"Should the Obama Generation Drop Out?" (New York Times)

Parents Forum
221

<p>
[quote]
Okay, so race does not exist. What exactly do we use to describe the vast amount of physical differences between people with different ancestors. What word should I use to describe the fact that West Africans are faster in sprinting, on average, that Caucasians or East Asians? What word is scientifically correct?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You're not talking about "race," then, though, but small subsets of people. "West African" ≠ black. The point is not that there is not variation amongst humans, but that there are not a few distinct and easy to define races that all people fit into.</p>

222

<p>"BCEagle, very possible that the people doing PC board type assembly will stay at 12.00 an hour. Or they will get kicked into piecework. Pragmatically many can't stay at PC assembly too long as the vapors from the solder do get people sick."</p>

<p>I used to solder boards when I was a kid so I know what you're talking about. Perhaps this is using automated equipment in volume instead of doing it by hand.</p>

223

<p>
[quote]
you could probably use the word "McDonald's".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Great answer. It's quite clear that environmental factors (in particular, the presence or absence of thorough training programs available to athletes from various places) trump "race" factors in winnowing out the world's best athletes. </p>

<p>See </p>

<p>Amazon.com:</a> Strange Fruit: Why Both Sides are Wrong in the Race Debate: Kenan Malik: Books </p>

<p>for more about the science behind mistaken ideas about "race." I probably disagree with the author just about completely as to his political and economic views, but his professional training is in science and medicine, and he has that mastered just fine, and shows how specious many statements about "race" are from a scientific point of view.</p>

224

<p>BC Eagle; Probably that's the way it will go, I vaguely recall that automated equipment was used back when I was enjoying the toxicity of the whole process. </p>

<p>Which brings up a peripheral problem with Murray's concept that not all jobs need college educations. Not necessarily the broad contention because many jobs do not need a college education but in how those kinds of jobs have been marginalized. </p>

<p>The problem is that many trades simply do not pay enough to make a viable living and the relation between labor and higher management has become very dysfunctional within US culture.
An example would be the current problems with those assembling cars here in the US, yes they make more than their Japanese and German compatriots. But in the best of the German and Japanese system the companies did tend to express some loyalty to their employees in exchange for them becoming very proficient in their skills. And that loyalty often existed in programs which made it possible for their employees to live in a reasonable manner even when the pay was somewhat less than their American compatriots. Granted that employee might have had to sing the Toyota song every morning, but a good worker was usually secure in their position. </p>

<p>I certainly would not want to be turning wrenches for GM or Ford right now, because no matter how well I did my job the PR would be that I caused the downfall of American industry. Although obviously it was higher level decisions which caused that particular mess. And though Toyota and Mercedes are also having their problems I don't recall any of their higher ups trying to pin the blame on their own workers-at least in public pronouncements (either directly or by proxy). </p>

<p>In many regards American corporate culture became very predatory back in the 80's and unfortunately in today's economy what their doing is eating their own labor resources.</p>

<p>Token Adult; thanks for the complement...</p>

225

<p>"The problem is that many trades simply do not pay enough to make a viable living and the relation between labor and higher management has become very dysfunctional within US culture."</p>

<p>I think that it depends on your ability to grow within the trades.</p>

<p>I had a look at that website looking for manufacturing jobs after interning and didn't see any in our area. I think that they train them in NH and that the main manufacturing jobs are over the border in MA. It is hand-soldering. Hopefully their workstations are well-ventilated.</p>

<p>I noticed that they had a position for a Finance intern for the summer but the submission date has already past. They have interns listed for engineering majors so our son may have a shot there this summer.</p>

<p>I visited the Toyota plant outside of Lexington, KY. We spent 90 to 120 minutes in the plant watching the manufacture of Camrys, Solaras and Avalons. What was amazing is that the workers seemed pretty happy in their work. I didn't see workers rushed and there was some amount of chatting here and there. Workers typically learned to do multiple tasks which probably reduces boredom from doing the same thing all the time. Benefits seemed pretty generous - I think that they had tuition reimbursement for those interested in furthering their education.</p>

