Is this a correct concept of, “Racism?”
Posted by Solver 5 years, 6 months ago to Philosophy
(Racism) “is the idea that the racial group is the primary unit of reality, and its benefit, whatever that means, is the standard of value by reference to which one should choose his actions.”
-Charles Tew
An example that came up is actionable concern about the vast differences of IQ scores based on race.
I thought this would be a good topic in an Objectivist forum.
Ayn Rand had this to say about racism,
https://ari.aynrand.org/issues/cultur...
-Charles Tew
An example that came up is actionable concern about the vast differences of IQ scores based on race.
I thought this would be a good topic in an Objectivist forum.
Ayn Rand had this to say about racism,
https://ari.aynrand.org/issues/cultur...
To base racial differences upon skin color, body shape, IQ or place of origin is pure nonsense. There are way too many other traits that are shared between all Humans...even the evil ones...sadly.
I would think a different Racial entity, one that is sentient and aware of self, beyond it's own survival might be a Dolphin, Whale or Elephant...if in fact they fit the above definition.
(hmm...let me guess before you answer...All of the above?)...laughing
To be racist would also have to include some fundamental belief that one race is superior to others OR that one race is inferior to others. Thus, justifying actions towards another group that keep them down, based on the people's race.
Simply identifying with others that are of a similar race and background, aka culture, doesn't make you racist. One can be proud to be Japanese without hating Egyptians, etc.
ethnicity (Japanese, Jewish, or whatever?) Your birth into it is not your own achievement.
Rand makes so much sense in her discussion of race, so true, so on the mark. The black commentators can't stand the solo thinking black, or they go nuts. Just as the crooked Senators judge Ms. Ford by all sexual assualt victims, as being true, also quite wrong. Logic just tells you the Senators in general have no logic.
I think that Martin Luther King, Jr. actually got one thing correct: that men should be judged based on the content of their character (what they do) rather than their appearance.
It is a separate comment, 4th stand alone comment from the top and I replied, right underneath it.
"Consciousness-(self introspection" would imply selves without introspection. At what age do those selves who (really can't use that word since they are not conscious, so not somebodies) are not conscious, gain introspection? Must be fairly late in life, I would guess. Also, do you consider self awareness as being consciousness?
English more likely developed from some Anglo-
Saxon dialect from the west German dialects which cannot be considered as English. Went to Old English, eventually to modern English with spelling locked up with the introduction of a dictionary.
Much of the time English was written as it sounded to the speaker so words were spelled in many ways depending on the pronunciation of the locals.
There are many today that are not aware of their own behavior...take the leftest ridiculous outrages for instance...that is exactly what pagan, bicameral man acted like. (the fault in their own behavior/ the fear of their own incompetence, is your fault...for the pagan man, it was their gods punishment).
But here is a serious note: Mental diseases like Schizophrenia and Psychopathy often manifest without a conscience,...accentually...0 self introspection and sees everything as an impediment to their own survival...that is all the self awareness they have. What is really scary about these global deletes, criminals and politicians is that they can learn to imitate us so as to avoid detection.
If someone with one or both of the mental diseases has a conscience, awareness of one's own behavior they are likely harmless to others but more of a danger to themselves.
That is what I saw when I started my research into the differences between us and came to the conclusion that it is Conscience...those that have and those that have not. Not only is that the only true division in human societies but also the main cause of the division in the first place...all else is superficial and superficially promoted by the have nots.
Families govern themselves and in the event of a conflict that could not be resolved they go to the most wise in the community...therefore, government governs best when close to the governed.
In my studies of the best languages...the only link I am aware of was Aramaic and Germany...but you could be right about the Anglo Saxons...interesting point,
Thanks.
Shows that English came through dialects of West Germanic languages.
I sold my Britannica Encyclopedias to finance my trip to California in 1975...
Jan
https://youtu.be/aIdWAa-0oOw
https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-coun...
Stefan Molyneux did a youtube video with graphics on this specific issue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcMd9...
Those who get out of a hell hole in order to sneak into the USA are not averages but individual human beings. In fact those who try to leave are probably high enough in IQ to be above the average. What is your IQ so that I can get some idea whether you are somehow superior to me or those whom I deal with. Should I decide that if your IQ is lower or higher than mine, that one of us is lesser than the other in some way.
Would you all immigrants take an IQ test to be sure that they do not lower the average IQ of US citizens. It is interesting that different countries have different average IQs, but is completely irrelevant to anything but to the conditions in the country in which one develops one's self.
The only thing that should be considered about immigration is whether it is legal or not, because raising or lowering of an average IQ for the USA says nothing about individuals living in the USA. The publication of the book "The Bell Curve" should have been enough about IQ differences to find some other average to worry about like average time it takes to eat a Big Mac or to urinate. Then we could decide that too much time was spent by some to do those activities and then do something to decrease the average time for USA citizens doing the activities.
