- * structural oppression and actual differences can both exist at the same time! They're not contradicting each other!
- * I don't know how to build a better world, but my first step is to go a little meta and talk about why we can't talk, and take seriously the possible harms from talking, rather than just asserting that free speech and civil discourse is Actually Good the way the likes of Cofnas/Winegard/Murray do (being a nobody blogger probably helps; I have an excuse)
-
+ - I don't know how to build a better world, but my first step is to go a little meta and talk about why we can't talk, and take seriously the possible harms from talking, rather than just asserting that free speech and civil discourse is Actually Good the way
+ * the likes of Cofnas/Winegard/Murray do (being a nobody blogger probably helps; I have an excuse)
* women and courage
- * A few things are actually _worse_ than the ball-hiders make it seem ("treat ppl as individuals" doesn't work; "IQ isn't morally valuable" doesn't work)
* Embryo selection looks _really important_; I don't want to give amunition to racists, but I need to talk about that—and the recent Dawkins brouhaha says we can't even talk about that; and the ways I'm worried about eugenics being misused aren't even on the radar
* Murray says polygenic scores are like GDP ... I bet Ben and Michael would have something to say about that analogy!
* "genders have been identified"
* Hyde/Fine binary notes: p. 388
* need to talk about individual differences being non-threatening
+* need to clearly define before casually using later: "cognitive repetioires", "egalitarian", "renormalized"
+* it's actually a _selective_ blank slate (Winegard: https://quillette.com/2019/03/09/progressivism-and-the-west/ )
+* work in "Can Race Be Erased" result
+* Glenn Loury on stigma (older people are also dumber, but that's not a political firebomb)
+* Usain Bolt and the general factor of athleticism: https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7703577 https://isteve.blogspot.com/2007/09/g-factor-of-sports.html (I ran a 2:08.3 when I was sixteen years old.); the tails come apart ; https://www.newyorker.com/sports/sporting-scene/how-fast-would-usain-bolt-run-the-mile
+* blank slate coordination hurt me personally; but just tell the damn truth is also a Schelling point ("Speaking Truth to Power is ...")
+"I realize I am writing in an LGBT era when some argue that 63 distinct genders have been identified," Murray writes at the beginning of Appendix 2. But this is failing to pass the [Ideological Turing Test](https://www.econlib.org/archives/2011/06/the_ideological.html).
-"I realize I am writing in an LGBT era when some argue that 63 distinct genders have been identified," Murray writes.
-
-
-
-
-https://www.econlib.org/archives/2011/06/the_ideological.html
-
-
+The language of _has been identified_
+group diffs aren't real
+* groups
> To say that groups of people differ genetically in ways that bear on cognitive repetoires (as this book does) guarantees accusations that I am misuding science in the service of bigotry and oppression. Let me therefore state explicitly that I reject claims that groups of people, be they sexes or races or classes, can be ranked from superior to inferior. I reject claims that differences among groups have any relevance to human worth or dignity.
-quotes Steven Pinker: "Equality is not the empirical claim that all groups of humans are interchangeable; it is the moral principle that individuals should not be judged or constrained by the average properties of their group."
+
It gets worse. Intuitively, "The moral principle that individuals should not be judged or constrained by the average properties of their group" seems self-evident—one cries out at the _monstrous injustice_ of the individual being oppressed on the basis of mere stereotypes of what other people who _look_ like them might statistically be like.
[...]
-> I think at the root is the new upper class's conflaction of intellectual ability and the professions it enables with human worth. Few admit it, of course. BUt the evolving zeitgeist of the new upper class has led to a misbegotten hierarchy whereby being a surgeon is _better_ in some sense of human worth than being an insurance salesman, being an executive in a high-tech firm is _better_ than being a housewife, and a neighborhood of people with advanced degrees is _better_ than a neighborhood of high-school graduates. To put it so baldly makes it obvious how senseless it is. There shouldn't be any relationship between these things and human worth. And yet, among too many in the new upper class, there is.
-
-As [Harold Lee points out](https://write.as/harold-lee/seizing-the-means-of-home-production),
-
-> The conflcation of intellectual ability with human worth helps to explain the new upper class's insistence that inequalities of intellectual ability must be the product of environmental disadvantage. Many people with high IQs really do feel sorry for people with low IQs. If the environment is to blame, then those unfortunates can be helped, and that makes people who want to help them feel good. If genes are to blame, it makes people who want to help them feel bad. People prefer feeling good to feeling bad, so they engage in confirmation bias when it comes to the evidence about the causes of human differences.
"it is a matter of ethical principle"
https://www.cato-unbound.org/2007/11/21/eric-turkheimer/race-iq
Thermometer and statistical discrimination in machine learning
+Anacholic's critique: https://twitter.com/AnechoicMedia_/status/1245997689113907200
+
------
This was the linkpost description text I initially drafted, before deciding that the "Straussian coyness" I [occasionally]() [succumb]() to is ultimately unbecoming.
+
A Book Review
-Someone wrote a blog post reviewing a book by some sociologist named Murray. Never heard of him. Anyway, I couldn't get through the whole thing because the reviewer has this _really obnoxious_ writing style that uses way too many italics and exclamation points (as well as occasional weirdly out-of-place cuss words?!), but I did notice that he (?) links to _Less Wrong_ a few times (!), which is something I don't see "in the wild" very often these days, so I thought it couldn't hurt to share the link here in case one of you happens to find it interesting??
+Someone wrote a blog post reviewing a book by some sociologist named Murray. Never heard of him. Anyway, I couldn't get through the whole thing because the reviewer has this _really obnoxious_ writing style that uses way too many italics and exclamation points (as well as occasional weirdly out-of-place cuss words?!), but I did notice that he (?) links to _Less Wrong_ a few (or twenty) times, which is something I don't see "in the wild" very often these days, so I "thought it couldn't hurt" to share the link here in case one of you happens to find it interesting??
------
-Book Review—Charles Murray's Human Diversity: The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class
-
New on my secret ("secret") blog: a review of the new Charles Murray book about the science of sex and race differences, including a discussion of some philosophical, psychological, and game-theoretic reasons this stuff is so hard to talk about!
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / blobdiff