Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So if the claim that black Africans are superior sprinters is true, which is not even arguable, that's racist also?
If not, you got some 'splaining to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by branh0913
Intellect is more value than running in the context of human beings. So it's not really a good comparison. Humans survive on intellect not on our ability to to sprint
Why are you limiting your discussion only to intelligence? Is it because you don't like the apparent fact that white Americans, on average, are more intelligent than black Americans? Why do you gloss over areas in which black people (on average) excel over white people (on average), such as sprinting or basketball, but focus on an area where it's reversed?
Why are you limiting your discussion only to intelligence? Is it because you don't like the apparent fact that white Americans, on average, are more intelligent than black Americans? Why do you gloss over areas in which black people (on average) excel over white people (on average), such as sprinting or basketball, but focus on an area where it's reversed?
Doesn't matter. Intellect has more objective value. So saying that whites are more intellectual than blacks is an assertion of superiority. That's the crux of the argument. Stating that black people run faster or play better basketball is moot. And actually an absurd argument to make. Basketball or the ability to run faster has no objective value amongst humans. you can keep downplaying this, or try to talk about other things blacks "excel" at as some sort of consolation. But at the end of the day, intellect probably has the highest value in any human society, without exception.
Doesn't matter. Intellect has more objective value. So saying that whites are more intellectual than blacks is an assertion of superiority. That's the crux of the argument. Stating that black people run faster or play better basketball is moot. And actually an absurd argument to make. Basketball or the ability to run faster has no objective value amongst humans. you can keep downplaying this, or try to talk about other things blacks "excel" at as some sort of consolation. But at the end of the day, intellect probably has the highest value in any human society, without exception.
This really isn't true.
First of all, you have to define "intellect" in a way that is agreed upon by everyone. And that isn't going to happen.
Second, pure intellect does not automatically translate into success and survival. It just doesn't. Millions of "intellectuals" would starve to death were it not for "non-intellectuals" providing for them the things they cannot provide for themselves.
Why are you limiting your discussion only to intelligence? Is it because you don't like the apparent fact that white Americans, on average, are more intelligent than black Americans? Why do you gloss over areas in which black people (on average) excel over white people (on average), such as sprinting or basketball, but focus on an area where it's reversed?
This is one of the rare and narrow circumstances in which I agree with branh0913.
He's correct that sprinting and such aren't what gave homo sapiens our crucial edge over the natural environment, and he's correct in that sprinting and such don't give black people, as a whole, any useful edge in the
Nobody gives a damn about being better at sprinting in the workaday world. That's like patting the slow kid on the head and saying, "He's got emotional intelligence." Nobody gives a damn in the workaday world about that, either.
There are only about 2,500 black professional athletes in the US. That's too small a number for "excellence in athletics" to be any meaningful advantage to people in the workaday world.
What turns "race realism" racist lies in what you do with the data--what public policies you create from it.
Maybe the most sensible viewpoint goes all the way back to Charles Murray's much-maligned "The Bell Curve" from 1994.
Unlike most people, I actually read the entire book. He proposes that comparing the IQs of various racial/ethnic groups on their respective bell curves, the peak of the African-American bell curve would fall a few points to the left of the peak of Caucasian-Americans.
But Murray does point out that a significant proportion of African-American individuals would still fall to the right of the Caucasian-American peak, and an even more significant proportion of Caucasian-American individuals would fall the left of the African-American peak, because both bell curves skew left and they mostly overlap.
Murray's proposition was that public policy should be considered according to how individuals measure, not how groups measure.
What if somebody said whites are better than blacks at something? Would you be mad?
That's the double standard I've seen practiced frequently in general life. It's always okay to say somebody is better than whites at x thing, but turned the other way it's called racism.
As a loosely related example, white pride is derided while black pride is celebrated.
No, I wouldn't be "mad". If a group of people -- in general -- are better at some specific thing than people in another group...so be it.
The problem is when you get into general "white pride" that always seems to connect with a group of people who want to hold other people down. And many people that I've known like that have little to brag about in regard to themselves. Let's take Elmer (the name is changed, but I'm talking about a real person). Elmer lives in a wreck of a trailer, isn't paying child support for either of his failed marriages/families, has probably crossed the line into being an alcoholic, can't keep a steady full-time job, and takes a bath about once a week. And he's out talking all the time (especially at the bar) about white pride.
But here's my real point. There's nothing -- in my view -- to be proud of (whether you are White or Black) that happened to you that you had absolutely no control over. You didn't control whether you were born Black or White. I'm not proud to be Irish...because that ancestry has nothing to do with what I became. I'm proud of my accomplishments. I'm proud to be an American because of its overall history (although we all know there were dark periods of American history that were downright evil), but only because I have tried in various ways to give back to my country.
First of all, you have to define "intellect" in a way that is agreed upon by everyone. And that isn't going to happen.
Second, pure intellect does not automatically translate into success and survival. It just doesn't. Millions of "intellectuals" would starve to death were it not for "non-intellectuals" providing for them the things they cannot provide for themselves.
no at it essence humans need some sort of intellect to survive. In the wilderness humans didn't outrun it's predators nor did we out muscle our prey. We built tools to capture our prey and build shelter and barriers to protect us from hunters. even in the most "primitive" societies, there is a baseline of intelligence for survival. So yes, intellect has objective value to humans. Because it's literally the only means we have to survive. A bear or a lion doesn't need intellect, they can overpower most other species. Humans can't. Just as a Lion being intelligent really has no objective value among lions. A human with less intellect has no objective value among humans.
This is one of the rare and narrow circumstances in which I agree with branh0913.
He's correct that sprinting and such aren't what gave homo sapiens our crucial edge over the natural environment, and he's correct in that sprinting and such don't give black people, as a whole, any useful edge in the
Nobody gives a damn about being better at sprinting in the workaday world. That's like patting the slow kid on the head and saying, "He's got emotional intelligence." Nobody gives a damn in the workaday world about that, either.
There are only about 2,500 black professional athletes in the US. That's too small a number for "excellence in athletics" to be any meaningful advantage to people in the workaday world.
What turns "race realism" racist lies in what you do with the data--what public policies you create from it.
Maybe the most sensible viewpoint goes all the way back to Charles Murray's much-maligned "The Bell Curve" from 1994.
Unlike most people, I actually read the entire book. He proposes that comparing the IQs of various racial/ethnic groups on their respective bell curves, the peak of the African-American bell curve would fall a few points to the left of the peak of Caucasian-Americans.
But Murray does point out that a significant proportion of African-American individuals would still fall to the right of the Caucasian-American peak, and an even more significant proportion of Caucasian-American individuals would fall the left of the African-American peak, because both bell curves skew left and they mostly overlap.
Murray's proposition was that public policy should be considered according to how individuals measure, not how groups measure.
But we don't just live in the workaday world.
Sports is a pretty lucrative field. Whether I'm personally interested in it or not is fairly irrelevant.
Emotional intelligence...does matter. Who is more successful in the workday world...a personal with high emotional intelligence or a person who is low in emotional intelligence?
The only thing that matters is not public policy, because certain groups benefit or suffer from everyday life, not just what is controlled by government policies. I just sold my house so I can move to Arizona. Of all the people who came to look at the house, there was just one African American...a woman. I gave her the same tour of the house, pointing out particularly good features, discussed the HOA, and answered any questions she had. A couple of minutes after she left there was a knock on the door and it was her. "More questions?", I asked. "No. I just wanted to tell you how much I appreciated your friendliness. You're a good person". And to me, this is an example of something that has nothing to do with public policy, but everything to do with how people treat each other on a personal level.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
