The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Prosecutors Argue IQ Tests Must be Biased Against Blacks So It Would be Racist Not to Execute Black Killers with IQs <70
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Pacific Standard:

HOW IQ TESTS ARE PERVERTED TO JUSTIFY THE DEATH PENALTY

Research has identified embedded racism in IQ tests. Now, prosecutors in at least eight states are using that research—to legalize more executions.

DAVID M. PERRY JAN 25, 2018

As a concept, IQ is terrible. The idea that we can reduce intelligence to a simple number, quantifiable in a test, exacerbates inequality in numerous racist, classist, sexist, and ableist ways. Not only do people have worth beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.” Over the last many decades, scholars and activists have pushed back against the regime of IQ testing in all contexts, often successfully.

Now, prosecutors in at least eight states have been hiring experts to testify about the racist nature of IQ, in order to kill more black and brown men.

The Supreme Court has slowly been carving out exemptions to the death penalty for people with intellectual disabilities. In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled in Atkins v. Virginia that people with intellectual disabilities could not be executed, but left it up to the states to determine who is or is not eligible for that protection…. Still, IQ testing continues to play a major role, with a threshold of around 70 serving as the cutoff score, below which a person cannot legally be executed.

Here’s where “ethnic adjustments” come in. The practice, as documented by attorney Robert Sanger in a 2015 article in the American University Law Review, adjusts IQ scores upward for people of color convicted of capital crimes. According to Sanger, prosecutors in Florida, Texas, Alabama, Tennessee, Missouri, California, Pennsylvania, and Ohio have all used ethnic adjustments to successfully impose the death penalty on people who otherwise might have been deemed exempt. In his article, Sanger works methodically through case after case, noting in particular the role played by expert witnesses for the prosecution, who testify to the racial biases of IQ testing.

Sanger wrote:

Statistically, some minority cohorts tend to perform worse on tests than White cohorts; prosecutors argue that this discrepancy is not based on intellectual inferiority, but rather that there are testing biases and behavioral factors that cause minority test-takers to underperform. Thus, the argument goes, minority IQ scores should be increased to control for these biases and behavioral factors.

I wrote for UPI back when the Supreme Court made its 2002 decision:

Analysis: IQ defenders feel vindicated
By STEVE SAILER, UPI National Correspondent | June 24, 2002 at 12:37 PM

LOS ANGELES, June 24 (UPI) — Several IQ researchers, accustomed to having their field of expertise ignored or denounced as racist and fraudulent, were bemused by Thursday’s vote by six Supreme Court Justices to ban the execution of murderers, in effect, who score poorly on IQ tests.

As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.

The IQ experts were particularly amused that newspapers that routinely condemn IQ tests as biased and meaningless were quick to endorse intelligence exams in this case. The New York Times, for example, editorialized, “[I]nflicting the death penalty on individuals with I.Q. scores of less than 70 who have little understanding of their moral culpability violates civilized standards of justice.” …

Finally, the Court’s decision officially designates that a much larger fraction of the African-American population is of diminished moral capability compared to the white and East Asian populations. About 2 percent-3 percent of whites or East Asians don’t exceed 70 on IQ tests, vs. 10 percent-12 percent of American blacks (and more than 20 percent score below 75).

Some of the IQ defenders were quick to point out that Court and the New York Times had implicitly agreed with them that IQ tests were not racially biased. Gottfredson said, “The death penalty may be the only public policy debate involving race in which we are not bombarded with the usual canards about IQ tests being biased against blacks.” She contends that abundant evidence shows IQ tests are equally good at predicting a variety of life outcomes for both blacks and whites.

 
Hide 138 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Not only do people have worth beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.”

    So, according to Mr. Perry, if a test shows a racial difference, this is evidence that the test is racist. So the claim of intellectual equality between the races is literally unfalsifiable.

    (The class one seems to be going even further into madness though. Does Perry really believe that the children of rubbish collectors are on average as intelligent as those of CEOs, and its only classist IQ tests that show otherwise?)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    "So the claim of intellectual equality between the races is literally unfalsifiable."

    Of course!