Ayn Rand was inspirational in her rational thinking and identifying that A is A no matter what the circumstance, color, or other inconsequential identifier.
Well, hell's bells, that statement will not hack it with the PC thought police crowd.
Same goes for lib mobs who are not mobs because "mob" never applies to lib mob behavior. Just ask Antifa.
So IQ in that case did make a difference, but at times in high school and college, I think my IQ was around 70, based on some of the stupid things I did and said. Some even continuing to this day.
" vast differences of IQ scores "
IQ is just what we choose to put on the test and call IQ. Race is the physical attributes that we choose as criteria for race. Correlation between these two groups is compounding the issue that we shouldn't be dividing individuals into groups in the first place.
Maybe the issue is racists wants to say race is real and their race is fundamentally superior. They imagine the IQ test as a measure of worth, and then they can scientifically conclude human value is bestowed more on their race. Those people should go do something they love and value in life and abandon dividing people into groups and putting the groups on scales of merit.
IQ does measure something, whatever it is, can be repeatedly measured with a reasonable consistency. Unfortunately as Charles Murray found out with The Bell Curve, publishing statistics which show groups have different means can be hazardous.
In the Army, I took a highly integrated IQ test and achieved a score of 138...whoopie do! On the average, it doesn't mean a whole lot other that the fact that I use my mind and am able to integrate information.
An IQ test today would be tainted toward collectivism and all it's antilectual bull crap, those taking that test would likely score High but in a standard integrated test would probably score below 100.
The Bell Curve was actually not about race. The main theses was that the shift in Universities from being essentially a place for the upper class to go to being one which aggressively sought out highly intelligent people was concentrating them into groups that would naturally meet and marry. They thought this could have serious consequences for the country as a whole. And maybe it has.
They had a chapter on IQ and mentioned that the mean IQ of African Americans was below that of Whites which was below that of Asians. This caused the to be intensely vilified by those who insist that there is no difference between groups of people.
Same goes for any uncivilized country where the information level is low and only geared for raw survival.
Sounds like more science is needed in this field.
A certain amount of compartmentalized information should always be measured but more important is how the individual can integrate that information should always be measured as well...that can be daunting when pressed for time in these tests.
I do think that IQ measured integrally can rise with accumulated experiences and information as one ages...however, some areas of the test could suffer also because we don't use all of the information we learned in school for a good portion of our lives.
For instance, I haven't used a lot of advanced mathematics in my life, I would likely fail the test on Algebra but would probably do better in History, chemistry, biology and psychology than I did in college.
As I remember, in grade school, there wasn't a whole lot of that (I was very good at the flat/folded object match ups)...but I was also hyperactive and did not have the patients for testing...I just wanted it to be over.
What were you good at Irshultis?
Average native US speaker knows 20000 to 35000 words with 4 year olds knowing about 5000 words and 8 year olds knowing something like 10000 words. I do not recall having such a large vocabulary at such a young age.
Although I poorly studied the real languages German, Spanish, Russian, Danish, and French, I was more interested artificial languages for their grammars, Interlingua, Loglan, and Esperanto. I was more interested as to whether a language spoken has any effect on how people act. If I recall right, Loglan was created to test that. Loglan expresses exactly what is intended by all possible logical ways of expressing a thoughts.
Metaphors are considered very important in achieving awareness and cooperation of, both sides of the brain..ie Unicameral) therefore the attainment of Consciousness-(self introspection). [Julian Jaynes]
(Learned all that from those that continue his work).
English excels at those things.
Did you know that Germany originally spoke English?
I just wish we would spell the way words sound or say the way words are spelled. (get rid of all "silent" letters)
Seems like if you write a reply and then a sub-reply to it, that deleting the first will delete the new reply also.
This sounds interesting. I wonder sometimes if more aspies meeting and marrying might be causing more autism.
That was an rather anti-collectivst statement.
That is normal because all fans of Ayn Rand are anti-collectivist.
.
But facts are facts - they shouldn't be suppressed just because they are inconvenient. That is a very dangerous precedent.
However, many facts concerning racial trends are suppressed. The root cause could be cultural but nonetheless, to speak of any differences is dangerous in our current cultural environment.
Just by focusing on individual rights and achievements.
I wouldn't deny people the right to be wrong, but I think it's wrong to divide people into groups of "sicks" and "healthies". People can be sick or healthy, but that doesn't mean they entered into a group. I similarly don't think of US citizens as being "Americans". They're people who have US citizenship.
At the core, I think of people as sentient beings, who have various abilities and limitations, various physical attributes, various licenses or records of wrongdoing from authorities, and so on. Those abilities and attributes are real. The authorities could be right or wrong. I just don't think of any of that as changing the nature of what people are.
Why do some people have stronger immune systems than other people?
Why do some people have higher intelligence quotients than other people?
Why do some people live longer than other people?
...should be free to use the scientific method to discover truth that can benifit everyone.