• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sam Harris Whitewashes ‘The Bell Curve’ During Interview With Charles Murray

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
"Changing environmental factors is really hard" Oh I don't know Europe managed it pretty well for several centuries

This guy doesn't come off as hateful but for as much as he's able to talk about statistics he has demonstrated basically zero understanding of race

And Harris is clearly badly out of his depth
 

FyreWulff

Member
Sam Harris is the symptom of one of the various methods of recruitment into or at least using people as a conduit for spreading racism and white supremacist views.

Sam Harris is a dumbass, because race is a social construct made up by humans.

Sam Harris is a racist, because once again the core of his argument is the IQ test, which boils down to "how well do you know European culture", a pop culture quiz, more than anything else.

Just another resurgence of the ol' Scientific Racism, which has been around for more than a century and is used to spread white supremacist bullshit latently through the scientifically leaning and science communities.


He's not capable of unrolling the whole hay bale that is institutionalized racism. I mean whenever a minority community got wealthy and prominent they got firebombed by white people with no legal repurcussions. Sam is an idiot that thinks the white people in the room haven't sawed the legs off everyone else's chairs before he walked in.
 
Used to dig Harris, read a couple of his books, and have defended him. I was an atheist, and he is articulate.

That ends today. Fuck this, and fuck him.

Sam Harris is a dumbass, because race is a social construct made up by humans.

Sam Harris is a racist, because once again the core of his argument is the IQ test, which boils down to "how well do you know European culture", a pop culture quiz, more than anything else.
A round of applause for this post. Everybody should know this shit by now.
 
What percentage do you think it is? I thought 50-80 was the consensus, with most research landing closer to the 50 mark.

That is, coming from GENES, not RACE. If he just stuck to that part I don't think people would be protesting him.

Yeah, sorry if I didn't make that clear. The race thing is the one that puts me off together with the context in that the 50-80% argument is used.

It's used as if there's major differences in base intelligence formed by genes between ethnic groups.
 

Cyframe

Member
If you are having a rational conversation using the Bell Curve(other than laughing at it), you are in the same boat as Flat Earthers, and Homeopathy. Except you are racist

He's even worse. He presented Murray of all people as some sort of victim, and even people in this thread are empathizing with him.

----

Sam Harris is racist. Is he wearing a hood, no, but he's a very prominent atheist, who has a large voice that is going to reach his white audience of atheists into giving credence to a complete fraud. He could have had any other PoC on to discuss and repudiate Murray's book.

You don't have to say I hate *iggers to be a racist, and the fact that so many people are afraid to use that descriptor for Sam Harris, shows that we still have a long way to go. If this and his Islamaphobia won't convince people, it's hopeless.

Yeah I listened to the whole thing and I don't think any less of Sam. Race affects environmental factors which affect intelligence. That's the sole point which can be understood to understand why he's not fucking white washing or using this data to promote racism.

Take a fucking minute and think things through before subscribing to outrage porn

You need to log off this site and spend the next week library researching the social construct of race.
 

Yeoman

Member
Just to nip this "intelligence is inherited" digression in the bud, people need to read:
Heritability in the genomics era: concepts and misconceptions by Visscher, P. M. et al.
Specifically:
Misconception : ”Heritability is informative about the nature of between-group differences"

This misconception comes in two forms, and in both cases height and IQ in human populations are good examples. The first misconception is that when the heritability is high, groups that differ greatly in the mean of the trait in question must do so because of genetic differences. The second misconception is that the observation of a shift in the mean of a character over time (when we can discount changes in gene frequencies) for a trait with high heritability is a paradox. For IQ, a large increase in the mean has been observed in numerous populations, and this phenomenon is called the Flynn effect, after its discoverer. The problem with this suggested paradox is that heritability should not be used to make predictions about mean changes in the population over time or about differences between groups, because in each individual calculation the heritability is defined for a particular population and says nothing about environments in other populations. White males born in the United States were the tallest in the world in the mid-19th century and about 9 cm taller than Dutch males. At the end of the 20th century, although the height of males in the United States had increased, many European countries had overtaken them and Dutch males are now approximately 5 cm taller than white US males, a trend that is likely to be environmental rather than genetic in origin.
 
One doesn't need to be malicious to buy into racism.

To your second part: Some things don't need to be challenged. I can assure you that there certainly is no scientific consensus that race plays a major role in intelligence besides shaping environmental factors. You don't need conversations with people saying that.