<p>"I certainly would not want to be turning wrenches for GM or Ford right now, because no matter how well I did my job the PR would be that I caused the downfall of American industry. Although obviously it was higher level decisions which caused that particular mess. And though Toyota and Mercedes are also having their problems I don't recall any of their higher ups trying to pin the blame on their own workers-at least in public pronouncements (either directly or by proxy)."</p>

<p>I was at the local Toyota dealership picking up my car this afternoon and was amazed that all of the salespeople were busy and that there were customers waiting for salespeople to buy cars. I talked to some of the service staff and they said that people are buying cars and trucks and SUVs. One said that it is the 0% financing. I've heard that there's been a big pickup in the interest of larger vehicles given the drop in the price of gasoline and the very bad weather that we've had this fall.</p>

<p>There's a lot of stimulus out there and maybe some of it is actually making it into pockets here or there. There is a governors' request for a trillion in federal aid to the states. That may be interesting too. What the big three (I think that it will be the big two soon) need is for people to buy their vehicles. Lower costs don't help if they don't sell anything.</p>

226

<p>
[quote]
In many western countries where 'Caucasians' are the predominant population the diet isn't exactly suited for developing a runners physique.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So the blacks in those same countries (i.e. US) are getting the proper diet? Jamaica, a country full of world-class sprint runners, has good nutritional practices?!?! It's funny that these (descendants of) West African sprinters are raised in disparate environments, from African countries, U.S., Jamaica, Canada, Great Britain, etc., yet they all seem pretty damn fast. </p>

<p>And while I agree environment plays a significant role, ascending to that level of competition can NOT be due to environment. That level of physical prowess can only exist innately. The genius of Newton or Einstein could be nurtured, but no amount of training could result in that level of human greatness. The sprint finalists are born with an ability that 99.99999% of us don't possess. It's no surprise that this high ability is almost entirely found in the population (West Africans) whose physical bell-curve has a higher average mean than other races. Similarly, Jews dominating the Nobel Prize list implies a genetic predisposition towards intelligence. </p>

<p>Oh and I guess poor nutrition in some European countries can't produce world-class sprinters, but the black urban ghettos and their wonderful health environments (drugs, poverty, crime,etc...) can produce the physical specimens we find in the NBA and NFL (/sarcasm).</p>

<p>
[quote]
The only choices are something is biological or it doesn't exist? No human construction? No enviroment?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No one ever set up this dichotomy. From data I've seen, I imagine the nature vs. nurture split is 70/30 (though a limit exists regarding how much one achieve with their basic innate ability). I based most of this on Twin Studies that show a 0.7 correlation between separated twins IQ's.</p>

<p>
[quote]
See</p>

<p>Amazon.com: Strange Fruit: Why Both Sides are Wrong in the Race Debate: Kenan Malik: Books

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I only briefly skimmed the review but I was immediately intrigued with the following quote:</p>

<p>
[quote]
demonstrates how the contemporary obsession with identity has propelled a dangerous—and liberal—tendency to romanticize race. Commonalities are being downplayed, according to the author, as individuals are seeking answers in terms of history and heritage.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Being an Ayn Rand fan and a supporter of individualism, I'm increasingly frustrated with the liberal obsession of multiculturalism and the implication that one's identity is a product of one's arbitrary heritage. Though this may seem contradictory to my view regarding group averages, I see those facts as merely the reality of human biodiversity, not a guide with which to approach individuals.</p>

227

<p>Yes, people do set up that dichotomy in terms of race. Often they are same people who believe very strongly in the predictive ability of IQ testing. </p>

