Equating Intelligence with a Degree is an indication of Inferior Intellect

Dec 2016
4,116
2,125
Canada
#82
Did you actually read "The Bell Curve"?
Yes, or at least most of it! I recall it was a big heavy white covered book( not first edition) that I picked up at my local library( cause I had no intentions of paying for it) and I doubt most of its fans have actually read it -- just were aware that it's basic premise was genes equals destiny( even though Charles Murray has tried to deny it in later interviews), and could serve as 'evidence' for judging 'races' of people (even in pre-literate cultures) by comparing dodgy global data on IQ...some of which was collected decades ago IQ scores! And it's not exactly a new idea either, cause one of the authors- political scientist - Charles Murray has long held a notion of meritocracy outweighing all other social factors. And no surprise this message has been ear candy to racists and libertarians alike who all believe in the Hobbesian individualist morality of survival of the fittest. In Canada, we had a bit of an advance on the refurbished rightwing message when an Ontario professor - Philippe Rushton got a lot of media attention for a book he wrote and a lecture tour offering the same ideas in a slimmer volume and focusing on the racial intelligence hiearchy that placed Asians (specifically Japanese and Koreans) at the top because of high math scores, whites a little lower and then blacks way down at the bottom! Rushton also made the argument that family size tracks with intelligence.....I don't know whether he copied Murray or came up with it himself, but the arguments were little more than putting a more genial and polite face on the same notions espoused by David Duke and others!

It was more a slam on the "welfare class" than anything else.
Except WHO is the welfare class in America? Or should I say: 'who do most American voters think of when they think of welfare recipient?' In actual numbers, most welfare recipients are white, but dark people are larger by percentage, so there's no way to detach race from class in America!
It had tons of legitimate hard data, but the interpretation of the authors (including Charles Murray, mentioned in one of the threads in this forum) was highly questionable. It was labeled "racist" by the reactionary left, in fact. It's an interesting book because 1) most conservatives aren't smart enough to understand the context of the book, it's thrust, and the evidence therein and 2) the extreme left HATED it, and 3) the academic world just kinda yawned and said "tell us something we don't already know". For the record I thought it was an interesting read, but depending on your political views it could be very annoying.
The context is that if it is not racial and cultural supremacist, then it's intended to justify libertarian notions of meritocracy....hence Murray's constant condemnations of all affirmative action programs. If he believed that environmental factors could improve intelligence and life outcomes, then he would be all for these programs to at least help a black minority who were able to access them!
Regarding PhDs, I have no idea what yhou mean by "growing proliferation". Why, have numbers of PhDs suddenly doubled or something? No? The fact of the matter is this: the more people in the world, the more people attending universities, the more people will get PhDs. Nothing mysterious about that. It's kinda like when conservatives bitch about the budget going up every year (hilariously, since their tax cuts did more to grow the deficit than spending ever has). OF COURSE the budget goes up every year. It SHOULD go up every year as the number of citizens needing government services increase.
Well, whatever the hell goes on in universities, whether it's "political correctness" or "snowflakes' or "safe spaces" or other over-arching concerns of the right, I don't care to spend a whole lot of my time on them, so the complaints that students are being told that a masters isn't good enough and they have to go for their full doctorate and complaints that PhD's are meaningless today because there's too many of them etc. are all stories I hear by anecdote and I'm not going to spend time looking in on further!
 
Jun 2013
5,495
1,699
Katmandu
#84
All a college Degree does is show you have a knowledge in a specific area, and you have the ablility to follow instructions and learn to procedures..
It doesn't show you have useful knowledge in a specific area, just the knowledge that people that were unsuccessful in the area or never even worked in the area thought you should have.
 
Likes: xMathFanx
Dec 2013
31,089
18,647
Beware of watermelons
#88
you infer that wikipedia is a bad source withut providing prrof it is a bad source, you inference may be dismissed out of hand
Wikipedia being a good or bad source has nothing to do with it. You c/p the majority of your posts from there. You may as well just put a link to it in your signature.
 
Sep 2018
5,666
946
cleveland ohio
#89
Wikipedia being a good or bad source has nothing to do with it. You c/p the majority of your posts from there. You may as well just put a link to it in your signature.
i dont make shit up and i dont quote brietbart so why is wikipedia a bad thing, wikipedia has been proven 90% or more reliable if you think it isnt you can prove it
 
Sep 2018
5,666
946
cleveland ohio
#90
my grand parents were very wise and smart people they were honest and worked hard they never finshed hifh school they were poor, my parents went to college they were upper middle class we went to graduate school our real income adjusted for inflation s about double theirs every genration got a bit more educated and every genraion did better you are right my uneducated grandparents? were real smart people maybe smarter than us.. the point is .. we were told to get a god education so we would not be poor.. thats what smart un educated people told us to do we did it.. we are no longer poor we are rich.. because of education
 

Similar Discussions