I think it's fair to have conversations about anything. It's super important to be able to do instead of drawing battle lines. My only disappointment was, from what I understand, little active disagreement from Sam. Though if it's something he doesn't know anything about I wonder if he could. Still.. from what I'm reading... his point was Race ->Lives in disadvantaged areas-> Environmental -> IQ. Isn't that the same thing people are arguing? Just cutting out the beginning because it says "Race."

Right, Harris would totally have voted for Obama a third term. Stop the outrage peoples....

But, yeah, it's always a shame to have Harris be such a prominent science figurehead.

Right, let's turn against our best rational reasonable minds because emotional reaction.


I mean it does matter what he says... If this story was Sam Harris has Murray on and fights against the Bell Curve this thread wouldn't need to exist...

I understand but I'll listen to the podcast not read the article telling me what to be outraged about.

Anyways. Heading to dinner so I can't sit and reply. I'm not expert anyway, and have to listen to the podcast before grabbing a pitchfork.
 

IrishNinja

Member
It's been a horrific couple of decades for the Atheist movement. I'm not sure how it became such a perfect incubator for misogyny and racism, but that's where we are.


Burn it all down and start over.

seriously, this. ill always appreciate The Selfish Gene but modern day Dawkins can get tossed in the bushes, too

and not that YT "personalities" should count for much but if atheist is in their name, they're prolly.shit, too
 

Lois_Lane

Member
And it should at least be pointed out that Murray wants a universal basic income as a solution to this problem, not genocide:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-guaranteed-income-for-every-american-1464969586

So at least there's that. This guy isn't Richard Spencer, he's not talking about ethnic cleansing.

So fucking what? Give any credence to this utter unscientific fucking bullshit sets us back. I ain't going to agree with a flat earther who still believes people should go to flight school.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Wait what... what does this mean?

There are genetic trends identifiable within various ethnic groups but this is incredibly granular and incredibly blurry. Any sort of conclusions about ethnicity are far from firm. What we think of as race is basically entirely cultural
 

Lois_Lane

Member
Wait what... what does this mean?

It means you can have 'black' people who aren't african and 'white' people who aren't European.

i.e some indians/pacific islanders for black/ some pacific islanders/native americans/middle easterners( ex. persians) for white

Genes are complicated.
 

fauxtrot

Banned
Weird how all of the Harris defenders don't want to actually bring some arguments to the table and instead decide to complain about people "not getting it", "not listening to the whole thing" or "resorting to outrage"... isn't having a "free exchange of ideas" the exact type of masturbatory stuff Harris and his followers love the idea of?
 

-Plasma Reus-

Service guarantees member status
This dude is using IQ as a standard for generalising entire ethnicities. Lmao. Does he even know what IQ is.
 

Nafai1123

Banned
I think it's fair to have conversations about anything. It's super important to be able to do instead of drawing battle lines. My only disappointment was, from what I understand, little active disagreement from Sam. Though if it's something he doesn't know anything about I wonder if he could.

If he doesn't have sufficient knowledge on the topic then he should have brought someone on the show that could counter and breakdown those arguments. He didn't, which is not only counter-productive, but actively irresponsible.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
"IQ tests are not culturally biased" have Chinese researchers ever devised their own intelligence tests and had a bunch of Americans take them?

That's an honest question I'm very curious
 
I can see this thread going in the way of all the others where we throw out ad hominems in lieu of discussion.

If anyone who thinks this is wrong wants to listen to the podcast and fancies talking about it with someone who has an open mind, feel free to pm me, id be glad to have the discussion.
I understand the general hesitation to discuss this on GAF. You may be interested in the very forums for this podcast. I would argue there's still some informative value to the discusion here, but that's up to you.
 
And it should at least be pointed out that Murray wants a universal basic income as a solution to this problem, not genocide
Maybe so, but his work has been a go-to text for supporting arguments for why we should spend less on public education, AND he's given more cover to "respectable" racism than any human being alive, so forgive me if I don't really give Murray too much credit for clearing the "not a genocidaire" bar.
 

Shai-Tan

Banned
But not in the way it is framed. It's framed like there are massive differences between, as he said ethnic groups and race (the latter doesn't make any sense) because of it.

Keep in mind IQ is not isolating the effect of genes/environment and group differences are just average that doesn't try to tease out any causality. Heritability can change with environment. Some effort to control for those variables can estimate the size of different factors - even Murray admits large environmental effects much of which is unknown
 

rucury

Banned
can anybody point me to other, ideally clearer, examples of Harris being a racist or flirting with racist ideas? If there are other good examples then I would stop considering him a worthwhile speaker to listen to, etc
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
"Lets talk about the concept of race, its widely believed its not a valid biological concept."

