Quote note (#180)

A usefully depressing account by Paul Gottfried of Conservative Inc. and the shifting boundaries of hate-think:

Well into the 1990s, it was almost universally accepted by the scientific community, except for Stalinoid propagandist Leon Kamin and the perpetually PC Stephen Jay Gould, that human IQ varied significantly, that IQ tests could measure these differences, and that up to 85 percent of intelligence may be hereditary. In an enlightening work The IQ Controversy (1988) Stanley Rothman and Jay Snydermann document the premises that the overwhelming majority of scientists, biologists, and psychologists fully accept the axioms that a significant part (indeed well over one half) of intelligence is hereditary, and that general intelligence is testable.

(No longer, at least as far as its official gate-keepers are concerned.)

Western Civilization has been disgraced indelibly by its craven surrender of all intellectual integrity on this topic. The degree to which it will be despised, eventually, for what it has become almost certainly exceeds its power of historical imagination.

August 27, 2015admin 26 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Discriminations


26 Responses to this entry

  • michael Says:

    “During the phone conversation, I learned that my interlocutor thought “as a Christian” that it’s immoral to believe some groups are not as intelligent as other ones because of an inborn difference. I’ve no idea why this person’s religious affiliation requires him to deny a defensible scientific proposition, and which as late as the 1990s half of the (already leftward drifting) American Psychological Association still affirmed as a heavily substantiated fact.”

    This I have found is one of the two rubs of the matter the other being conservatives decided a long time ago to try to dodge the racism meme by using culture as a stand in for race, it was clever in a way as many of the bad behaviors are accelerated by a bad culture since historically a better culture was enforced statistics could be shown to correlate with a decline between enforced culture and self actualized culture.It also made a nifty opening into the valid argument that socialism degraded culture. whether the new generation never got the memo this was a tactic or doesn’t actually believe it or finds reality in defensible today is unclear.

    The Christian angle is something more recent while Im sure there have always been some who concluded Christian Gods couldnt possibly have made various grades of man most never considered or simply accepted that people like animals are different. Of course be anti racist has to be part of a religion like christianity just like all the nice qualities are. But I think its goes deeper I think Christians perceive a potential flaw in a theology of universalism if all men are not in fact created equal;.


    CuiPertinebit Reply:

    No, I’d say it sounds like you were talking to a liberalized, Christianish sectarian.

    “As a Christian,” I think it’s blasphemous and contrary to reason, to imagine that God forms every man alike. The Bible itself indicates that God distributes His gifts variously to each man as He likes, and chastises the impertinence of those who would call His seemingly varied election “unfair.” I also find it impious and savouring of heresy, to imply that the corruption of nature consequent to the Fall has not introduced a further, varied, disordered and disordering effect upon various human persons.


    michael Reply:

    i wasnt talking to anyone I was raised catholic beginning while mass was still in latin church twelve years of catholic school a father who dropped out of the seminary before taking orders, religion and politics being all we ever discussed in out family. And then spending the past twent years among born again christians mormons menonites and Adventists in very religious north idaho.
    Sure ill grant there is a massive disconnect between a religions theology and what the congregants understand it to be.And certainly I can also devise or interpret you a reaction friendly Christianity.
    But at root [and I really am disturbed you guys cant see this really plain fact] Christianity is a universalist creed, thats what catholic means and thats what Paul decided. and protestants upped the ante by making it demotic as well.
    It is also communitarian its primary tenet is to live ones life for the other. who is your brother as gods children.This is to be taken to extremes to lay down ones life, to give the coat and cloak off your back, to turn your other cheek, to abandon your parents and family as if dead in favor of your spiritual family, to deny your genetic and national ties in favor of you spiritual brethren. to put your daughter out to the mob at your door or your son in to the fire.Judaism which has a certain internal internal logic of justice to one of equality.
    It is also despite the many brilliant minds who through out history have attempted to make sense of it;completely irrational.Its very core is that reality is not real and not worthy of consideration,that a more real world awaits after death where one will be rewarded in proportion to how well one completely ignored this world. its an insanely convoluted theology of a tridentine god thats man spirit and god all at once yet not at all.a god who also has another maybe two entirely different religions going on the side. reaction is founded on reality on pointing out the irrational prejudices of progressive/christianity.
    To forward a christian interpretation thats reactionary in a time when people can read for themselves is a hopeless goal.today people are all about soundbites and tweets they are not sitting down for some long winded interpretation of how jesus was really thor not a hippie. Have you not noticed what christianity has been used for?
    And Ill say again Im sentimental about the church of my youth.but its hopeless


    michael Reply:

    “I’ve no idea why this person’s religious affiliation requires him to deny a defensible scientific proposition”

    Ill answer Gotliebs question.

