poverty is caused by heritable factorsI never argued this but it certainly isn't helped by them. Not all poor people are stupid and having low IQ (or a middling one like you) doesn't negate someone's humanity. >Founders of planned parenthood wanted poor pregnancies abortedThey specifically targeted the poor, anon. Especially black people. >Therefore planned parenthood was a eugenicist programmeThe founder was literally an outspoken eugenicist, anon. She was whitewashed until very recently (I just read an NPR article from 10 years ago smearing Ben Carson for pointing out she was racist, it said something like "by the standards of her own time she was a progressive" then one from a few years ago found via the University of Chicago that was like "yeah, she was a racist and intentionally put clinics in black neighbourhoods to curtail their breeding", lol). >The actual intentions and beliefs of it's founders be damnedShe was literally a eugenicist, retard. This was downplayed until recently. I just found out Planned Parenthood NY took her name off of its building in 2020, lol. >That's a lot of crying and seething about the fact that you cannot demonstrably establish that lower intelligence is the root cause of both poverty and criminal proclivityYou don't understand how stats work, anon. This isn't a counterargument against what you quoted. >Cry about it then?No you. >It's not a matter of individuals or populationsYes it is you fucking retard. Holy shit you're ignorant. >I was just playing around at firstYou were being retarded on purpose? I'm sure that comes very naturally to you. >You cannot just prevent some random group of people from pro-creating and call it eugenics"Hey, Margaret. Whatcha doin?" "I'm starting Planned Parenthood." "Why?" "Eugenics. We have to make sure the poor and blacks don't breed." Lol >>25260956>Even the nazi holocaust of jews cannot be defined as a eugenicist programmeThe Nazis loved the founder of Planned Parenthood and spoke very highly of her. Also, no, anon. The Nazis were definitely motivated by eugenics and scientific racism.
>>25255403the right wing cares about natural hierarchies
>>25255386Rec books for genes plsDo not care about political shitflinging
>>25260962This discussion is fruitless if you do not even believe that eugenics is about improving society by artificially selecting of "desirable" heritable traits in the population. This definition is usually what nazi chud types mean when they advocate for eugenics. And that's the type of thing Murray is arguing for in his book. I get your more generalised idea of eugenics that covers non-biologically defined populations under it's gambit (like poor people) But I don't see how that's relevant to the thread other than maybe as a sleight of hand to paint planned parenthood in a bad light and equate them to Nazis even though both approach it from a different standpoint.
Why is there such endless seething between left and right wingers?
>>25261016>This definition is usually what nazi chud types mean when they advocate for eugenics. And that's the type of thing Murray is arguing for in his book.You think Murray is arguing for a genocide?I'm not the guy you're arguing with but Planned Parenthood's relationship with eugenics is completely undeniable, not sure why you're so determined to deny this
>>25261016>This discussion is fruitless if you do not even believe that eugenics is about improving society by artificially selecting of "desirable" heritable traits in the populationThere are positive and negative forms of eugenics. Positive is what you just described and negative is the elimination of undesirable traits. This hasn't been done via targeting specific genes until recently (e.g. the example of paying a premium to have your eggs screened for selection before they're used to create embryos). What has been done is the targeted selection of individuals for sterilization and the promotion of birth control to poor and racialized populations. One of the motivational factors behind the Roe decision was that it would decrease undesirables and it's subsequent affect on the crime rate is well documented.>And that's the type of thing Murray is arguing for in his book.It's not, anon. Murray is arguing that social programmes that fail to take factors like the role of IQ in poverty are doomed to fail. He isn't arguing that poor or racialized people are somehow less human and thereby less deserving of existence. Libtards smear this as scientific racism because it undermines the theory behind a lot of welfare programmes and DEI. >sleight of hand to paint planned parenthood in a bad light and equate them to Nazis even though both approach it from a different standpointThe Nazis were inspired by Planned Parenthood and spoke very highly of its founder. You're historically ignorant and people like you are the reason we can't have nice things.
ITT leftists obsessing over denying reality
>>25261017Right wingers aren’t the ones who are having a meltdown lol
“Yes, the brain isn’t the same person to person-“400 posts later
>>25261071Yeah it’s bizarre how people will go so far arguing against the most obvious shit. It’s so fucking surreal. These people single handedly hold the human race back with their sheer stubbornness.
I'm going to eat 100mg of THC and watch Gattaca.
>Sterilize the feeble minded poor and abort the negrost. Margaret Sanger