Ohhhhkay here we go

EDIT: Yeah he is misusing the word "racial group" here
 

sflufan

Banned
If he doesn't have sufficient knowledge on the topic then he should have brought someone on the show that could counter and breakdown those arguments. He didn't, which is not only counter-productive, but actively irresponsible.

This is an excellent point.

This isn't the same as having Anne Applebaum or Gary Kasparov on the show to talk about Putin, or David Hume to talk about Trump. This is very much an area of requiring extensive scientific expertise to discuss effectively which means having an opposing viewpoint presented as well.
 

-Plasma Reus-

Service guarantees member status
can anybody point me to other, ideally clearer, examples of Harris being a racist or flirting with racist ideas? If there are other good examples then I would stop considering him a worthwhile speaker to listen to, etc
How about when he says Islam is more dangerous than Judaism or Christianity.
He says it pretty regularly and provides no realistic proof.
 

MrToughPants

Brian Burke punched my mom
Sam Harris is the symptom of one of the various methods of recruitment into or at least using people as a conduit for spreading racism and white supremacist views.

Sam Harris is a dumbass, because race is a social construct made up by humans.

Sam Harris is a racist, because once again the core of his argument is the IQ test, which boils down to "how well do you know European culture", a pop culture quiz, more than anything else.

Just another resurgence of the ol' Scientific Racism, which has been around for more than a century and is used to spread white supremacist bullshit latently through the scientifically leaning and science communities.


He's not capable of unrolling the whole hay bale that is institutionalized racism. I mean whenever a minority community got wealthy and prominent they got firebombed by white people with no legal repurcussions. Sam is an idiot that thinks the white people in the room haven't sawed the legs off everyone else's chairs before he walked in.

Excellent post.
 

Yeoman

Member
can anybody point me to other, ideally clearer, examples of Harris being a racist or flirting with racist ideas? If there are other good examples then I would stop considering him a worthwhile speaker to listen to, etc
Sam Harris being in favour of racial profiling springs to mind:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2015/09/15/hasnt-learned-a-thing/

Just on the note of PZ Myers, there's a quote of his that always rings true for me, and we are even seeing this exact behaviour in this very thread:
Sam Harris has an amazing talent: he can say the most awful things, and a horde of helpful apologists will rise up in righteous fury and simultaneously insist that he didn't really say that, and yeah, he said that, but it only makes sense.
 
Here with go with the reflexive "He's a racist."

He could very well be wrong, but in an alternate dimension where he is stating true facts such subjects will still have this emotional outrage. The guy is not a white supremacist and no friend to Republicans, but he will support something that is *true* regardless of the controversy and sensitivity surrounding it.

Ten people outraged by these remarks will jump in with a group already outraged by previous controversial positions to create one giant group spouting hyperbole.

Ahh, the old multi-dimensional argument.
 

FyreWulff

Member
"IQ tests are not culturally biased" have Chinese researchers ever devised their own intelligence tests and had a bunch of Americans take them?

That's an honest question I'm very curious

I'll give an example. IQ totally misses the value of instinctual smarts, or what some people might call street smarts or gut smarts, where someone can expertly navigate the world even if they lack "traditional" marks of education like literacy.

For example, there are people who have achieved upper levels of management and/or tenure without the ability to read whatsoever. There are people with supposed mega-IQs that struggle to hold jobs or relationships because they have zero street/gutsmarts and have the social capability of an orange. Being illiterate actually does not mean someone is dumb, and a literate person can have the mental horizon of a stone's throw.

I've tutored for a literacy center before and a huge stigma is people equating illiteracy to being dumb. There are people I was teaching to read and write that had high school diplomas. They had jobs, families, were awesome people and knew how to deal with the world and you cannot even tell by the way they talk they are illiterate because being able to talk to other people actually does not automatically give you the ability to read written English or write it. The IQ test would also mark people like this as having a low IQ and "dumb".

It'd be like testing Americans on their knowledge of how the Mexican government works and deeming them dumb because "of course all of us Mexicans know this so they're stupid and that's just how it is"
 

JordanN

Banned
His IQ is 300. But he gets defeated by a blue hedgehog.

YAJRmsF.png


Bell curve is racist tripe. I don't like this idea you can measure a person's intelligence and assume that automatically means they're more dominant at life. Especially when it's used to paint different races as being better than the other.