    Not just because it is a vodoo taboo you'll be hounded out of your job and possibly your home for doubting, but also because every single test of brainpower has the same Jew-NEAsian-White-Mestizo-Mulatto-Arab-Black-Relic Race ordering. No exceptions. Ever.

    Such is the shit sandwich of the left's racial egalitarianism: backward digit recall and eye to finger reaction time tests are culturally biased! You better believe it, your job depends on it. And we might send a violent mob after you if for some reason like academic tenure or self-employment means we can't get you fired.
    , @Clyde
    So called rubbish collection in the UK ___ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4969542/Rubbish-collector-shocked-man-hiding-wheelie-bin.html

    In the USA we don't have any rubbish collectors but we do have garbage men. Matter of fact in some large cities they can make a mint. In NYC they make $70,000 w bulletproof pensions and bennies. $70,000 in 2009 (internet) so making more now.

    , @Logan
    For at least 70 years psychometricians have been trying to produce an accurate IQ test that makes these average racial difference disappear. Fame and fortune await the researcher who succeeds, and they all know it.

    Yet nobody has discovered this Holy Grail, almost certainly because it doesn't exist.

    The critics of IQ are forced to make an entirely unjustified assumption that all IQ researchers are fudging the data to make white (and Asian) folks look better.
    , @JeremiahJohnbalaya
    Since IQ appears to be heritable, is it racist for low IQ parents to give birth? Or are they racist simply in that their children have similarly low IQ scores?

    Of course, the same logic would apply to high IQ parents.
    , @Roderick Spode
    didn't he mean (((abled middle- and upper-class white males)))?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Another David M. Perry about the “War on Hanukkah”:

    The GOP Theocracy: Xmas vs Hanukkah Statements.

    The RNC puts out messages on holidays. Here’s the text for Hanukkah:

    And here’s part of that they say for Christmas:

    1. Notice the “As our Jewish friends” vs “We.”
    2. Notice the simple statement of theological belief as fact for the Christian statement.

    We should realize, once more, that the GOP believes only Christians are real Americans

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    "the GOP believes only Christians are real Americans"

    Where would they get that idea? (Don't ask history; that's cheating.)

    By the way, the GOP? They're not even so extreme as to have adopted citizenism. There are no "real Americans" to the GOP. However, when they're not granting "amnesty" en masse or rationalizing about how the entire population of planet earth is "naturally conservative," they would like to limit the number of fresh ones.

    , @Dr. X

    We should realize, once more, that the GOP believes only Christians are real Americans
     
    Maybe that's because Christians aren't automatically guaranteed the right to become citizens of a foreign nation, unlike every single Jew in the world?

    Or because the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. is a "Christian nation" in 1892?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. This is an unanticipated boomerang in the face to all those who have argued that IQ tests are racially biased.

    However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Colleen Pater
    yeah a real dick move to want to execute vicious animals who do heinous things get back to us when it happens to your family
    , @anonymous
    "this is a bit of a dick move by the prosecutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing."

    Agreed that it is a dick move, Mr. Eyes, but criminal prosecution/defense is a dick business. Context is everything...if I was prosecuting a Tookie Williams , a Jeffrey Dahmer, or equivalent, I would have no hesitation using whatever (legal) arguments I could to get that guy planted.

    Also, there is a kind of fun irony to the argument that I.Q. tests are invalid, at least in this context. You know, the petard and all that.

    , @roo_ster
    Dick move maybe, but highly eugenic and eucivic.
    , @Joe Walker
    No more bloodthirsty than the murderers on trial.
    , @HEL

    However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

     

    Or it just might be that the prosecutors aren't suckers. They know that the people who are being spared the death penalty by this rule are vicious, monstrous creatures, whereas the death penalty opponents want us to believe such killers are Lennie Small, just simple-minded giants who don't know their own strength.

    Obviously they never quite come out and say this, but the terminology used naturally evokes this image. The notion that someone is retarded, or some euphemism for this term, now has strong connotations suggesting that person has some sort of developmental disorder. Surely most everyone nowadays went to school with at least one retarded individual who was futilely mainstreamed into regular class rooms. This is who we are intended envision in the debate over executing those with low intelligence, but these are not the people committing the murders. Not in any substantial numbers, anyway.
    , @Paul Rain
    @SnakeEyes "You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing."

    It is a very.. lawyerly.. argument, but let's face the reality. This is only occurring because some twisted lawyer first came up with a concept under which a full 15 percent of blacks may not be executed!

    This would be one thing if we were talking about just whites under IQ 70, who are practically all organically retarded and don't really do crime. But very different for the ungratefuls. The 85's with IQ's under 70 are a group that contains some truly vicious individuals who do awful things that prosecutors would be going after hard, even just to satisfy their own shriveled moral senses, let alone the public outrage.
    , @Dave from Oz
    > However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    Well, perhaps reviewing what these poor helpless mentally challenged souls actually do when the get hold of a gun or a knife or a woman tends to make one a little bloodthirsty.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.

    Perhaps the argument over the meaning of the intelligence quotient has become altogether too involved. One does not need to be a rock solid believer in the scientific veracity of IQ in order to see that the inability to score above 70 on what is essentially just a puzzle test is indicative of poor mental faculties.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    Read More
    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    "recompense"

    I wasn't aware that murdering a murderer brings their victim[s] back to life. Can you cite examples of this?
    , @Stephen Paul Foster
    "There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims."

    Also, if the mental state of not being "aware of the moral gravity of their crimes" was a reason not to execute a convicted murderer, you would have to exempt (relatively) high IQ psychopaths like Ted Bundy since psycho-sociopathic killers like Bundy operate without any moral faculties. The sickening depravity of the people (smart or stupid) who end up on death row makes the factor of intelligence complete irrelevant in determining their fate.
    , @NickG

    A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.
     
    Demonstrating mens rea is, in Anglo Saxon law, central to establishing criminal responsibility.

    Does someone with an IQ of less than 70 have the wherewithal for mens rea?

    I really don't know.
    , @AnotherDad

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.
     
    Exactly. Well said ID.

    Same with psychotics. It's not the job of the courts to sit in God like judgment and determine if the murderer has some sort of innocent soul, unfortunately burdened with a really stupid or psychotic brain. The courts aren't sentencing their soul, but their actual biological being on this material planet with their nasty murdering brain.

    Kill them all and let God sort them out.
    , @eD
    This comment by Intelligent Dasein contains two valid and not obvious points.

    The first is that IQ tests were originally developed to see if people were retarded. They are by design most valuable in measuring if someone is retarded, and much less reliable to see if someone is a genius.

    The second is that the strongest, and really the only strong argument for the death penalty (I happen to be an opponent) is as a preventive measure. Some people are incapable of functioning without attacking other people because they are too stupid to understand right and wrong, are psycopaths, or whatever. Until medicine can get to the point where whatever is wrong with their brains is repairable, there is nothing that can be done about them but to eliminate them. Not only should having an IQ under 70 not be a bar to execution, we should be executing only people with IQs under 70!
    , @roo_ster
    I was never comvinced of the logic of sparing the stupidly evil and insanely evil.
    , @Anon
    It doesn't seem to occur to anybody that lawyers for these defendants may be coaching their clients to deliberately score low when they're being judged for mental competence. In other words, score so badly that your neck will be saved. Of course this is happening. Any good lawyer would think of it, and any liberal lawyer would feel obligated to pull off this kind of fraud.
    , @Logan
    There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes.

    Possibly, but it's a pretty old principle. Goes at least as far back in common law as the M'Naghten rule in 1847.

    The idea is that we don't execute people for crimes they are incapable of realizing are wrong. As others have noted, this Rule would also prohibit imprisoning them, if applied logically.
    , @Old Palo Altan
    Should only murderers be put to death?
    I was reading an English newspaper from around 1820 the other day and noticed a list of court decisions and sentences, with the occasional quotation from the judgment. The following caught my eye:
    Lord Justice Neville, in announcing his sentence upon a young man of twenty who had been caught red-handed in the act of stealing a handkerchief, remarked that it would perhaps benefit the boy to be sent off to the wilds of Australia for life. But, on the other hand, who knew what might become of him there?
    At this point the narrative ended, and the reporter simply recorded the actual sentence: DEATH.

