|
|
 | | From: | stlbl | | Subject: | Re: Racial Differences in Intelligence | | Date: | 17 Jan 2005 03:55:53 -0800 |
|
|
 | I agree with the comments about Bush---you know there is a I Hate
George Bush Fan Club discussion group....there are some interesting
articles on this backintyme.com site (get past the commercial
stuff--there are articles listed on the end)--about the one-drop rule
and America's ridiculous policy of classifying people as black OR
white--that author says, and I agree, it makes about as much sense as a
short/tall binary way of looking at people---no in betweens
acknowledged!?! You HAVE to fit in one category---but what about we men
that are right at the MEAN---5'10"?
Therefore --- if you apply their precious Bell (actually Gaussian)
curve to SKIN COLOR and use this binary way of thinking---with say
Nordic/Baltic peoples on one side of the curve and say, Nigerians of
the other side---80 % or more are mixed genetic and the same criteria
(statistics) that quantifies lower IQs(sub-mean) to blacks will have
relegated the whole idea of SEPARATE races to the realm of the
ridiculous (there is a gradient of races just like intelligences,
however measured) which is good as this is the realm in which these
studies were devised. Which is why most intelligent people (myself not
included) would just laugh at these sort of rantings and not lower
themselves enough to involve themselves in these sort of discussions.
Its funny that with that way of thinking, you would have to classify
the British royal family as black---does Bush know his only real allies
in his latest Republican war is a Black monarchy???--and that the 19th
century was fundamentally a century of a white(ish) Navy conquering the
world for the sake of their Black Queen?? Any informed Brit knows
about Victoria's African side of the family....
|
|
| | From: | P.Comm | | Subject: | Re: Racial Differences in Intelligence | | Date: | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:24:50 GMT |
|
|
| "stlbl" wrote in message
news:1105962953.322649.271420@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I agree with the comments about Bush---you know there is a I Hate
> George Bush Fan Club discussion group....there are some interesting
> articles on this backintyme.com site
Ain't there? It's a dynamite site!
(get past the commercial
> stuff--there are articles listed on the end)--about the one-drop rule
> and America's ridiculous policy of classifying people as black OR
> white--that author says, and I agree, it makes about as much sense as a
> short/tall binary way of looking at people---no in betweens
> acknowledged!?! You HAVE to fit in one category---but what about we men
> that are right at the MEAN---5'10"?
True - Sweet used to be friendly awhile back (he's a great guy!), but when I
wrote him my hypothesis about what caused that black/white (dark/light)
duality among western people RELIGIOUSLY speaking (carried over to
everything else) he didn't say much after that. He did say he did not like
religion. My hypothesis crosses disciplines, it's outside the box - VERY
much so. Also, lots of people partly black don't like that one drop rule
and resent blacks insisting that they self-identify as black. I suggest he
read Sandor Gilman "On Blackness without Blacks" and see what they are
reacting to. Well, we now have people of mixed race that resent blacks
getting all over them for not identifying as black, even if they are
literally "one drop." I understand why they do that - it's like how Slavs
EMPHASIZE how Nietzsche was a Slav - it's due to past German prejudice
against Slavs as inferior. It's a dynamic, it's emotional and it's very
very real - it can't just be dismissed. Emotions are real. Dynamics in
society are also real. The whole "act black" thing well, when whites go off
on that and start up with "no such thing as race" they better grasp that
blacks that are into that DEMAND that race is real - and they want to speak
up, identify - especially if the person is famous or a professor or
something. It's like whites denied them humanity before due to race. NOW
whites (liberals) want to deny them RACE when they are PROUD of it or
speaking "in your face" about it. Let's ask blacks themselves. I don't
like "black ON white" bullshit - primarily because it's not just black on
white - it ends up being black on anything non-black as perceived by them!
You can't be TRANSracial around them. Heh.
