The Art of Nonsense, Pathology or Con-Artistry?

[Gandalf]

What bigotry, Tito? As long as you can support what you are saying then I struggle to understand the meanings of terms like racist or misogynist etc. If you disagree then cite why you disagree, but I hate it when people counter an argument with 'misogynist' as a) they have no counter argument and b) nust want to shut you down. This is where Beanz is such a conformist and stereotype. Does it all the time and in every thread. At least Molyneux can make a case and you can disagree all you like as long as you have the information to counter with. For instance there is a lot of information about the harmful effects of single parenting. Yet typically the only counter you get is 'You don't like women....misogynist'. It is asinine.

Miles, any time you start to generalize human flaws/ superiority based on race or ethnicity, you've already started off on the wrong foot. It doesn't matter how prettily you dress it up with (cough) "statistics" or (hack) "science"..... it's always wrong. It's bigots' and sexists' way of rationalizing their inherent feelings of superiority and separation. It ignores individuality, and the fact that if you go back far enough, we all come from the same origins. Now I'll remind you that earlier I posted that I'm not "branding everything he has to say as wrong", so going off that, his views of single mothers are not entirely wrong. It's not rocket science to say that children generally do better with both a mother and a father. This is not news to me, or to billions of people around the world. There are exceptions, of course, and he probably should mention that once in awhile. 'Cause when he doesn't, he then comes across as what you're saying... a misogynist. It's all in how you choose to deliver your message.

Look Tito, the local population here has an IQ higher than that of my own country. This is just a fact. There might be different arguments surrounding how and why, but it is a fact and I don't really consider it off on the wrong foot or anything like that. Look at the top 10 highest IQ countries and you see a pattern and it is what it is. You can watch the presentation on single mothers and then do your own research, it is generally accepted, though not absolute to any degree of course, that children raised with one parent will have life a lot harder than life raised in a two parent household. I really cannot be bothered with cries or racism or misogyny when it comes to such things. I am not offended by it in the slightest and I say that as someone from a country that is middling around 100 for IQ and has an epidemic of single motherhood. I don't understand the need to be upset by it. I find it much more constructive to just accept the reality and then ask 'What can we do to improve things?' and when you suggest people should have less casual sex and consider their partners very carefully you are still painted as being a very naughty boy. It is very twisted how Beanz goes about things in that regard.

It is good to see that you know how to have a conversation and we can agree on some things and disagree on others and that's all fair enough.

[TitoFan]

What bigotry, Tito? As long as you can support what you are saying then I struggle to understand the meanings of terms like racist or misogynist etc. If you disagree then cite why you disagree, but I hate it when people counter an argument with 'misogynist' as a) they have no counter argument and b) nust want to shut you down. This is where Beanz is such a conformist and stereotype. Does it all the time and in every thread. At least Molyneux can make a case and you can disagree all you like as long as you have the information to counter with. For instance there is a lot of information about the harmful effects of single parenting. Yet typically the only counter you get is 'You don't like women....misogynist'. It is asinine.

Miles, any time you start to generalize human flaws/ superiority based on race or ethnicity, you've already started off on the wrong foot. It doesn't matter how prettily you dress it up with (cough) "statistics" or (hack) "science"..... it's always wrong. It's bigots' and sexists' way of rationalizing their inherent feelings of superiority and separation. It ignores individuality, and the fact that if you go back far enough, we all come from the same origins. Now I'll remind you that earlier I posted that I'm not "branding everything he has to say as wrong", so going off that, his views of single mothers are not entirely wrong. It's not rocket science to say that children generally do better with both a mother and a father. This is not news to me, or to billions of people around the world. There are exceptions, of course, and he probably should mention that once in awhile. 'Cause when he doesn't, he then comes across as what you're saying... a misogynist. It's all in how you choose to deliver your message.

Look Tito, the local population here has an IQ higher than that of my own country. This is just a fact. There might be different arguments surrounding how and why, but it is a fact and I don't really consider it off on the wrong foot or anything like that. Look at the top 10 highest IQ countries and you see a pattern and it is what it is. You can watch the presentation on single mothers and then do your own research, it is generally accepted, though not absolute to any degree of course, that children raised with one parent will have life a lot harder than life raised in a two parent household. I really cannot be bothered with cries or racism or misogyny when it comes to such things. I am not offended by it in the slightest and I say that as someone from a country that is middling around 100 for IQ and has an epidemic of single motherhood. I don't understand the need to be upset by it. I find it much more constructive to just accept the reality and then ask 'What can we do to improve things?' and when you suggest people should have less casual sex and consider their partners very carefully you are still painted as being a very naughty boy. It is very twisted how Beanz goes about things in that regard.

It is good to see that you know how to have a conversation and we can agree on some things and disagree on others and that's all fair enough.

Absolutely. It's the only way to argue.