Hell, if they can be outwitted by someone "lower" than them, that kinda proves they're not smart.
 

Zaru

Member
which boils down to "how well do you know European culture", a pop culture quiz, more than anything else.
So you're saying that only European culture has spatial, mathematical and verbal reasoning then?

What kind of shit-ass iq tests have you been taking?
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
And here we go. Harris circles back around to the reaction to the book and it becomes apparent again that this isn't really about the science
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
I just said "oh fuck you" to my computer screen. What on earth is this "risk of hiring black employees due to risk of lawsuits"?

I get that Murray is saying that that's dumb, but the implication is that that's dumb because the legal system allows for such lawsuits

EDIT: This discussion of "affirmative action" is suspiciously heavy on the past tense
 

Cyframe

Member
I'll give an example. IQ totally misses the value of instinctual smarts, or what some people might call street smarts or gut smarts, where someone can expertly navigate the world even if they lack "traditional" marks of education like literacy.

For example, there are people who have achieved upper levels of management and/or tenure without the ability to read whatsoever. There are people with supposed mega-IQs that struggle to hold jobs or relationships because they have zero street/gutsmarts and have the social capability of an orange. Being illiterate actually does not mean someone is dumb, and a literate person can have the mental horizon of a stone's throw.

I've tutored for a literacy center before and a huge stigma is people equating illiteracy to being dumb. There are people I was teaching to read and write that had high school diplomas. They had jobs, families, were awesome people and knew how to deal with the world and you cannot even tell by the way they talk they are illiterate because being able to talk to other people actually does not automatically give you the ability to read written English or write it. The IQ test would also mark people like this as having a low IQ and "dumb".

It'd be like testing Americans on their knowledge of how the Mexican government works and deeming them dumb because "of course all of us Mexicans know this so they're stupid and that's just how it is"

"My mother said I must always be intolerant of ignorance but understanding of illiteracy. That some people, unable to go to school, were more educated and more intelligent than college professors." Maya Angelou
 

Tubobutts

Member
The Bell Curve stuff is a good example of how much racists hate black people because they don't care that white people arent at the top as long as black people are at the bottom.
 

fester

Banned
Here with go with the reflexive "He's a racist."

He could very well be wrong, but in an alternate dimension where he is stating true facts such subjects will still have this emotional outrage. The guy is not a white supremacist and no friend to Republicans, but he will support something that is *true* regardless of the controversy and sensitivity surrounding it.

Ten people outraged by these remarks will jump in with a group already outraged by previous controversial positions to create one giant group spouting hyperbole.

Stop talking about this "outrage" and start talking about the content of the topic. Do the points raised by Harris have merit? If so, how? Because from where I stand, those quotes in the OP are pretty damning.
 
https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...oblem-with-charles-murray-and-the-bell-curve/

“The Bell Curve” endorses prejudice by virtue of what it does not say. Nowhere does the book address why it investigates racial differences in IQ. By never spelling out a reason for reporting on these differences in the first place, the authors transmit an unspoken yet unequivocal conclusion: Race is a helpful indicator as to whether a person is likely to hold certain capabilities. Even if we assume the presented data trends are sound, the book leaves the reader on his or her own to deduce how to best put these insights to use. The net effect is to tacitly condone the prejudgment of individuals based on race.

This isn't the "PC police" talking. Although prejudice breaks taboos, stomps on eggshells, and hurts people's feelings with unfairness, that's just the beginning. Its full damage reaches much more dire extremes. Personhood and individuality are sacred. Judging by way of category is the epitome of dehumanizing. It curtails the individual's opportunities and livelihood, and contributes to what is often a self-fulfilling, systematic cycle of disadvantage for an entire group. It also curtails the prejudger's potential to wholly evaluate a person as an individual by his or her prior behavior, choices, and character. This is why the term "civil rights" has a nice ring to it and "bigotry" does not.
 

Onemic

Member
damn, the defense force for saying black people are intellectually dumber than whites came in quick lol. Got a couple of posters straight up trying to make the claim that Murray himself isnt racist.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
And now he's linking dropout rates among blacks in college to affirmative action? Boy this went from "misguided" to "really racist" really super fast. There couldn't possibly be reasons why black students drop out of MIT at high rates other than them being dumber than their peers

EDIT: "If you're in the top 4% and the rest of your class is in the top 2% you're the dumbest kid in class" okay so wait all that stuff you were saying about how these statistics don't really matter is bullshit? You're now saying that actually blacks are a bit dumber?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom