LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 84
2 members and 82 guests
Hank Chinaski, Oliver_Wendell_Ramone
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 07:55 AM.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-02-2018, 11:00 AM   #2026
Adder
I am beyond a rank!
 
Adder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 15,997
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
You can't divorce that comment from its intrinsic meaning: "Certain discussions should not be had."
This part is in your head. If we're paraphrasing, Klein said, "certain discussions should not be had without providing proper context." That does not sound objectionable to me. Nor is it censorship.

Quote:
There is no way to have the discussion Murray and Harris did in the manner Klein prescribes.
There isn't? Harris couldn't ask Murray about critiques of his work? That sort of thing happens all the time.

Quote:
I actually agree with Klein, oddly. I think Murray should be treated with extreme skepticism because he bases a lot of conclusions on generalizations, cherry-picked stats, and anecdata.
So, if you were interviewing Murray, wouldn't you want to ask him about those things? Don't you think you'd owe it to listeners to do so? Did I just censor you?
Adder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 11:11 AM   #2027
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 22,916
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Whatever you think Klein is doing, it's not censorship, and you should just admit you got that one wrong. As Adder says, Klein is not trying to shut anyone up, he's saying that if you are going to give credence to someone who is arguing that blacks are genetically inferior, you should acknowledge the context instead of pretending it doesn't exist.
My reply to Adder covers this.

Quote:
Far from being censored, Murray has no problem spreading his views, far out of proportion to their merits. There are a lot of people who really want to hear what he is saying, and who want to pretend it's good science, or at least good enough to be taken seriously.
Murray's haunted the race issue for decades now because there's never been a straightforward dismantling of his theories in a public forum (a Joseph Welch moment, if you will, rather than some dense critique from a fellow academic in some obscure journal). You realize that as long as this man can assert that he's being censored, the question of whether his "science" holds water remains unresolved. I only play a scientician on television, but I've read enough on this issue to conclude that we could entirely dismiss the notion that certain groups genetically have higher IQs than others with lots of comprehensive, clinical, empirical data. We don't need to get into soft-headed discussions of the "socio-political realities" to refute Murray's prime argument. It should be addressed directly, on the science. Which Harris would, could and hopefully will do.

On a personal note, my pet theory, shared with Harris, is the sooner we can stop focusing on background (race, ethnicity, etc.), the better. None of this bigotry ends until the notion someone is alien to us based on unscientific, tribal, "cultural" bases, the sooner we'll have a truly functioning and enlightened society. I understand that's pie in the sky, that it'll never happen in our lifetimes. But I'd hope that maybe, 200 years down the road, people would stop categorizing each other. It's a rotten fetish long past its sell by date. And it's fucking dumb. The only proper assessment of a person - clinically, scientifically, logically - is based on consideration of that exact person. Not his race or his ethnicity.

You wouldn't invest in a person's business based on loose facts about his background. You'd invest based on meeting him, assessing his intelligence and business model one-on-one. You'd want the greatest amount of detail you could get on him. That same rigor should be applied to judgments about people in everyday life. Identity politics is understandable, but it's inherently generalization-based, and generalizations are dangerous.

And with that, I leave the soapbox.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 11:22 AM   #2028
Not Bob
Moderator
 
Not Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Podunkville
Posts: 5,990
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski View Post
Nvm
I feel oddly gratified whenever I learn that I read one of your posts before it was removed.

For those keeping track of such things, please note that a rich white high school kid can get a pass on participating in a murder of a supposed rival gang member if he says he only joined the gang because he was studying the gang culture.
Not Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 11:48 AM   #2029
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 83,996
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Bob View Post
I feel oddly gratified whenever I learn that I read one of your posts before it was removed.
It just felt like piling on- for those of you not up late- I brought up some of Mr. Harris's thoughts from the potion of the interview with the Columbia student, and asked how one could say he wasn't racist? I suppose each of us have our own definition, but from what i heard, you'd have to go a bit to not find the man had problems with black people generally. But this board has bigger fish to fry, censorship and cafeteria questions, so i deleted.
__________________
alumnus of beating thurgreed in arguments
Hank Chinaski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 12:10 PM   #2030
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,145
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
My reply to Adder covers this.
Whatever.