<p>
[quote]
ascending to that level of competition can NOT be due to environment.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Writing "not" in all caps is no more convincing that writing it in lower case. Because the fact remains that we don't know. I mean, what you write sounds very convincing until you scratch the surface:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Similarly, Jews dominating the Nobel Prize list implies a genetic predisposition towards intelligence.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Or it implies a group that prizes education and invests accordingly. Or it implies something else. </p>

<p>Even if there is a genetic marker for "intelligence", the IQ test does a lousy job of testing for it. I put "intelligence" in quotes because I've yet to see a definition of that given out in this thread beyond the ability to do graduate level work in engineering.</p>

228

<p>"I think that it depends on your ability to grow within the trades." </p>

<p>BC Eagle, that's quite true. The dilemma is how one can last long enough to obtain that proficiency and avoid the debt trap while getting the training. </p>

<p>Interesting observation about the Toyota plant, and it's ironic some of the procedures they developed to obtain such productivity may have germinated from US theories back in the postwar reconstruction/occupation.* Theories ironically which we did not use. The Japanese obviously integrated their own concepts and the result seems to have be quite workable. I've noticed similar attitudes with the mechanics who've worked for Mercedes Benz or Steyr Daimler , they regarded their time with the company as a partnership. And as a result even when they were operating their own shops they were willing to exceed expectations on repairs-in part because of a communal pride in the product. I recall one man who kept my vehicle for 2 extra days so it could be adjusted without any variance and he tested it incredibly thoroughly to attain that state. American workers are quite capable of doing the same, if there were more reciprocal respect between management and labor. </p>

<p>*These ideas may have resulted from changes forced on US manufacturers by the war. The old attitudes such as what Henry Ford tried to do in the 30's could not be tolerated by the government. In part what made "Rosie the Riveteer" successful was the concept that the workers were needed as essential components to wartime production rather than disposable assets. </p>

<p>Dontno
In the US obesity is obviously a problem for most of our population. My reference to McDonald's was pointing out that environmental conditions mattered more than some nebulous condition of race. And the various descendants who excel at those type of sports do so because of personal drive and interest; no doubt many have relatives who are french fried into inactivity. </p>

<p>"And while I agree environment plays a significant role, ascending to that level of competition can NOT be due to environment. That level of physical prowess can only exist innately. The genius of Newton or Einstein could be nurtured, but no amount of training could result in that level of human greatness" </p>

<p>Perhaps, but circumstance does tend to play a greater role than genetics and inherent talent. And that could be just as mysterious as claiming some inherent genius. For example, we could discuss a man in the early twentieth century who was considered quite a good runner, to the extent in extreme conditions he was valued for that ability. In addition that ability was combined with what his society considered courage. And he did have some intelligence, especially in regards to an awareness of the power of language and of group motivations. With those abilities this person could have been considered great, noble or etc. The problem of course, is the man I was using as an example was Corporal Hitler during his service in ww-1.
Obviously inherent ability can be a factor but social conditions and a thousand other variables have a far greater influence, as does simple fate. Millions served in ww-1 and there were thousands who had the same inherent abilities as Hitler and many of the same reprehensible attitudes and beliefs. But the variable influences and circumstances are what permitted one corporal to become the murderous evil which unfortunately defined the 20th century. </p>

<p>And obviously the same argument could be made about those who stood for the noble aspects of human character...the difference between such as Ashoka, Zaranthustra, Joan of Arc, or Crazy horse and 'ordinary' men and women was likely a matter of the favorable or variable circumstances which produced them. </p>

<p>In less lofty realms, someone like Joshua Chamberlain might have fit well into the supposed categorization of IQ testing, his being a professor at a college. But other more diffuse traits of his character combined with dire circumstance are what compelled him to hold the line on that terrible hill. If not for that circumstance Chamberlain would have lived and died as a now forgotten 19th century professor.</p>

229

<p>

That much falsifying can't be good for your health.</p>

230

<p>
[quote]
You're not talking about "race," then, though, but small subsets of people. "West African" ≠ black. The point is not that there is not variation amongst humans, but that there are not a few distinct and easy to define races that all people fit into.