    Because if humans differ substantially through evolution all sorts of uncomfortable things happen.
    It looks a lot more like the world of Darwin and Dawkins than the judeo christian narrative,But not simply at the periphery of planets and the big bang even the possibility of some general evolution theory, but at the heart of the matter. Its one thing to say god used evolution to create the world including mankind, its an entirely different thing to say their are degrees of mankind, when your church is committed to universalism.
    Christianity is still 33% of worlds religious, same as 100 years ago but then 95% white now 50% white.
    Degrees of mankind implies degrees of agency and christianity is all about agency..
    Racists might not be evil just hyper observant they might even be the actual victims.
    which would mean christian meddling has damaged the worlds equilibrium.
    It means that traits not free will determine behavior, that man is not struggling against evil but nature+ a nature god must have bestowed unfairly.Gods a racist.
    this can all be glossed over if its hazy it can mix in with then general range of intra racial disparity it gets much different when sailor or griffe do regression analysis by race,essentially like conservatives its much better to hold to the its the culture meme.


    Posted on August 27th, 2015 at 1:37 pm Reply | Quote
  • Quote note (#180) | Neoreactive Says:

    […] By admin […]

    Posted on August 27th, 2015 at 1:40 pm Reply | Quote
  • Anon314 Says:

    @michael Christianity was not always universalist. For one example, Spaniards ignored Papal of 1452 forbidding slavery on the grounds that blacks were like animals in that they had no souls.


    michael Reply:

    Its true I have several times argued that Christianity can only do to Reaction what it did to recent conservatism,and the British, American, and Roman empires.However I was not making that point just now I was simply relaying my impression of essays articles and even comments over the past say twenty years in conservative circles.I wasnt too clear about whats changed with Christians because its less clear and being “catholic” its a bit different for us. Obviously all christians have simply moved left with the herd while theres been some pushback on certain issues like abortion it seems as if to balancee that there been a liberalizing on race, more Spanish people at church and a general need of parishes to reach wider congregations in a time of lessening church attendance.its a big topic but suffice it to say. events politics and theology colluded to push christians in a extremely race neutral position quicklly.
    That said I guess I will say yet again.
    After 12 years of jesuit education I think I know a bit about Church history including the definition of Catholic,the ministry of Paul,the Gospel of Jesus. the old testament,I dont even know where or when to stop,if you dont understand Christianity is an extremely liberal communitarian universalist creed then you have never been a christian.The fact that it has had some historical periods where it was twisted this way or that to suit some power or other can never change what it is what it must always revert to what its scripture says.This dungeons and dragons king Arthur Christianity is fun to daydream about but its not reality.Convincing people to re embrace religion of any kind would be a task but a crusades themed christianity would be absurdly impossible but even if you could it would never last because your idea is not what the religion is about. Yeah that sucks for us sure would be convenient to use it to control proles sure will be awkward explaining to christian conservatives they not wanted but there you have it.


    Metanoid Reply:

    Agreed, Christ is the anti-thede.

    Anyone who doesn’t get that worships some other authority over him. So we have ‘Traddianity’, ‘Churchianity’, ‘Biblianity’ etc; none of which are modelled on the imitation of Christ, who refused all retaliation, vengeance and blood loyalty in preparation for the apocalypse.


    Posted on August 27th, 2015 at 2:13 pm Reply | Quote
  • Kgaard Says:

    You know … the more I dig into Musk, the more reactionary the guy shows up as being: He goes on at length about how having five kids convinced him of the hereditability of intelligence, and thus the need for smart people to have more kids. In the Musk bio by Ashley Vance he literally quotes from Idiocracy on this point. Then he fired his long-time secretary Mary Beth Brown because she wanted to be compensated like an executive. He said, “Take two weeks off and let me do your job.” He determined it wasn’t that hard, gave her a year’s severance and fired her. (Well he actually offered her a job elsewhere in the company which she didn’t take.)

    Somehow he gets a pass on this stuff. I guess because he makes rockets and electric cars. There is zero mention of affirmative action or diversity hiring in the Vance bio.


    John Reply:

    Elon Musk for God-Emperor of the Solar System!


    Kgaard Reply:

    Man … lot of Musk-detractors out there. It’s not that he’s a god … it’s that he’s the man on the margin. Pushing the envelope on various fronts and doing interesting stuff. Like Trump in a sense. Trump is not perfect (I wouldn’t vote for him) but he’s the man on the margin in politics — single-handedly moving the Overton Window. We should all be thankful for him.