> >
> Therefore --- if you apply their precious Bell (actually Gaussian)
> curve to SKIN COLOR and use this binary way of thinking---with say
> Nordic/Baltic peoples on one side of the curve and say, Nigerians of
> the other side---80 % or more are mixed genetic and the same criteria
> (statistics) that quantifies lower IQs(sub-mean) to blacks will have
> relegated the whole idea of SEPARATE races to the realm of the
> ridiculous (there is a gradient of races just like intelligences,
> however measured) which is good as this is the realm in which these
> studies were devised. Which is why most intelligent people (myself not
> included) would just laugh at these sort of rantings and not lower
> themselves enough to involve themselves in these sort of discussions.
Did it ever occur to you that blacks in the USA deliberately fuck up their
tests? I have MET blacks that deliberately fucked up in school, got low
grades, just to be "cool." I've seen it with my own eyes. It's sort of
like some Hispanics that pretend they don't speak English when they DO - and
fluently.
>
> Its funny that with that way of thinking, you would have to classify
> the British royal family as black---does Bush know his only real allies
> in his latest Republican war is a Black monarchy???--and that the 19th
> century was fundamentally a century of a white(ish) Navy conquering the
> world for the sake of their Black Queen?? Any informed Brit knows
> about Victoria's African side of the family....
You lost me on that one. I don't get it.
>
|
|
| | From: | Wolf Kirchmeir | | Subject: | Re: Racial Differences in Intelligence | | Date: | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:37:08 -0500 |
|
|
| P.Comm wrote:
[...]>
> Did it ever occur to you that blacks in the USA deliberately fuck up their
> tests? I have MET blacks that deliberately fucked up in school, got low
> grades, just to be "cool." I've seen it with my own eyes. It's sort of
> like some Hispanics that pretend they don't speak English when they DO - and
> fluently.
I've noted deliberate underperformance also among First Nations and
working class students. Two examples:
-- an Ojibway girl who (in her weekly journal, written for English
class) expressed anxiety about her ambition to succeed in school, since
her friends put her down for "trying to be better than them" if she got
good marks.
-- a boy whose marks went from A/A+ to D/F in a fairly regular pattern -
he was working class, and his friends put him down whenever he got a
good mark.
Then there are those who are afraid of messing up if they do the test as
instructed, so they deliberately mess up. That way, they have controlled
the outcome, not the test. Me, myself, have fucked up on tests, just to
show the bastards that they couldn't figure me out. That was when I was
a teenager, ane very confused. Which is another reason I put very little
stock in SATs and such. -- There are many and usually very mixed motives
for messing up on a test. Racial consciousness is just one factor.
Etc.
|
|
| | From: | P.Comm | | Subject: | Re: Racial Differences in Intelligence | | Date: | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 23:38:37 GMT |
|
|
| "Wolf Kirchmeir" wrote in message
news:41aHd.35056$W33.767525@news20.bellglobal.com...
> P.Comm wrote:
> [...]>
>> Did it ever occur to you that blacks in the USA deliberately fuck up
>> their tests? I have MET blacks that deliberately fucked up in school,
>> got low grades, just to be "cool." I've seen it with my own eyes. It's
>> sort of like some Hispanics that pretend they don't speak English when
>> they DO - and fluently.
>
> I've noted deliberate underperformance also among First Nations and
> working class students. Two examples:
>
> -- an Ojibway girl who (in her weekly journal, written for English class)
> expressed anxiety about her ambition to succeed in school, since her
> friends put her down for "trying to be better than them" if she got good
> marks.
>
> -- a boy whose marks went from A/A+ to D/F in a fairly regular pattern -
> he was working class, and his friends put him down whenever he got a good
> mark.
>
> Then there are those who are afraid of messing up if they do the test as
> instructed, so they deliberately mess up. That way, they have controlled
> the outcome, not the test. Me, myself, have fucked up on tests, just to
> show the bastards that they couldn't figure me out. That was when I was a
> teenager, ane very confused. Which is another reason I put very little
> stock in SATs and such. -- There are many and usually very mixed motives
> for messing up on a test. Racial consciousness is just one factor.
>
> Etc.
