Re: Bell-curve racism for nations

Pardon me for my being-in-the-wrong-field ignorance, but isn't this backward 
causation?

Serial neuronal connections, encouraged by early education in linear 
approaches eg times tables lead to specialisation of the brain on these areas. 
Plasticity/specialisation of the 'ol grey matter is what childhood is about, 
neurologically speaking...

Given that you have education systems aiming to develop by encouraging and 
pruning childrens brains on a vast scale for the prescribed and required 
result in these 'superior' countries, can you be surprised by the result?

In a situation of equal exposure and access to IQ-directed education, and 
subjective/intersubjective relevance and utility of these cognitive tools, 
then we might attempt to draw conclusions as to a biological 'base' and 
compare. Good luck to anyone setting up this experiment...

Also, the concentration on IQ as the sole index of reference in itself needs 
examination, does it not, given the manifold nature of human understanding?
At a time when economics (among other disciplines) is powerfully critiqued for 
its autism, it seems a curious rearguard action to tar as 'low IQ' all those 
whom we wish to, as a validation/vindication of economic inequality?


Pre-empotively apologising for my insouciant ignorance...











>===== Original Message From Sabri Oncu <soncu@pacbell.net> =====
>My Friend,
>
>Tell this Rushton guy that there is a Turkish man with a low IQ
>on WSN who wanted to send his best wishes to him.
>
>Sabri
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: wsn-owner@csf.colorado.edu
>[mailto:wsn-owner@csf.colorado.edu]On
>Behalf Of Jonathan Davis
>Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 9:59 AM
>To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu; psn@csf.colorado.edu;
>rpa-list@southwestern.edu; marxism@lists.panix.com; Louis Proyect
>Cc: upstream-list@cycad.com; rushton@uwo.ca
>Subject: Re: Bell-curve racism for nations
>
>
>Perhaps you would like to attack the arguments rather than the
>man, Louise?
>
>Preventative defamation makes you appear scared of Mr Rushton. It
>makes me
>think that you are  incapable of attacking his arguments. I think
>you owe it
>to Mr Rushton and the rest of us to explain why you think he is a
>racist and
>upon what evidence your claims rest. Perhaps you imagine that you
>are
>preaching to the converted with these dispatches to your
>intellectual clade,
>so the defamation of your common enemies (like Rushton) is
>permissible and
>even encouraged?
>
>I  have great respect for some of your work but I am appalled to
>see this
>sort of e-mail from you. It appeals to base, anti-academic
>sentiments of
>orthodoxy and censorship.
>
>That mock disbelieving  "What's next? Academic articles and books
>arguing
>for eugenics?" made me cringe reading it. Are you afraid of
>intellectual
>enquiry? Is there anything wrong with *arguing* for a given
>thing? Are you
>not aware that there is large and growing interest is de facto
>Eugenics -
>Transhumansism, extropianism, etc. This is a wholly legitimate
>field of
>scientific interest. That this field terrifies you (as it
>triggers
>associations with Nazi's)  is your problem. Science is moving on.
>You can no
>more stop it with orthodoxy than two million priests can pray the
>Sun around
>the Earth.
>
>I look forward to your analysis of Mr Rushton's essay.
>
>Regards
>
>Jonathan Davis
>
>P.S. I think you meant British National Party or Scottish
>National Party as
>there is no National Party that exists as a legal political party
>in the UK.