    Lesser Bull Reply:

    Hear, hear. On both counts.

    Harold Reply:

    “He goes on at length about how having five kids convinced him of the hereditability of intelligence”

    Wow, a billionaire with a commonsense view shared by millions of poor people with mediocre intellects. Impressive.


    Posted on August 27th, 2015 at 3:19 pm Reply | Quote
  • Quote note (#180) | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on August 27th, 2015 at 5:12 pm Reply | Quote
  • Joseph sans Brothers Says:

    “The degree to which it will be despised, eventually, for what it has become almost certainly exceeds its power of historical imagination.”

    But that assumes that a future society would have higher cultural coherence and intelligence than the present one. Yet the present society is total society; it is global, there is no alternative; when it falls, everything falls. Therefore, a future society will either inherit all the stupidity and degradation of the present one, or the future society will be a post-collapse society with no clear ability to reconstruct what came before it. Alternatively, if the Singularity is near, there would by definition be no need to remember let alone “blame” prior historical periods for anything.

    So what are you even talking about?

    The NRX once again vainly projects a redemptively less-stupid future ahead, ironically confirming their own intellectual mediocrity.


    Exfernal Reply:

    With privately funded positive eugenics? One can hope….


    admin Reply:

    Is there some kind of funny math that allows accelerating collapse to last forever?


    Joseph sans Brothers Reply:

    “Collapse” from what prior state? From a historical period in which “intelligence” was measured “objectively” (Hah!) in a socially validated way? When was that?

    Look at what you’re actually quoting here: “Stanley Rothman and Jay Snydermann document the premises that the overwhelming majority of scientists, biologists, and psychologists fully accept the axioms that a significant part (indeed well over one half) of intelligence is hereditary,”

    This is based on a SURVEY of the OPINIONS of “experts.” Scientific-truth-by-committee, anyone? And, ahem, “fully accept the axioms”. AXIOMS? Excuse me? Did your source actually mean RESULTS but just doesn’t know the difference between a result and an axiom?

    Has it ever occurred to you that the Nrxer ranting you engage in is structurally identical to leftist complaints against science-denying rightists? Your entire argument here is “The EXPERTS AGREE on this, but they’re being SILENCED by a nefarious conspiracy of [insert partisan bogeyman here], which will SURELY CUASE OUR DOWNFALL…” Precisely identical to the argumentation of left environmentalists.

    The only difference between Nrx ressentiment and left ressentiment is that the left may be slightly more informed regarding the state of scientific knowledge. Everything I’ve read on the topic here confirms that you have no idea what genes are or what functions they do and do not perform.


    Exfernal Reply:

    Genes – protein or functional RNA blueprints. What is else there to know? Ask a more interesting question.

    admin Reply:

    (He seems to prefer shouting. I suspect he’s not going to be around much longer.)

    admin Reply:

    Try to be polite. Raving like this looks idiotic, and is going to get your comments chucked in the trash.

    If you don’t think there’s a reign of terror in this area, you’re not paying attention.

    michael Reply:

    read much?

    wenshuang Reply:

    “Yet the present society is total society”

    Huh? Maybe in the same way that all living things are the total species so when it dies, all die. It sounds like your cladistic tree looks a bit like a telephone pole.


    Posted on August 27th, 2015 at 6:53 pm Reply | Quote
  • Dots Says:

    bad ideas r indeed very popular in our culture, and the artifacts of our culture r very durable. still, it seems like lots of things go the right way. smartypants entrepreneurs have repeatedly delivered us industrial solutions to imagined moral problems

    the liberal newspapers r thinning, and the declining marketability of the academic humanities will depopulate the higher winers a bit, no?

    police wear body cameras, the postal service tracks carrier behavior, public schools test in public. this suggests that components of the state itself may b subject to lite Gnon. my town’s first charter school just opened

    the last R vp candidate has pushed huge entitlement reforms. this is probably a feint, but some improvements may b possible


    Posted on August 27th, 2015 at 7:28 pm Reply | Quote
  • Lucian of Samosata Says:

    “Western Civilization has been disgraced indelibly by its craven surrender of all intellectual integrity on this topic.”

    That’s a rather value-laden phrasing for a cold collectivist (there’s certainly more of Cank than Gnon in it)


    Posted on August 28th, 2015 at 12:22 pm Reply | Quote
  • michael Says:


    Too bad this didnt come out a day earlier



    Posted on August 28th, 2015 at 2:26 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment