The debate "We should not expect all races to be equal in all respects. i.e. intelligence" was started by
October 31, 2015, 3:26 am.
13 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 28 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
sophistry posted 5 arguments to the agreers part.
PsychDave posted 9 arguments, historybuff posted 2 arguments to the disagreers part.
liberalssuck, Nethersquid, sophistry, zoeclare7, Gabri_XO and 8 visitors agree.
wmd, action007man, srishti_pinkleaves, PsychDave, historybuff, Sosocratese, erikD9921, karishmarathod, MylifeisaJoke, thecries, roshni, Apollo8, Dysfunctional, Kaleighltay, Yuki_Amayane, AstroSpace, mtemple74, SueAnnMohr and 10 visitors disagree.
Could you cite the author of the article that supplied the list of races sorted by intelligence? As I said, all I could see was articles criticizing the view you are expressing.
"We should not expect all races to be equal in all aspects. i.e. intelligence"
can be rephrased (but still hold the same meaning), when we negate it to
"We should expect all races to not be equal in all aspects. i.e. intelligence".
Simplify it and you have "We should excpect some races to be more intelligent than other races". Disclaimer: This does not generally encompass the entire meaning, it is at one side of the spectrum, the extreme, but this is the meat of the claim; the more clarified stance.
Neutrality is actually the better option, only if it was phrased in something like this: "We should not expect differences in intelligence, even if is true or not." But that doesn't seem to be the spirit of the statement because the additional clause extends the definition and actually gives more weight to the other side of the spectrum, making the claim sound racist and oppressive.
If that is so, I disagree with it. Going beyond trying to prove the equal distribution of human intelligence, the claim necessarily asks 'SHOULD' we. Basically, moving on from the scientific findings is discussing the moral sentiments of our acts.
The problem with expecting some races to be dumber than other races is the overgeneralization. Furthermore, it stops us from making the right notion. If we expect what the statement claims we should expect, it instills in us prejudice that these people are lower than us. Combine it with overgeneralization, it creates a stronger prejudice that these people will always be dumber than us. That in itself is wrong. You all the more oppress these people, and you oppress those who are capable. It will breed a culture that says for example, "This race is dumb so none of them will get to be part of my company." Or conversations like " OMG he's a *race* so he's so stupid." It opresses them because it takes away their opportunity and dignity. Elevate the discussion to the international arena, and you will see that some countries will now say, "I don't want this *race* immigrants in my country. Their stupidness might spread to my people." And I tell you it's not right.
Even if some people do not do this, or hopefully will not, you cannot erase the fraction that will. Prejudice is a virus which harms the public, especially if it is backed up by people from the ground given that specific expectation.
The best scenario that I can think of is if we believe people are capable of being human, that they can be a blank slate, tabula rasa.
There is a fundamental flaw in your argument. We are not comparing different species, we are comparing groups within a species. Let's look at your example in a bit more depth. If you presented the hypothesis that one species of chimpanzee is more intelligent than another, you must demonstrate the difference. You would have difficulty saying "These chimpanzees are more intelligent than those ones" unless you had results to substantiate your claim.
You are right, the default position should always be "I don't know" when asking a question. So why would we start from the presumption that there is a difference and that it is caused by race? You are starting from the assumption that a difference exists and it is caused by race. I am starting from questioning whether there is a measurable difference, and if so whether there could be confounding variables that bias measurement.
I am not emotional about the subject, I am logical. In any setting we should start by looking at the subject objectively rather than starting with bias and presumption. Part of this is because we are more likely to look into why a relationship exists if we have not made any presumptions. It also avoids confirmation bias when looking into the subject.
I'm afraid you're all getting sidetracked. the point isn't that all races are equally gifted in intelligence, but whether we should begin with a presumption that all races are equal in this respect.
to be clear, the default position on any claim begins as "I don't know" and shifts as new information comes in.
if you want to see the weakness of this presumption of equality, consider this example-
suppose I claimed all species of chimpanzee were equally intelligent. when challenged, I demand you provide proof that chimps are not all equal in intelligence, and further suggested your position was held due to your own personal prejudice against a particular chimp species.
it is only because the subject we're considering is human intelligence rather than that of any other animal, that we find ourselves unable to have this discussion without emotion.
What I found when I researched "Scientific American racial intelligence " was an article condemning the type of conclusion you draw as being inherently harmful and racist. It goes on to describe Jason Richwine and his research, and his downfall stemming from his racism and neo-eugenics ideas for us immigration. Could you reference either the author or article name since what I am finding is directly opposed to your opinion?
ScientificAmerican.com. PhD students have researched the field and concluded the same based on results. Races that are completely different cant be expected to have the same exact intelligence levels.
Can you point to where you got these iq levels?
These rankings are based off of average IQ levels.
even if it was true that there were differences, how did you come to that conclusion about the rankings?
Do you have any research or evidence backing that up?
Intelligence is obviously affected by race. It's not racist, just fact. The average order of intelligence is as follows: Black, Hispanic, European/white, Asian.
How you word the statement does not change the fact that you are making the claim. You are claiming that a) there is a difference in intelligence between races and b) that the differences is caused by race. Hiding behind semantics is ridiculous.
Beyond that simple fact, I did explain that, while differences have been seen, they have been shown to be attributed to other factors. Would you care to respond to that or will you continue to hide from the debate?
the current research and scientific belief is that there are no significant genetic differences between races. therefore there are no racial traits that affect intelligence. your arguments are based on outdated information.
reread the title of this argument before you try and misrepresent my position. is your position so weak that you have to skew my words in order to shift your burden of proof?
my claim, for those who did not bother to read this thread before they clicked on it, is that the notion of racial equality in aspects such as intelligence is unsubstantiated. is there anyone out there who can argue this view without resorting to the infamous straw man?
You are claiming that there is a difference. We are saying that there is not. Which is the positive claim?
There have been observed differences in intelligence, however they have been shown to be due to socioeconomic status, education, and culture rather than race.
You are hiding behind the same logic as religious arguments. God exists and, if you disagree, prove it.
actually the burden of proof lies with those making a positive claim (i.e. all races are equally intelligent) as opposed to those refusing a positive claim (i.e. the title of this argument).
a lack of belief in the intellectual equality of races is in fact the default position. just as agnosticism is the default position on God claims. you should never believe a positive claim without reason, including the claim that all races are equally endowed with intelligence.
You are shifting the burden of proof to those not making the claim. You claim there is a difference, prove it. I have looked into the research and found no meaningful difference in intelligence between races. You claim such a difference exists, which means the burden of proof lies with you to support your claim.
what we have here is the flip side of the naturalistic fallacy, treating equality among races as a given, when the evolutionary process does not care at all about whether different races are equal. its the same mentality that crops up when people insist men and women are equally strong overall.
You erroneously demand I provide evidence that races are not equal, when the burden of proof ought in fact be on you for insisting that they are. After all, there's no reason why nature aims to make all races equal, particularly when races evolve in very different environments.
all evidence I'm aware of says that there are virtually no differences in intelligence between races. saying otherwise without providing any proof is racist. so provide proof or stop saying racist things.
that's not true at all, what scientific evidence are you looking at? we shouldn't expect all races to be equally equipped to to function in modern society, just as we shouldn't expect all species of birds to build equally effective nests
Why not when all scientific evidence shows that the differences in ability are cultural, not genetic.