[/quote]
Ummm, actually, the point is that there is genetic variation between <em>groups</em> of humans. I am saying directly that I think West Africans are faster in sprinting, on average, than virtually any other "small subset". I believe this is due to a different statistical distribution of genes, as driven by evolutionary selection.</p>

<p>To think that this might not be true on a large scale seems "fallacious". It's possible that huge populations could be evolutionarily driven to have the same statistical distribution of genes, but it seems highly unlikely. It's pretty obvious just by looking at people to see whether they are Causasian, East Asian, or Sub-Saharan African [who comprise the vast majority of the world's population].</p>

231

<p>
[quote]
In the US obesity is obviously a problem for most of our population. My reference to McDonald's was pointing out that environmental conditions mattered more than some nebulous condition of race. And the various descendants who excel at those type of sports do so because of personal drive and interest

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think you're completely overstating the prevalence of obesity and its relation to sports success, but fine I'll run with it. So if American or European obesity significantly affects the ability of white people to be world-class sprinters, then what do we make of the "black" diet? Are you going to support the notion that poor blacks have a diet more suitable for athletic activity? That their homes, filled with drugs and poverty, is more conducive to raising healthy and physically able children?</p>

<p>It's pretty basic statistics. You've got one bell-curve for whites and one bell curve for blacks (I'll go with physical ability here so blacks have a higher average). Here's a link depicting the domination of blacks at the right tail (where world-class sprinter come from, the picture applies to men vs. women heights but it's the same for what I'm taling about):</p>

<p>[url=<a href="http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/debate05/images/pinker.slides/pages/pinker_Page_15.htm%5Dpinker_Page_15%5B/url"&gt;http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/debate05/images/pinker.slides/pages/pinker_Page_15.htm]pinker_Page_15[/url&lt;/a&gt;]&lt;/p>

<p>[url=<a href="http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/debate05/images/pinker.slides/pages/pinker_Page_16.htm%5Dpinker_Page_16%5B/url"&gt;http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/debate05/images/pinker.slides/pages/pinker_Page_16.htm]pinker_Page_16[/url&lt;/a&gt;]&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]

[quote]
Or it implies a group that prizes education and invests accordingly. Or it implies something else.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No I think it implies a propensity for innate intelligence. You seriously believe that Jews are **15 times **overrepresented in the Nobel Prize winners because they nurture their children?!?! You've got to be kidding me. If that was the case, WASPy suburbia, full of helicopter parents and the like, would be churning out Nobel Prize winners constantly. Think of the best science student you know. Or better yet, a less nebulous example. Think of the best athlete you know. Imagine the US government spends a million dollars a year training this person, giving him the proper diet, etc. They began doing this at around 8 years old and continued until he was around 25 years old. So upwards of 15 million dollars worth of nutrition advice, regimented training schedules, the best coaches and doctors have looked after your friend's development. So, according to your hypothesis (that innate intelligence is NOT the PRIME motivator of human greatness), he will be able to challenge the world record in the 100 meters. Or become one of the greatest 50 basketball players of all-time. Or win the NFL MVP. You actually believe this to be true? </p>

<p>
[quote]
Yes, people do set up that dichotomy in terms of race.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, Charles Murray, Arthur Jensen, Steven Pinker, Mr. Payne, or myself, not one has set up this dichotomy. Have any of these legitimate researchers in intelligence/racial issues defined intelligence as exclusively Asian or athletic ability as exclusively black? Fudge no. I really can't make it any more clear. If you believe this, you haven't read of a word of what these people have said.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Even if there is a genetic marker for "intelligence", the IQ test does a lousy job of testing for it. I put "intelligence" in quotes because I've yet to see a definition of that given out in this thread beyond the ability to do graduate level work in engineering.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yea such a lousy job that the military uses it, colleges use it (SAT is a politically correct proxy for an IQ test), even the NFL uses it (Wonderlic), and companies would use it if it weren't illegal. IQ has strong predictive powers, especially with regards to salary (see IQ will put you in your palce by Charles Murray). </p>

