Re: [xmca] Nobel prize talks stupid things about human intelligence

California is certainly burning at an incredible rate and I have no idea
where we will be come morning.
But such mundane concerns pale compared to other ongoing tragedies in the
world, and at our best,
the participants in XMCA struggle to think how to minimize the destruction
that we visit on our collective
environment and each other.

Paul had an important point about what sort of virtue is measured by IQ
tests, correlated as they are with
formal schooling, correlated as it is with the regimes of violence on a
grand scale (aka civilization) that humans started to visit
on each other 6,000 years ago.

In the midst of all the loss and terror, people around here are being, in
general, incredibly decent to each other -- offering many
forms of help. They cannot, sadly, see that if they had been able to be
decent before all the loss they could have greatly reduced
it and its dollar costs. They cannot connect their theories with their
everyday practices. only when total calamity hits can they
find some humanity.

As for me, life permitting, I hope to spend tomorrow continuing to think
about the ideas we discuss here while driving to a part of
town where my neighbors' theories say the folks there are in a bad way
because their genes are inferior and busting my ass to
demonstrate, as "scientifically" as possible, that they are wrong, and if
they do not figure out how they are wrong they might just
end up dead wrong.

If you want to help, go outside and blow hard in an eastward direction. That
would save a lot of destruction if it stopped the gale
blowing fire west across San Diego. And then blow hard north from Kurdistan
and blow hard south from Southern Turkey and hope
that you cool down the hot, self righteous tempers that are promising to
bring yet another fire yet another next time.,\
mike