    A bit extreme perhaps, but surely the direction we need to be heading.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Doublethink.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paul Yarbles
    Heads I win, tails you lose.
    , @Stan Adams

    The IQ experts were particularly amused that newspapers that routinely condemn IQ tests as biased and meaningless were quick to endorse intelligence exams in this case.
     
    "To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morally while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forger it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself--that was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word "doublethink" involved the use of doublethink." - 1984 by George Orwell
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    So, the basis of a ‘low IQ score’ is a necessary and sufficient justification for absolving blacks from the supreme sanction, as determined by law, incumbent upon citizenship in the polities which practice the punishment of death.
    Surely, the logical converse must be as a ‘low IQ score’ is sufficient reason to nullify the extreme penalty of citizenship, it should also be sufficient condition to nullify the great privilege of citizenship, namely the franchise, not merely upon the justified grounds that the low IQ scorer has an egregious privilege other his fellows, but also upon the eminently justifiable principle that in a democracy, he surely is unfit to exercise the duty of a voter.

    Read More
    • Agree: AndrewR, Almost Missouri
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. “IQ also routinely awards” –IQ awards? What does that even mean?–”higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males…”

    Isn’t part of being “abled” being of superior intelligence? Nevermind.

    Are we supposed to believe IQ is a bad thing *because* it benefits white male non-invalids of a certain class? Usually articles like this go to the trouble of establishing or at least implying white male non-invalid middle-class and above (what, you couldn’t throw in religious or sexual status?) IQ privilege is unearned. Or are we at a point in our culture where we can zoom past that argument, and start with “favors whites, therefore bad?”

    I won’t bother mentioning the fact that IQ tests privilege Asians and Jews the most. Placing white males in the middle of the hierarchy, even, is too high.

    “reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of ‘science.’”

    Okay, you don’t think IQ is scientific. But you didn’t even establish that we’re talking about invalid (yeah, I’m using that term again) ideologies. Are ideologies wrong as such? I don’t know what “pre-existing” means in this context. Of course it would be difficult to reinforce ideologies that don’t yet exist.

    Is “pre-existing” supposed to mean old-fashioned? Is it supposed to have something to do with prejudice? I dunno. Is it ironic that an article discounting intelligence’s measurability is so stupidly written?

    Read More
    • LOL: Laugh Track
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    are we at a point in our culture where we can zoom past that argument, and start with “favors whites, therefore bad?”
     
    Yes.

    Indeed, we are well beyond this point.

    The current point is Early Stage Genocide.
    , @Negrolphin Pool
    The execution-exempt author is suggesting the entire intelligence literature is built on research fatally tainted by confirmation bias.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @Hippopotamusdrome
    Another David M. Perry about the "War on Hanukkah":

    The GOP Theocracy: Xmas vs Hanukkah Statements.
    ...
    The RNC puts out messages on holidays. Here’s the text for Hanukkah:
    ...
    And here’s part of that they say for Christmas:
    ...
    1. Notice the “As our Jewish friends” vs “We.”
    2. Notice the simple statement of theological belief as fact for the Christian statement.
    ...
    We should realize, once more, that the GOP believes only Christians are real Americans

     

    “the GOP believes only Christians are real Americans”

    Where would they get that idea? (Don’t ask history; that’s cheating.)

    By the way, the GOP? They’re not even so extreme as to have adopted citizenism. There are no “real Americans” to the GOP. However, when they’re not granting “amnesty” en masse or rationalizing about how the entire population of planet earth is “naturally conservative,” they would like to limit the number of fresh ones.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. “IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males,”

    And even higher numbers to NE Asians and Hindus than whites.