Quote:
Murray's haunted the race issue for decades now because there's never been a straightforward dismantling of his theories in a public forum (a Joseph Welch moment, if you will, rather than some dense critique from a fellow academic in some obscure journal).
His work has been debunked plenty of times in plenty of public fora, but the Harrises of the world keep finding reasons to bring it back.

Quote:
On a personal note, my pet theory, shared with Harris, is the sooner we can stop focusing on background (race, ethnicity, etc.), the better.
No forced Harris to look at Murray's work, or to downplay the criticisms of it. No one forced you to post about Harris and Klein here.
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 12:11 PM   #2031
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,145
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski View Post
It just felt like piling on- for those of you not up late- I brought up some of Mr. Harris's thoughts from the potion of the interview with the Columbia student, and asked how one could say he wasn't racist? I suppose each of us have our own definition, but from what i heard, you'd have to go a bit to not find the man had problems with black people generally. But this board has bigger fish to fry, censorship and cafeteria questions, so i deleted.
I appreciated the effort you put into the post, fwiw.
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 12:12 PM   #2032
Adder
I am beyond a rank!
 
Adder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 15,997
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
... I've read enough on this issue to conclude that we could entirely dismiss the notion that certain groups genetically have higher IQs than others with lots of comprehensive, clinical, empirical data.
I think we can entirely dismiss the notion that those "groups" actually exist from a genetic point of view.

Quote:
None of this bigotry ends until the notion someone is alien to us based on unscientific, tribal, "cultural" bases, the sooner we'll have a truly functioning and enlightened society. I understand that's pie in the sky, that it'll never happen in our lifetimes.
Consider why humanity involved to so strongly identify with in and out groups, and maybe it's not possible at all. And aside from whether it's an evolved trait, think about how it can and has been used to perpetuate existing power structures, making it a powerful drug regardless.
Adder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 12:24 PM   #2033
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 22,916
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
His work has been debunked plenty of times in plenty of public fora, but the Harrises of the world keep finding reasons to bring it back.
Harris didn't bring it back. Harris brought him on to discuss the issue of censorship.

Harris stated at least a dozen times in his podcast that he had no interest in digging into Murray's work. He was interested in digging into the issue of attempts to stifle inquiry.

Is Murray not the best vessel for this argument? Yes. But I'm not Harris's booker. I'd have preferred to hear Harris address the issue with Maher.

Quote:
No forced Harris to look at Murray's work, or to downplay the criticisms of it. No one forced you to post about Harris and Klein here.
Harris did not downplay criticisms of Murray's work. He took issue with people seeking to censor certain debates.

And the only reason I offered the Harris and Coleman Hughes podcast here, which started this whole thing, was because there was an ongoing discussion of race and white guilt about race discussions. Hughes and Harris were having a discussion about race.

You reserve the right to discuss the issue of white discomfort with race discussions. Yet you have a problem with a white man (Harris) discussing race with a black man (Hughes). I'm a bit confused, and you sound a lot like Klein: "Let's discuss race, but let's discuss it within the narratives that suit my views."
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 12:32 PM   #2034
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 22,916
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
I think we can entirely dismiss the notion that those "groups" actually exist from a genetic point of view.
That's an excellent point, "race" itself being a dubious concept.

Quote:
Consider why humanity involved to so strongly identify with in and out groups, and maybe it's not possible at all.
I don't want to agree with this, but I struggle to argue against it. I'd like to assert that people will evolve to something close to pure rational thought over time, but the science refuses me.

Quote:
And aside from whether it's an evolved trait, think about how it can and has been used to perpetuate existing power structures, making it a powerful drug regardless.
We're ultimately dim animals, wired to tribalize. But that realization leaves me utterly hopeless. I can't think of anything darker and shittier than the notion people will still be categorizing themselves against one another in 500 years.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 02:52 PM   #2035
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,145
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
Harris didn't bring it back. Harris brought him on to discuss the issue of censorship.

Harris stated at least a dozen times in his podcast that he had no interest in digging into Murray's work. He was interested in digging into the issue of attempts to stifle inquiry.

