A
Anonymous
Guest
Hey @bhops, do you have any idea what Father Serra, a guy who died in 1784, has to do with IQ tests that people took in the past 10 or 20 years? I'm struggling to make the connection too. Apparently biases in racially charged studies on intelligence 200 years ago, which were used as a basis to enslave natives, are still somehow to blame if in 2019 a group of black students score lower on an IQ test than their white peers. Am I picking this up correctly?
The tests are only culturally biased if the white students score higher than the black students, mind you. If the black students scored higher than their white classmates then it's because the tests weren't quite so racist and oppressive, naturally.
So math and logic-based problem solving tests are "biased" according to @The Truth, it seems. I'm trying to piece this together.
Asking black students to take the same IQ test as their white peers is 'biased'.
They're not 'culturally compatible' with the tests, is the implication. Nothing to do with intellect, it's the culture which is the culprit if they don't score too highly. And there are just different types of cultures and intellects, all more or less equal, in their own way! The very notion of a measurable 'intelligence' is farcical to Truth, unless they're white people who live in the Appalachians or the deep south, in which case he has no problem referring to them as white trash.
Actually in his comment yesterday he said "you're not dumb" to me, so maybe an overarching concept of ''intelligence" does exist in Truth's world.
When he said I'm not dumb what was the metric he was using which brought him to that conclusion? Comparing me with other white people, or...? Who is dumb if IQ tests are inherently biased and intelligence can't be measured? Is "dumb" even a thing, Truth? Can we only reasonably measure IQ among white people, possibly, and these same measures can't be applied to anyone else due to cultural biases?
Do you support a form of IQ segregation, or just abolishing entirely the idea of there being such a thing as 'IQ', because you find it inconvenient/potentially dangerous?
On the subject of culture: each ethnic group just stumbled randomly into their respective cultures of course, with the intelligence of the people having little to do with how their culture came into being. Tokyo is Tokyo and Monrovia is Monrovia only by happy accident. We're only being biased by seeing one as being more advanced or evolved than the other; like modern day Father Serras!
Maybe Europeans and south-east Asians would score much lower on these primitive 'audio' IQ tests that Truth referenced.
I don't see why they would; if they score highly on complex intelligence tests then the "primitive" tests should be a breeze, wouldn't you think?
So even if specialised tests were created for people in Monrovia which took their particular skill sets into account, whites and Asians would likely still ace it. And what would that have told us? Perhaps the Liberians could try our tests after that and see if they ace them in turn?
White men, we assume, set the questions in the aforementioned complex IQ tests, which immediately puts the black or native students taking the test at a disadvantage.
The white students will sense that the questions were set by someone who is also white and automatically will perform better as a result, or something like that.
The black students will perform worse because of the implicit racism in being asked to solve logic problems in tests that a white person compiled. Because it's white logic! So white logic is different from black logic? No of course not, it's just the cultural stuff which throws a spanner in the works and skews everything, yadda yadda.
Just to draw a line under my extrapolation based on the sterling logic on display from Truth, from what I think I could parse between the numerous deflections and digressions from him: if a group of white kids and a group of black kids take the same test and if the white kids score higher on average it's due to racism and/or cultural biases; that, along with Father Serra enslaving natives 200 years ago. Take your pick, he'll entertain every possibility except the most obvious one. Like the opposite of Occam's Razor; it's Truth's Razor.
As I said in my first comment: the reason given for differences in IQ averages is always anything except different races having differing levels of intelligence, as The Truth demonstrates to us again with his response. Yes Truth, "intelligence" meaning the western/south-east Asian standard of intelligence, which you also subscribe to, since you're communicating with hundreds of written words rather than with some sort of rain dance or ululating throat sound among your tribal members.
Having differing levels of anything else among races is fine according to what Truth's telling us, just not intelligence. And seemingly that's just in case we try to bring back slavery for example if one group comes to accept that their average IQ is one or two standard deviations higher than another group. Of course, slavery is still practiced in parts of Africa and the Middle East, which has nothing to do with them comparing and contrasting each other's IQ tests and taking slaves on that basis, as far as I know...
