Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[Adder]

Happy holidays and merry Christmas. Drove my dad away by saying we don’t need his help about whether the toddler needs space vs attention. Was much more pleasant after he went to bed. Huh.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

Happy holidays and merry Christmas. Drove my dad away by saying we don’t need his help about whether the toddler needs space vs attention. Was much more pleasant after he went to bed. Huh.

I hope everyone had a tremendous Saturnalia.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

http://pressthink.org/2019/12/the-ch...of-chuck-todd/

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

http://pressthink.org/2019/12/the-ch...of-chuck-todd/

Chuck Todd is a professional virgin.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Tyler Cowen on Charles Murray's most recent book. If that sounds like something you will want to read, then you should.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Tyler Cowen on Charles Murray's most recent book. If that sounds like something you will want to read, then you should.

Looks like having profited from arguing that the use of IQ tests show there are innate differences in people that justify racial discrimination (it's not that one race is superior it's just that one race's characteristics are preferable) and then from arguing the same thing justifies gender discrimination he's now going to argue they justify class stratification. I think I can guess what he'll say.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Tyler Cowen on Charles Murray's most recent book. If that sounds like something you will want to read, then you should.

Remember the interview Seb posted with a white guy and a black guy saying "since blacks do crime at high rates it only makes sense to profile young black men in your store?" Is this that guy?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Remember the interview Seb posted with a white guy and a black guy saying "since blacks do crime at high rates it only makes sense to profile young black men in your store?" Is this that guy?

I’m going to take blame for it either way, but that doesn’t sound like something I posted. I only defended Sam Harris’ and Bill Maher’s rights to interview Murray and not be pilloried for it.

I have never found Murray particularly convincing because he seems very weak on the clinical science regarding intelligence. He seems to think data sets about groups trump the hard science. He’s an anthropologist. He goes in the bucket of necessarily dubious intellects, along with economists and most historians.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Chuck Todd is a professional virgin.

DC has more (ambitious) hookers than Vegas.

And a 2:1 ratio, with lots of dumb Southern chicks.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Chuck Todd is a professional virgin.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...it-fell-apart/

Some relatives got to arguing about politics at the house this holiday. A few Laphroaig Quarter Casks in me, I sneeringly called them equally deluded and threw my copy of this between them: https://www.amazon.com/Hate-Inc-Toda.../dp/1949017257

[Hank Chinaski]

Just saw Uncut Gems. Holy shit it was good.



Spoiler







If you bet on who wins the tip at an NBA game you are a degenerate gambler.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I’m going to take blame for it either way, but that doesn’t sound like something I posted. I only defended Sam Harris’ and Bill Maher’s rights to interview Murray and not be pilloried for it.

I have never found Murray particularly convincing because he seems very weak on the clinical science regarding intelligence. He seems to think data sets about groups trump the hard science. He’s an anthropologist. He goes in the bucket of necessarily dubious intellects, along with economists and most historians.

One of my best friends from college, an Asian studies professor, has a book coming out next month that, among other things, takes Harris and his pals to the woodshed for being an ignorant slut when it comes to Buddhism. It's always worth a laugh.

Why do these people insist on speaking out of ignorance? Maher knows less than jack-shit about Islam or the Middle East, and won't listen to people who do know something; Harris knows jack-shit about Buddhism, and won't listen to anyone who does; and Murray knows jack-shit about evolutionary biology, among other subjects, and has been ridiculed by some of the best biologists out there, but still won't listen.

It's really amazing. They make a living off ignorance.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

One of my best friends from college, an Asian studies professor, has a book coming out next month that, among other things, takes Harris and his pals to the woodshed for being an ignorant slut when it comes to Buddhism. It's always worth a laugh.

Why do these people insist on speaking out of ignorance? Maher knows less than jack-shit about Islam or the Middle East, and won't listen to people who do know something; Harris knows jack-shit about Buddhism, and won't listen to anyone who does; and Murray knows jack-shit about evolutionary biology, among other subjects, and has been ridiculed by some of the best biologists out there, but still won't listen.

It's really amazing. They make a living off ignorance.

I don't listen to Harris' critiques of Islam because his big argument - that Islam is more problematic than Christianity or Judaism - is just weak. It relies on viewing Islam only over the last fifty years, and it focuses on the crazies rather than the moderates. If one takes a longer view and assesses Christianity's crimes, Christianity was a far more pernicious "problem religion" for a longer period of time than any other.

I'm not familiar with Harris' views on Buddhism. I think he's a bit off kilter to be picking fights with a religion as benign as that one. (I actually kind of like Buddhism to the extent it's more a way of thinking than a religion.)

Maher doesn't pretend to be enlightened. Maher is an opinion machine. He's thoughtful, but he's also got a quick trigger finger. He doesn't care to go deep into the weeds. He sells judgment. I like him because, while he is wrong on certain things, he's right far more often, and where he's right, he's ruthless. His disdain for religion generally, his views on climate, his stance on animal rights, and his free speech absolutism make him an essential voice.

Murray wrote one good book about excessive govt regulation and when I heard him talk about how society is bifurcating into "two Americas" (similar to John Edwards' shtick) on Harris' show, I thought he made some good points. But it struck me a bit odd that a guy who wrote on those soft anthropological subjects would also feel comfortable getting into biology. That takes an exceptionally nimble mind. The only person I've seen do that convincingly is Dawkins. And he does it in reverse - starting from the science and expanding into cultural issues. When you start with views derived from anthropology and then seek out the hard science to support them, as did Murray, you're doing it all backwards, and you're going to get flawed results.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Some relatives got to arguing about politics at the house this holiday. A few Laphroaig Quarter Casks in me, I sneeringly called them equally deluded and threw my copy of this between them: https://www.amazon.com/Hate-Inc-Toda.../dp/1949017257

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Maher doesn't pretend to be enlightened. Maher is an opinion machine. He's thoughtful, but he's also got a quick trigger finger. He doesn't care to go deep into the weeds. He sells judgment.

Oh.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Oh.

My opinion on media dovetails with Taibbi's.

I also gave some family this: https://www.amazon.com/Case-Against-.../dp/0393254690

His broader argument includes the suggestion subconscious tribalism is, from an evolutionary perspective, a feature rather than a bug. I've not read the book yet, but I heard him interviewed at length, and the argument is compelling. But to the extent he discounts agency, however, I'm skeptical. I suspect there may be more intent involved in crafting one's own reality than unconscious genetics.

My hope in gifting it is to perhaps cause the relatives who read it to doubt their own thoughts and views. To be destabilized about their bedrock notions, right, left, or middle.

I've not doubt I'll be thoroughly disappointed at the results.