Is Murray not the best vessel for this argument? Yes. But I'm not Harris's booker. I'd have preferred to hear Harris address the issue with Maher.
Harris chose to give Murray another platform. If he's going to talk about censorship, it's an odd choice to do it with one of the most notorious public intellectuals in the country, someone who has had no problem disseminating his views for many, many years. And it's crazy to think you can talk about the reaction to Murray's work without getting into the substance of his work. It's like inviting Elizabeth Holmes to talk about the glass ceiling for female executives, and thinking you can do it without talking about her fraud.

Quote:
Harris did not downplay criticisms of Murray's work. He took issue with people seeking to censor certain debates.
You should just stop using that word, since you either don't understand what other human beings mean when they use it, or you don't care.

Quote:
And the only reason I offered the Harris and Coleman Hughes podcast here, which started this whole thing, was because there was an ongoing discussion of race and white guilt about race discussions. Hughes and Harris were having a discussion about race.

You reserve the right to discuss the issue of white discomfort with race discussions. Yet you have a problem with a white man (Harris) discussing race with a black man (Hughes). I'm a bit confused, and you sound a lot like Klein: "Let's discuss race, but let's discuss it within the narratives that suit my views."
I don't know who Coleman Hughes is, so I'm not sure why you think I am familiar with his race or have a problem with someone discussing race with him. Stop censoring me, bro.
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 03:59 PM   #2036
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Registered User
 
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Government Yard in Trenchtown
Posts: 18,770
Re: We are all Slave now.

So, to be clear, complete agreement that Murray is a racist ass and white supremacist, that Harris is a racist but Sebby likes him sometimes anyways, and that Klein can sometimes be insufferable but Ty likes him sometimes anyways.

Can we all just now agree that being openly racist is a pretty fucking awful thing and being insufferable just kind makes him one of us?
__________________
A wee dram a day!
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 04:03 PM   #2037
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Registered User
 
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Government Yard in Trenchtown
Posts: 18,770
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski View Post
It just felt like piling on- for those of you not up late- I brought up some of Mr. Harris's thoughts from the potion of the interview with the Columbia student, and asked how one could say he wasn't racist? I suppose each of us have our own definition, but from what i heard, you'd have to go a bit to not find the man had problems with black people generally. But this board has bigger fish to fry, censorship and cafeteria questions, so i deleted.
I think a zoning restriction on Google would violate the first amendment right to peaceably assemble, and that Google should deploy endless numbers of Amazon drones in defense of its rights.

The only way they'll take Sergey's avacado is from his cold dead hands.
__________________
A wee dram a day!
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 06:55 PM   #2038
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,145
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy View Post
So, to be clear, complete agreement that Murray is a racist ass and white supremacist, that Harris is a racist but Sebby likes him sometimes anyways, and that Klein can sometimes be insufferable but Ty likes him sometimes anyways.

Can we all just now agree that being openly racist is a pretty fucking awful thing and being insufferable just kind makes him one of us?
I really don't know much about Harris and don't have a view about him apart from his contretemps with Klein, which did not show him in a good light. I'm not much of a fan of Klein, though I respect Tyler Cowen, who is. Klein's wife just wrote a hot book on a topic Sebby likes, so maybe that will pull him up in his opinion. I think of Klein as more of a curator of other people's views than as having interesting things to say himself, so I'm a little taken aback by Sebby's venom about him, which seems to have more to do with mood affiliation than anything he has said. The conservative part of Sebby's brain bridles at earnest liberalism and belief in policy, and is overcome by a powerful desire to tell people like Klein to shut up, and it has almost zero to do with the substance of what Klein might say.

eta: Maybe it's more appropriate to say that Klein is Lowrey's husband.
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith

Last edited by Tyrone Slothrop; 08-02-2018 at 07:42 PM..
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 02:58 PM   #2039
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 30,145
Re: We are all Slave now.

Would like to hear reactions to this, especially from SEC Chick.
__________________
“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”
- John Kenneth Galbraith
Tyrone Slothrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 04:09 PM   #2040
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 83,996
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
Would like to hear reactions to this, especially from SEC Chick.
Are you advocating "claw backing" any ideological Justices already there?
__________________
alumnus of beating thurgreed in arguments
Hank Chinaski is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:46 PM.