And no bhops, Truth hasn't read the Charles Murray book you mentioned, but he has read an article about the book which rubbishes the general ideas that he assumes the book posits which therefore told him all he needs to know about it without him having to take the time to read it. Since, after all, the book is merely 850 pages of unabashed racism, or so an opinion piece that he read about it reliably informed him.
The tests are only culturally biased if the white students score higher than the black students, mind you. If the black students scored higher than their white classmates then it's because the tests weren't quite so racist and oppressive, naturally.
So math and logic-based problem solving tests are "biased" according to @The Truth, it seems. I'm trying to piece this together.
Asking black students to take the same IQ test as their white peers is 'biased'.
They're not 'culturally compatible' with the tests, is the implication. Nothing to do with intellect, it's the culture which is the culprit if they don't score too highly. And there are just different types of cultures and intellects, all more or less equal, in their own way! The very notion of a measurable 'intelligence' is farcical to Truth, unless they're white people who live in the Appalachians or the deep south, in which case he has no problem referring to them as white trash.
Actually in his comment yesterday he said "you're not dumb" to me, so maybe an overarching concept of ''intelligence" does exist in Truth's world.
When he said I'm not dumb what was the metric he was using which brought him to that conclusion? Comparing me with other white people, or...? Who is dumb if IQ tests are inherently biased and intelligence can't be measured? Is "dumb" even a thing, Truth? Can we only reasonably measure IQ among white people, possibly, and these same measures can't be applied to anyone else due to cultural biases?
Do you support a form of IQ segregation, or just abolishing entirely the idea of there being such a thing as 'IQ', because you find it inconvenient/potentially dangerous?
On the subject of culture: each ethnic group just stumbled randomly into their respective cultures of course, with the intelligence of the people having little to do with how their culture came into being. Tokyo is Tokyo and Monrovia is Monrovia only by happy accident. We're only being biased by seeing one as being more advanced or evolved than the other; like modern day Father Serras!
Maybe Europeans and south-east Asians would score much lower on these primitive 'audio' IQ tests that Truth referenced.
I don't see why they would; if they score highly on complex intelligence tests then the "primitive" tests should be a breeze, wouldn't you think?
So even if specialised tests were created for people in Monrovia which took their particular skill sets into account, whites and Asians would likely still ace it. And what would that have told us? Perhaps the Liberians could try our tests after that and see if they ace them in turn?
White men, we assume, set the questions in the aforementioned complex IQ tests, which immediately puts the black or native students taking the test at a disadvantage.
The white students will sense that the questions were set by someone who is also white and automatically will perform better as a result, or something like that.
The black students will perform worse because of the implicit racism in being asked to solve logic problems in tests that a white person compiled. Because it's white logic! So white logic is different from black logic? No of course not, it's just the cultural stuff which throws a spanner in the works and skews everything, yadda yadda.
Just to draw a line under my extrapolation based on the sterling logic on display from Truth, from what I think I could parse between the numerous deflections and digressions from him: if a group of white kids and a group of black kids take the same test and if the white kids score higher on average it's due to racism and/or cultural biases; that, along with Father Serra enslaving natives 200 years ago. Take your pick, he'll entertain every possibility except the most obvious one. Like the opposite of Occam's Razor; it's Truth's Razor.
As I said in my first comment: the reason given for differences in IQ averages is always anything except different races having differing levels of intelligence, as The Truth demonstrates to us again with his response. Yes Truth, "intelligence" meaning the western/south-east Asian standard of intelligence, which you also subscribe to, since you're communicating with hundreds of written words rather than with some sort of rain dance or ululating throat sound among your tribal members.
Having differing levels of anything else among races is fine according to what Truth's telling us, just not intelligence. And seemingly that's just in case we try to bring back slavery for example if one group comes to accept that their average IQ is one or two standard deviations higher than another group. Of course, slavery is still practiced in parts of Africa and the Middle East, which has nothing to do with them comparing and contrasting each other's IQ tests and taking slaves on that basis, as far as I know...
And no bhops, Truth hasn't read the Charles Murray book you mentioned, but he has read an article about the book which rubbishes the general ideas that he assumes the book posits which therefore told him all he needs to know about it without him having to take the time to read it. Since, after all, the book is merely 850 pages of unabashed racism, or so an opinion piece that he read about it reliably informed him.