But IMO, single motherhood, and claims about IQ's by race or ethnicity are two completely different things. On single motherhood I agree. Still.... I'll bet we've all known shining exceptions to the rule, where a single mother has done her damnest and has raised wonderful, well-adjusted kids. It's not the norm, mind you... but there are exceptions. Still, I believe a single mother is starting off with two strikes, if you will (sorry for the baseball analogy). It's a problem that by all means should be addressed, as it's the root cause of a lot of ills in society. On IQ, it gets stickier. To me, IQ is simply genetics. The same reason why some kids are adept at sports and some aren't. Why some have a musical talent since birth. Why still others are born with a paint brush in their hands. Genetics. More than one U.S. celebrity has gotten in trouble trying to explain why blacks aren't good swimmers..... or why women aren't good golfers. They may have good intentions... but they invariably get in trouble for their generalizations. No country, race, or ethnic group has a monopoly on IQ. Life circumstances force people into different cubbyholes in life.... but it isn't because they're black, Asian, white, Hispanic, Jewish, etc.

[Gandalf]

They are very different issues for sure. One can be controlled, but the other, like you say, is likely mostly genetic. Like I say, though I have no qualms about differences between races and there will always be exceptions. You are going to get stupid Asian people and highly intelligent black people too of course. However, I guess my point is that I don't see how Molyneux is scientifically wrong on these issues. I hear a lot of words against Molyneux from Beanz and how much he knows about cults because apparently he was 'raised in a cult', but I don't actually see many arguments to tell anyone how or why Molyneux is wrong. I have highlighted one clear example of how I think Molyneux is wrong and that is in my belief that freemarkets are not always a solution and I could illustrate the UK property market of today as a prime example of how this hasn't worked, but all I see is 'He asks for donations, he has twisted words, he leads a cult' and this is rather bankrupt stuff.

[TitoFan]

Ok so you don't see how Molyneux is scientifically wrong on issues of race, but I on the other hand haven't seen any scientific evidence on his part to back up his outlandish claims. It so happens National Geographic came out with an issue devoted entirely to race this month. Now like any other publication, NG is given to slanted coverage on some issues.... but they also can't be merely dismissed on every topic. This particular issue is quite good, as it explores the notion of race from different angles. Part of the message is that it is us human beings who are too willing to cubbyhole ourselves into different groups, or "races". The reality is that nowadays the vast majority of people have quite a mix of ethnicities in their DNA. Pure breeds are for dogs. Most of us can claim heritage characteristics from several origins. As time goes by, this becomes even more pronounced. So to hear IQ claims based on race or ethnicity sounds hollow to me.

Molyneux is opinionated. The only difference between him and most of us is that he's gone through the trouble of setting up and maintaining a YouTube platform. He's neither the world's most educated person, nor the most knowledgeable on many of the topics of which he speaks. Again, I'm not saying he's wrong about everything..... only that too many people substitute listening (and watching) the Molyneux's of the cyber world for their own original thoughts and ideas. That, my friend, is dangerous.

[Gandalf]

I object to that as the highest IQ nations in the world tend to be very homogeneous societies. Sure there are different tribal elements at work within those societies and there is overlap, but it seems pretty clear that East Asian nations produce the most intelligent people along with also the Ashkenazi Jews too who produce very high IQ results.

[TitoFan]

You are completely entitled to your opinion, of course. However, there are plenty of articles out there by very intelligent people that point out the flaws in IQ tests, their design, their administration, and their interpretation..... and dismiss the notion that IQ is related to race, ethnicity, or any such factors. So your assertions sound rather wild to me. I've read your broad generalizations for some time now, and usually I don't comment. But I couldn't be more in disagreement with them. There are many, many factors that come into play and should not be ignored when attempting to pigeonhole races and ethnicities into IQ categories. All this does is promote bigotry, separatism, general resentment between groups of people. In fact it seems sort of medieval, given the globalization we've experienced across society in the past couple of decades. You speak of "scientific proof", yet have never once provided a shred of scientific evidence to prove these sweeping generalizations. Yet I'm positive that there are true scientists out there, much better prepared than you or I, who would debunk these myths in a New York minute.

[Gandalf]

It isn't especially difficult to find evidence. A very easy search throws up this pdf which reviews a lot of the literature on this particular topic. I have only skimmed it myself as I am too busy, but will probably read the complete thing this weekend as it does look very interesting. I understand that some people might try to use the data for bigoted purposes, but at the end of the day, all I care about is if something is true or not. It serves no greater purpose to stick ones head in the sand and pretend that something does not exist because it might be divisive. That is where I struggle with political correctness. I don't think we should be politically correct when it comes to science. I think it is also very important when you consider how we are opening borders to pretty much everyone. The reality is that you are going to end up with problems if you are not going to be realistic about cultural and intelligence differentials. I think the ignorance of such evidence is partly what is leading to Europe having such a murky time of it today. This is one area where I think Molyneux is quite brave and I think others like Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson have referenced similar things.

https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfreds...sen30years.pdf