On 10/22/07, David Preiss <davidpreiss@uc.cl> wrote:
>
> Eirik,
>
> As California burns, so a large group of people in the list is
> worried about more urgent things at this moment and will not concur
> to this thread, I don´t think it has any sense for us to proceed
> ahead with this discussion.
>
> We will certainly repeat the points of view we already sketched. We
> both have made more than clear our opinions to each other, thus we
> just need to learn to live with our differences.
>
> Peacefully,
> David
>
> On Oct 22, 2007, at 9:03 PM, E. Knutsson wrote:
>
> > David P,
> >
> > It remains diffuse to me what you mean by "doing science." The
> > Steve Connor
> > comment says a lot of things (as already mentioned: representing a
> > more
> > balanced view). The issue here (as far as I am concerned) is not to
> > decide "who
> > is right" (that would be outside the scope of my competence,
> > anyway) but rather
> > to emphasize the scholarly legitimacy or value of conflicting
> > views, of
> > multivocal/polyphonic (or, perhaps, cacophonic) discourses. The
> > papers you
> > referred to earlier, seem to me to represent that kind of "cacophony."
> >
> > Eirik.
> >
> > On 2007-10-22, at 22:08, David Preiss wrote:
> >> Eirik,
> >>
> >> The Steve Connor comment you send us (second link below) tells
> >> exactly why JW was not doing science at all. Particularly, why you
> >> can't infer from an heritability ratio a conclusion about the
> >> intelligence of people that works with you (as Watson say). On the
> >> other hand, something can be statistically heritable and not genetic
> >> at all. A nice explanation is in the Sternberg, Grigorenko and Kidd
> >> paper I sent before.
> >> David
> >>
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >> On Oct 22, 2007, at 3:16 PM, E. Knutsson wrote:
> >>
> >>> Amanda,
> >>>
> >>> JW's comment (http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/
> >>> article3075642.ece)
> >>> concludes with this request: "[W]e as scientists, wherever we wish
> >>> to place
> >>> ourselves in this great debate, should take care in claiming what
> >>> are
> >>> unarguable truths without the support of evidence."
> >>>
> >>> Some of the other comments also seem to give a more balanced view:
> >>>
> >>> http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article3070538.ece
> >>>
> >>> http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/article3075640.ece
> >>>
> >>> "Curtailing free debate is almost always a mistake. Allowing
> >>> scientists and
> >>> individuals to air their theories openly does not validate them. On
> >>> the
> >>> contrary it allows them to be refuted."
> >>>
> >>> Eirik.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 2007-10-21, at 01:26, Amanda Brovold wrote:
> >>>> Just for the record, it sounds to me as if Watson has suggested he
> >>>> may have
> >>>> been misquoted. In the article linked to 3 messages below he
> >>>> says: "I can
> >>>> understand much of this reaction. For if I said what I was
> >>>> quoted as
> >>>> saying, then I can only admit that I am bewildered by it. To
> >>>> those who have
> >>>> drawn the inference from my words that Africa, as a continent, is
> >>>> somehow
> >>>> genetically inferior, I can only apologise unreservedly. This is
> >>>> not what I
> >>>> meant. More importantly from my point of view, there is no
> >>>> scientific basis
> >>>> for such a belief." I am not sure why the first two sentences of
> >>>> this quote
> >>>> are generally left off when it is repeated. Such common
> >>>> occurrences though
> >>>> (even on this very list) lead me to believe it is plausible that
> >>>> what Watson
> >>>> said my not have been as appalling as what has been passed around
> >>>> makes it
> >>>> seem. I agree that it seems certain he has a view I very much
> >>>> disagree with
> >>>> and seems to be contradicted by the preponderance of evidence.
> >>>> However, I
> >>>> find un-thoughtful knee-jerk responses to such views to be at
> >>>> least as
> >>>> dangerous as the views themselves. I have heard people stress
> >>>> that it is
> >>>> important for academics to respond appropriately to events such as
> >>>> these. I
> >>>> very much agree, it is important for experts in the relevant
> >>>> fields to
> >>>> correct any misunderstandings that stories like this are likely to
> >>>> perpetuate. It is also extremely important though for the
> >>>> academy to
> >>>> remember that academic freedom is absolutely vital. As appalling
> >>>> as views
> >>>> expressed by one academic may be, the expression of controversial
> >>>> view
> >>>> points simply cannot be allowed to threaten the protections
> >>>> necessary for
> >>>> inquiry to be carried out.
> >>>>
> >>>> Something else to consider, phrased a different way, I feel
> >>>> confident that
> >>>> many people outraged by Watson's remarks would agree that in fact
> >>>> there are
> >>>> differences in the intelligences of different people, often
> >>>> correlated with
> >>>> differences in culture. These are not differences in terms of one
> >>>> being
> >>>> overall superior to another, but I do not think that reading is
> >>>> forced by
> >>>> the words that have been quoted without context, even if they are
> >>>> accurate.
> >>>> It is at least possible that Watson, as he now seems to claim,
> >>>> really meant
> >>>> to refer to differences without evaluating them. And isn't the
> >>>> recognition
> >>>> of the complexity of intelligence one of the things that makes
> >>>> many of the
> >>>> outraged so upset about IQ testing?
> >>>>
> >>>> -Amanda
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> xmca mailing list
> >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >>
> >> David Preiss, Ph.D.
> >> Subdirector de Extensión y Comunicaciones
> >> Escuela de Psicología
> >> Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile
> >> Av Vicuña Mackenna 4860
> >> Macul, Santiago
> >> Chile
> >>
> >> Fono: 3544605
> >> Fax: 3544844
> >> e-mail: davidpreiss@uc.cl
> >> web personal: http://web.mac.com/ddpreiss/
> >> web institucional: http://www.epuc.cl/profesores/dpreiss
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> xmca mailing list
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
> David Preiss, Ph.D.
> Subdirector de Extensión y Comunicaciones
> Escuela de Psicología
> Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile
> Av Vicuña Mackenna 4860
> Macul, Santiago
> Chile
>
> Fono: 3544605
> Fax: 3544844
> e-mail: davidpreiss@uc.cl
> web personal: http://web.mac.com/ddpreiss/
> web institucional: http://www.epuc.cl/profesores/dpreiss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Mon Oct 22 20:31 PDT 2007