AJ,

"How does someone who believes that IQ scores are ridiculous come to the conclusion (incorrectly) that they’re less “iffy” when applied to racial groups than they are when applied to the different sides of the political spectrum?"

The study in your linked paper relied on small sample sizes and only a few tests to determine IQ. The studies used to determine the race 'findings' have large sample sizes over a long term with IQ determined by a full battery of tests. Hence one is more 'iffy' than t'other.

"If IQ scores really were as useless as you imply, then we wouldn’t see consistently lower averages in samples consisting of individuals with lower socioeconomic status and education levels."

The fact that an inappropriate measuring tool comes up with similar results doesn't prove that its right. If you have a tape that measures 1 metre incorrectly, the fact that all metre long timber cut using that tape is the same length doesn't make the tape correct.

Intelligence cannot be determined by a bank of tests no matter how hard or honestly the testers try to make them non-subjective and/or culturally neutral.

mhaze,

Given that the Right side of politics has most of the religious, the study really shouldn’t come as a surprise to you. That atheists have, on average, have higher education levels has been well established.

<<The study in your linked paper relied on small sample sizes and only a few tests to determine IQ.>>

Again, in the first study, yes. The second used thousands of subjects.

<<The studies used to determine the race 'findings' have large sample sizes over a long term with IQ determined by a full battery of tests. Hence one is more 'iffy' than t'other.>>

The number of times that IQ has been measured between races, or over what period it’s been measured, does not negate my point that IQ scores are more problematic with race due to the other factors (mentioned before) that affect IQ. This is not a problem when comparing the two sides of the political spectrum, so long as the sample is random.

<<If you have a tape that measures 1 metre incorrectly, the fact that all metre long timber cut using that tape is the same length doesn't make the tape correct.>>

So long as you keep using the same incorrect meter, that doesn’t matter. That can be adjusted for later. Poor analogy.

<<Intelligence cannot be determined by a bank of tests no matter how hard or honestly the testers try to make them non-subjective and/or culturally neutral.>>

To a large extent, yes. But it’s the best we’ve got at the moment, and it does an alright job when used appropriately. Race, however, is an inappropriate use (depending on the thesis) because there are too many other factors driving the results.

Anyway, I actually don’t care all that much about the study. My self-esteem doesn’t hinge on it and I don’t need a study to tell me what I can observe fairly reliably. I’ve known about the correlation for a long time, yet have never mentioned it on OLO until now because that’s not really me. I only mentioned it this time because LEGO’s unjustified hubris made it far too tantalising.

//But it’s the best we’ve got at the moment, and it does an alright job when used appropriately.//

I'm with mhaze on this one. All that IQ tests measure is how good you are at performing IQ tests. Whether or not this can be equated to the ambiguous beast we call 'intelligence' is somewhat contentious.

I think it's because the human mind is so versatile: I'm quite good with maths and science, but I'm rubbish at music. Am I more or less intelligent than an oboe virtuoso who struggles with trigonometry but at least has the basic ability to keep the beat? How do you even begin to answer that question? It's like comparing oboes with equations.

It is racist to say that one race is superior to another race AJ.

I am a racist, and I say that races are not equal. Races look different because they have evolved separately to give each race an advantage within very different environments.

The only thing I know about your position is that you disagree with me that races are not equal. Therefore, you must agree that all races are equal. But you deny that. So what your position is, I don't know. When you are prepared to submit your position, we can get started again.

Thank you.

Toni Lavis and mhaze,

Where are you guys when I’m trying to tell LEGO the same thing?

(http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15856#275700)

Initially I was just trying to communicate with LEGO on his wavelength in a jibe at his unjustified boasting of “his side” and how smart they all allegedly are. He’s currently waffling on about the intellectual supremacy of whites are on another thread (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18533&page=0) and not a peep from either of you there. Am I more pleasant to communicate with or something?

Thanks for knocking the wind out of a nice comeback to a spectacular display of arrogance too, by the way.

Although, Toni, I will point out that it’s a bit of an understatement to say that IQ tests only test one’s ability to pass an IQ test. IQ tests test cognition, which - as broad, ambiguous, and slippery as the concept of intelligence is - is what we tend to think of when we talk about intelligence.

---

LEGO,

Feeling a little humbler now, are we?

<<It is racist to say that one race is superior to another race AJ.>>

Yes.

Racist: Showing or feeling discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or believing that a particular race is superior to another. (http://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/racist)

<<I am a racist, and I say that races are not equal.>>

Correct.

<<Races look different because they have evolved separately to give each race an advantage within very different environments.>>

Close enough.

<<The only thing I know about your position is that you disagree with me that races are not equal.>>

You don’t need to know my position if yours is justified. You only want it because you believe it will help you to distract from the holes in yours.

But for the umpteenth time now: that depends on what you mean by “equal”. Are we ready to clarify that yet, or are you just going to continue playing games?

By the way, an answer to your question is in my last post to you. I’m sorry if it’s not presented in the overly-simplistic manner that your inadequately narrow debating technique requires.

//He’s currently waffling on about the intellectual supremacy of whites are on another thread (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18533&page=0) and not a peep from either of you there. Am I more pleasant to communicate with or something?//

"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience."
- Mark Twain