<p>Intelligence is basically the ability to reason and critically analyze complex situations. This is manifested in verbal dexterity (ability to write is g-loaded), mathematical ability, spatial understanding (why some people are good at physics and how our evolutionary forebearers were able to throw spears accurately), etc. IQ does a fairly good job of quantifying this.</p>

232

<p>On IQ, wasn't Richard Feynman supposed to have had only something like a 121 IQ?</p>

233

<p>
[quote]
On IQ, wasn't Richard Feynman supposed to have had only something like a 121 IQ?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It was 123. But of course, everything discussed in this thread relates to an AVERAGE. There is individual variation. Asians are, ON AVERAGE, shorter than Europeans. Does that mean Yao Ming isn't tall? Basically, if you want to start a basketball team, you probably shouldn't be recruiting in Chinatown, but rather in Harlem. Now you could find a great player in Chinatown, but it's far more likely to find a great player, as well as a larger sample of good players, in Harlem. </p>

<p>As it pertains to Feynman, his verbal skills probably significantly affected his score. I highly doubt that score could be accurate unless his verbal facilities are severely lacking. An off-the-charts math score combined with a mediocre verbal score can result in a final score that clouds a particular genuis.</p>

234

<p>
[quote]
From data I've seen, I imagine the nature vs. nurture split is 70/30 (though a limit exists regarding how much one achieve with their basic innate ability).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The better considered view (you can check a good recent textbook on genetics if you'd like to look this up) is that broad heritability studies set a figure for a MINIMUM influence of the environment, and that minimum is nearer to 50 percent than 30 percent. What that means as a practical matter, as research on secular trends in IQ has shown, is that we still have no idea how much an individual's IQ score might be boosted, but in particular individual cases it is likely to be by quite a lot.</p>

235

<p>"Interesting observation about the Toyota plant, and it's ironic some of the procedures they developed to obtain such productivity may have germinated from US theories back in the postwar reconstruction/occupation.* Theories ironically which we did not use."</p>

<p>They hired Deming and actually listened to him.</p>

236

<p>"So if American or European obesity significantly affects the ability of white people to be world-class sprinters, then what do we make of the "black" diet' </p>

<p>Fast food manufacturers are quite happy to market to any group to which they can sell. Sometimes in a heavy handed manner as is evident from the botched McDonald's ads from a few years back. </p>

<p>As far as the diet for the poor in the US, in our society processed sugars, fats, and salts tend to be amongst the cheapest products. So by necessity and by marketing pressure these items tend to be a major element in the diet of the US poor. In that regard whether one is part of a minority or majority population the diet amongst the poor tends to be remarkably alike despite regional variances.
And there are places where fresh produce and decent meat are either too highly priced or verging on rotten when they are sold. And so are not economically viable choice for the poor. </p>

<p>As the economy continues to collapse people within the middle classes may find that their diet will decline to the same standards as the historically poor. In my community I've noticed an increase in the number of middle class people buying basic consumables with credit cards. This is a situation which indicates a degree of desperation to maintain living standards and one which obviously cannot be sustained. The next step for them will be descending down to the diet of such as Ramen noodles and potted meat or whatever the regional equivalent would be for those products. </p>

<p>At that point the nutritional effects of diet on brain development will also begin to affect the children of the middle classes. Which could easily toss the concept of IQ as a supposed marker of specific groups such as suburbia, barrios, reservations or Asian, Caucasion, Amerind, Black & etc. Unless of course someone gets desperate and tries to write IQ tests which are premised on economic status. Which incidentally when this controversy arose several years back, was done to show how culturally biased these tests can be. </p>

<p>"That their homes, filled with drugs and poverty, is more conducive to raising healthy and physically able children?" </p>

