Re: MD MOQ and Human Variation

From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Sat Jun 19 2004 - 16:47:56 BST

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Evolution of Society."

    Hi Platt, and all,

    Platt, I believe you're slipping off topic. The issue is not whether
    human intelligence and behavior is genetically determined, but
    whether one "race" of humans is genetically inferior to another,
    resulting in lower intelligence, more violence, etc., within the
    "inferior race".

    My reading of Wilson has uncovered no such assertion. But maybe I've
    missed something, and you can provide me a link. If Wilson does
    indeed make this claim, I can only say that that would put him so far
    in the minority of scientific thought on the issue as to make him
    almost disappear. Therefore one's reason for finding him more
    credible would be called into question.

    But I'm perfectly willing to discuss the topic from a MOQ standpoint,
    which is why I started this thread. What are your thoughts on
    Vogel's re Pirsig in this thread, and on Anthony's post in response
    to him in the new COSMOTHEISM thread?

    A few comments interspersed below...

    Best,
    Mark Steven Heyman (msh)

    On 19 Jun 2004 at 9:17, Platt Holden wrote:
    Hi All,

    MSH writes
    > Right on que, Platt mentions "The Bell Curve" as scientific
    evidence
    > in support of the idea that one "race" of humans is inferior to
    > another. I was wrong when I said no scientific evidence exists to
    > support this statement; I should have said no CREDIBLE scientific
    > evidence.

    Belief in what constitutes credible scientific evidence often depends
    on which scientists you believe are credible. For example, MSH finds
    S. J. Gould credible while I find E.O. Wilson credible. Both
    scientists present widely different views.

    msh says:
    But not, as noted above, in regards to racial inferiority.

    > Platt is also impressed by an advertisement for the book which
    > appeared in The Wall Street Journal. As an old ad man himself,
    Platt
    > should know better. The ad is a statement signed by 52 "experts",
    > and is easy to find on the web, if one is interested.
    >
    > If you look at the Pioneer Fund web site, you'll see that EVERY
    > major grantee, who happened to be alive at the time the ad was
    > composed, is listed among the "expert" signatories. Others of the
    > signatories have published papers in the fascist journal, Mankind,
    > which is maintained by Pioneer funds, or in other similar journals.

    > Still others are associated with studies paid for by the fund, such
    > as Bouchard's study of Identical Twins Reared Apart (all the
    > University of Minnesota people on the list).

    ph:
    MSH employs the tactic of McCarthyism to argue his point--the
    fallacy of Guilt by Association. "Are you now or have you ever been a
    grantee of the Pioneer Fund?" I had hoped for better.

    msh says:
    Posed not as argument, but as facts for consideration.

    > Although there is much in the ad that non-racist scientists would
    > and do agree with, the main source of contention would be that IQ
    > test results are determined primarily by genetic factors, and about
    > the significance of IQ tests in determining an individual's value
    > to, and success in, a given society. Here's Stephen J. Gould:

    ph:
    Gould is hardly the last word on the subject. E. O. Wilson, speaking
    of Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Lewontin, writes:
     
    "They disliked the idea, to put it mildly, that human nature could
    have any genetic basis at all. They championed the opposing view
    that the developing human brain is a tabula rosa. The only human
    nature, they said, is an indefinitely flexible mind. Theirs was the
    standard position taken by Marxists from the late 1920s forward: the
    ideal political economy is socialism and the tabula rosa mind of
    people can be fitted to it. A mind arising from a genetic human
    nature might not prove conformable."

    msh says:
    This is not related to "race" and is off-point.

    ph:
    So in case anyone is wondering, the issue of intelligence and race is
    far from settled.

    msh says:
    This is on-point, but is unsupported here. And it's wrong, as I've
    attempted to show in this thread and in the COSMO threads.

    ph:
    Values, of course, are never considered to play a
    role at the biological level by either faction in the ongoing debate.

    msh says:
    Not in the debate about genetic factors in human intelligence, but
    value is certainly in play when one race is said to be genetically
    less intelligent than another.

    ph:
    Science is locked in the box of only that which can be measured.
    Which is why I find metaphysics a far more interesting subject. :-)

    msh says:
    Well, science has its own metaphysics, but I understand what you're
    saying, and I agree. So... Let's have your thoughts on Vogel and
    McWatt re Pirsig.

    Best,
    Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
    --
    InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
    Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
    Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com

    "Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is
    everything." -- Henri Poincare'

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 19 2004 - 16:58:32 BST