Well, here is another example. I was hanging out with a math professor - it
was casual, we were having dinner at this GREAT (oh god GREAT) place - and
heh, had gone thru a whole pitcher of Sangria (the real thing) - so we were
pretty drunk. Throughout the night, he was passing me these really dumb
math problems that were all jokes. Then, he passes me this problem after
taking 12 coins out of his pocket. I EXPECTED a joke since the other ones
(maybe 50 in all) were jokes. Of course, he said it was not a joke (but he
said that with the others, too). That one I solved pretty fast - drunk too.
Then he gets this BIG attitude over it. See, it took HIM 3 days to solve it
and he had told me that. HA.... And so, to make things worse, I improved
on the problem later on (when sober) and presented him a new problem, told
him there is a pattern to it a way to solve all such problems and I "got
it." He couldn't solve it. He's a professor. I have HS math only. Go
figure. Why he'd get all attitudish over it and, well - that has nothing to
do with intelligence. It's emotions.
Thing is - when you go to "take a test," you know you are "taking a test"
and some folks get stressed out - others do not. Some very good test takers
are dumber than the backside of a barn when it comes to real life things or
applying what they should know, or appear to know.
It really SUCKS that kids have that kind of ethic and then proceed to fail.
That kind of thing did not exist when I was a kid in school at all. What
you are desribing is the product of diseased egos - and diseased egos imo,
have to GO.
|
|
| | From: | Wolf Kirchmeir | | Subject: | Re: Racial Differences in Intelligence | | Date: | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 01:42:40 -0500 |
|
|
| P.Comm wrote:
[snip story of a math puzzle - btw, what was it? I'd like to try it.
Even if it takes me a few days...]
It's not whether you've studied math, its whether you can see certain
kinds of patterns.
> It really SUCKS that kids have that kind of ethic [of trying to fail] and then proceed to fail.
> That kind of thing did not exist when I was a kid in school at all. What
> you are describing is the product of diseased egos - and diseased egos imo,
> have to GO.
When I was in school in Austria, England, and even Canada, we didn't
have nearly so many tests, and all of them, with one exception, were
"performance tests" -- we had to to do what we had been doing in class.
Ie, precis in language, word problems in math, drawings in drafting, map
lettering in geo, etc. I guess our teachers, bless their antediluvian
theories of education, believed that we would actually learn the skills
we practiced... The exception? "Reading comprehension tests",
administered after we had supposedly read a book to a deadline, and
before we took it up in class. I think it was a ruse to ensure that
(most of us, anyhow) would actually read the book.
I didn't see a multiple choice _exam_ until university. In an ed psych
course. It took me twenty three minutes to do what was supposedly a
3-hour exam (at a rate of nearly ten questions/minute); I made no
revisions, and scored in the 92nd percentile. That university took my
money under false pretenses.
|
|
| | From: | P.Comm | | Subject: | Re: Racial Differences in Intelligence | | Date: | Sun, 23 Jan 2005 00:59:10 GMT |
|
|
| "Wolf Kirchmeir" wrote in message
news:du1Id.56562$W33.1683034@news20.bellglobal.com...
> P.Comm wrote:
> [snip story of a math puzzle - btw, what was it? I'd like to try it. Even
> if it takes me a few days...]
Got an email addy? I'm at nakived at juno dot com if you email me, say who
you are and what you want. I'll mail it to you.
>
> It's not whether you've studied math, its whether you can see certain
> kinds of patterns.
Well, I saw patterns, alright, later on when I got sober :)
>
>> It really SUCKS that kids have that kind of ethic [of trying to fail] and
>> then proceed to fail. That kind of thing did not exist when I was a kid
>> in school at all. What you are describing is the product of diseased
>> egos - and diseased egos imo, have to GO.
>
> When I was in school in Austria, England, and even Canada, we didn't have
> nearly so many tests, and all of them, with one exception, were
> "performance tests" -- we had to to do what we had been doing in class.
> Ie, precis in language, word problems in math, drawings in drafting, map
> lettering in geo, etc. I guess our teachers, bless their antediluvian
> theories of education, believed that we would actually learn the skills we
> practiced...
When I was in school in the 50s in the USA - there was a strict merit system
and no grading tests on curves. EG, fast readers, regular, slow readers.