<p>You do realize that amongst the poor although poverty is a obviously a factor homes are not necessarily filled with drugs, violence and dysfunction? </p>

<p>"They hired Deming and actually listened to him." </p>

<p>BCEagle, quite true.
I wonder with US education policy when there will be a point when people such as Dr. Elizabeth Warren, Paul Basken, or Andrew Collinge or the like are also listened to? Or we take a much closer look at overseas models of higher education funding, support and policies? US higher education is very close to the brink because of inadequate support and the unfortunate fact we have turned effective control of it and its funding over to a cabal of socially parasitic financiers. The Canadian's have figured out the problem as they are marking moves to mitigate the socially and economically disasterous effects (to the extent that border states like Montana have tried measures to restrict their populations from leaving in the hope of benefiting from the new Canadian reforms). The British have become concerned to the level that even Church groups such as "Just Share" are beginning to speak on the issue. </p>

<p>And the Germans, Japanese, Irish and etc did not use our model so its very possible that in the near future we will have a 'brain drain" as our most intelligent and ambitious realize it might be better to obtain their educations elsewhere than the US. And no doubt there will be countries which will alter their educational policies to take advantage of this potential.</p>

237

<p>IQ</a> and the Wealth of Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</p>

238

<p>^


</p>

<p>That's not the way to do science.</p>

239

<p>I seriously doubt (willing to bet cash on it) that Feynman had an adult IQ of ~123. From what I saw on the internet, this number was from one single childhood IQ test, so its accuracy is dubious (as childhood IQ's are quite different from adult IQ's). He was probably just a late bloomer or it was a lousy test.</p>

240

<p>
[quote]
As it pertains to Feynman, his verbal skills probably significantly affected his score.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What a crock. Feynman's verbal skills were exceptional. The man was known as a fantastic orator and many of his most important discoveries were communicated VERBALLY long before they were communicated through journals (which he did not enjoy writing.)</p>

<p>
[quote]
Yea such a lousy job that the military uses it, colleges use it (SAT is a politically correct proxy for an IQ test), even the NFL uses it (Wonderlic), and companies would use it if it weren't illegal. IQ has strong predictive powers, especially with regards to salary (see IQ will put you in your palce by Charles Murray).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Once again: The ASVAB is only used for enlisted.</p>

<p>Let me repeat this.</p>

<p>The ASVAB is only used for enlisted.</p>

<p>One more time, guys!</p>

<p>The ASVAB is only used for enlisted.</p>

<p>That means that the military does not see its use as applicable to officers (ROTC/OCS), suggesting that for those who will be leading, no such test is necessary. If it were such a good indicator, why not apply it to officers, who arguably (ARGUABLY) use "mental skills" more than enlisted?</p>

<p>Also, so what? Like I said earlier, the federal government uses the polygraph. Does that mean that the polygraph is really good?</p>

<p>Mr Payne</p>

<p>
[quote]
Ummm, actually, the point is that there is genetic variation between <em>groups</em> of humans. I am saying directly that I think West Africans are faster in sprinting, on average, than virtually any other "small subset". I believe this is due to a different statistical distribution of genes, as driven by evolutionary selection.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>"Statistical distribution" here is kind of odd. What are the parameters? What do you mean? </p>

<p>
[quote]
To think that this might not be true on a large scale seems "fallacious". It's possible that huge populations could be evolutionarily driven to have the same statistical distribution of genes, but it seems highly unlikely. It's pretty obvious just by looking at people to see whether they are Causasian, East Asian, or Sub-Saharan African [who comprise the vast majority of the world's population].

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Why is it "fallacious?" We know from evolutionary biology that changes in large vs. small populations can be very different. </p>

<p>And again, what do you mean by "statistical distribution?" Explain this to a Bayesian, as I think we apply this terminology differently. Since you can't know the parameters-- this is exceptionally difficult in a situation like genetic traits-- how can you say anything with so much certainty?</p>