Pronunciation, enuciation, spelling Bs, all that. Knowing the meaning of
the words, how to use them in sentences - that was in very early years in
school, I was about 7 or 8 years old. It blows my mind that people today in
higher grades don't know this stuff. Each individual say, was given 50
questions, 2 points each question. The scores were absolute, not graded
based on what others got (on a curve). Curved grades are like this: IF the
top student in the class only got 30 right out of 50, that grade counts as a
the "new A score" and the rest of the scores fall into place from there,
with 30 right being the best score (A grade). I saw this as cheating, when
I first ran into it in 12th grade. 30 right and 20 wrong should have been a
C grade, not an A grade. That means that with the curved grade, people who
FAILED that test with only 10 right would get a C grade! Zero right would
be a D! NO failing grade there at all. That's also seen as "dumbing down"
education here in the USA. Anyway, say in math or arithmetic, we were given
problems to solve that were up to par with what we had learned about solving
them. They were not the same problems. In other words, does a person know
HOW to add, subtract, divide, multiply, do fractions, percentages, etc etc.
Same for geometry (plane geometry) which I had in 5th grade. I aced those
courses. History was (I HATED IT) just a rehash of what a person memorized
and I saw it as worthless. Reading was a test of comprehension, or they
asked us to write something ourselves to describe a situation. We had
reading comp too and I used to get accused of always post structuralizing
the stuff - tho I got good grades, when asked to try not to do that, I ended
up deconstructing, LMAO. I think cultural differences probably made me see
things from a very different perspective. But I'd ace that too. They did
teach us to THINK - which I think was very good. EG, in geometry: "The
angles of any given triangle, when added up, equal 180 degrees. Go home for
assignment and PROVE WHY this is so." That was the kind of problem we got a
lot. Most of us did it, too. Then the problems would be - ah, a plane
geometry text book for back then. I know they don't teach that in high
schools here anymore mostly. SOME schools do teach it. But I had this in
5th grade, in grammar school.
The exception? "Reading comprehension tests",
> administered after we had supposedly read a book to a deadline, and before
> we took it up in class.
See above, we had that too, it was part of regular reading. The thing is,
back then there was this "THIS is supposed to be the meaning of this story"
idea - STRUCTURLISM. I always post structured the stuff - or deconstructed
it. LMAO. It was as if, for me, what the author of the story said had no
meaning - it was just hearsay. Example from well-known kid story: "yeah,
but what did Cinderalla DO that her sisters hated her so much?" "How did
she end up being the step daughter - was that her natural mother? where was
her father? Etc." Of course, that's outside the actual text in the story -
I'm using that as a well known example of a story - we never read that
particular tale, but even as a kid when I first heard it, I wondered WHY
they were so mean to her because being mean to siblings was OUTSIDE my
experience in-culture! People were mean only to those that really deserved
it due to some real provocation! So the teachers used to smile and like it
and the other kids were always ready for it "oh boy, here it comes." Some
would think it was funny and laugh, others used to look at me kinda odd and
THINK about it and understand the different viewpoint.
I think it was a ruse to ensure that
> (most of us, anyhow) would actually read the book.
A REALLY good author to read where you can NOT agrue with structure or post
structure or deconstruction - is H. P. Lovecraft. That also would increase
a person's vocabulary, for sure. "Call of Cthulhu," "At the Mountains of
Madness." Excellent for that!
>
> I didn't see a multiple choice _exam_ until university.
I never had a multiple choice exam in school, not ever. I saw them when I
worked in a medical school (I was not a student at all), medical students
took them! They were SIMPLE questions, too! I saw them on job
applications, had to pass it to get the job. I also saw it on civil service
exam - I got 100% right. FAST too. Really easy test. I can't believe
people failed it!
In an ed psych
> course. It took me twenty three minutes to do what was supposedly a 3-hour
> exam (at a rate of nearly ten questions/minute); I made no revisions, and
> scored in the 92nd percentile. That university took my money under false
> pretenses.
Heh, I got 99th %ile on my SAT :) Hmm, I can't remember if that was
multiple choice or not - I'm not sure on that test. Long time ago!
>
|
|
|