    A side benefit I see to high IQ asian immigration is a reduction in white guilt. A visible minority with higher incomes and educational attainment and fewer problems with the police that whites raises the issue of why our problem minorities can’t do the same.

    iSteve is not exactly a hotbed of white guilt, but it is a real thing IRL. Seeing non-whites work hard and succeed in America like white Americans largely do is so powerfully attractive to the masses because it works to relieve the guilt, showing America is place where merit and hard work sre rewarded more than physical appearance. It isn’t just a white liberal thing either. Alan West, Alan Keyes, Herman Cain, and Mia Love, and Ben Carson all succeeded on the right far above their individual merits because the white guilt emotional cluster very well exists on the right too.

    Likewise, the happy co-existence of Jewish and Buddhist Americans gives the white Christian majority the emotional defense they need to crack down on Islam. “See, we get along great with our Mormon, Jain, Buddhist, etc groups, the problem isn’t with us being intolerant, it is with Islam being barbaric and incompatible with American values.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Your omission of Tim Scott on that list suggests that your thoughts on IQ should be taken with extra salt.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. ‘Not only do people have worth beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.”’

    That’s a beautiful example of the version of postmodern reasoning that is currently fashionable in Northern American universities and that Jordan Peterson likes to rail against: Power games is all there is. Hence, if African Americans do worse on a test, this is evidence that the test is biased, indeed, that it was designed to be biased.

    By implication, measurements of height demonstrate that folding rules are biased against children.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    In some parts of the multiverse, the racial IQ bias is different!
    , @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    LemmusLemmus writes, "By implication, measurements of height demonstrate that folding rules are biased against children."

    Pardon my low IQ, L.L., but what does this mean? I have never encountered folding rules. Folding of what? Height of what? Please explain.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @DFH

    Not only do people have worth beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.”
     
    So, according to Mr. Perry, if a test shows a racial difference, this is evidence that the test is racist. So the claim of intellectual equality between the races is literally unfalsifiable.

    (The class one seems to be going even further into madness though. Does Perry really believe that the children of rubbish collectors are on average as intelligent as those of CEOs, and its only classist IQ tests that show otherwise?)

    “So the claim of intellectual equality between the races is literally unfalsifiable.”

    Of course!

    Not just because it is a vodoo taboo you’ll be hounded out of your job and possibly your home for doubting, but also because every single test of brainpower has the same Jew-NEAsian-White-Mestizo-Mulatto-Arab-Black-Relic Race ordering. No exceptions. Ever.

    Such is the shit sandwich of the left’s racial egalitarianism: backward digit recall and eye to finger reaction time tests are culturally biased! You better believe it, your job depends on it. And we might send a violent mob after you if for some reason like academic tenure or self-employment means we can’t get you fired.

    Read More
    • Replies: @DFH
    Something I forgot to mention, the white/black gaps are actually smaller on the more 'culturally biased' parts like vocabulary, information and arithmetic

    http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/cultural-bias-on-iq-tests/
    , @Anonymous

    the same Jew-NEAsian-White-Mestizo-Mulatto-Arab-Black-Relic Race ordering
     
    More accurately the same Ashkenazi-NEAsian......... Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews test out closer to white averages.


    That said there are numerically a lot more incredibly smart Whites than people of all other races combined because of the width of the white bell curve. Also we have a lot of doofuses as well.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. A black American whose cognitive abilities measure at IQ 75 not only is not retarded but also remains indistinguishable from the crowd. A Caucasian whose cognitive abilities measure at IQ 75 is not only retarded, he displays obvious physical and behavioral signs of his limitations. Restricted cognitive ability and retardation are not really the same thing. Anyone on the Supreme Court as well as those possessing an IQ of 140 who cannot understand this simple concept probably should be executed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. Seems to be an all-round SJW — he retweets ‘radical fundamentalist’ SJW stuff like this:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. “As a concept, IQ is terrible.” You could say the same thing about Quantum Mechanics. The question is “does it work?”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dr kill
    Solid burn.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @Intelligent Dasein

    As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.
     
    Perhaps the argument over the meaning of the intelligence quotient has become altogether too involved. One does not need to be a rock solid believer in the scientific veracity of IQ in order to see that the inability to score above 70 on what is essentially just a puzzle test is indicative of poor mental faculties.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    “recompense”

    I wasn’t aware that murdering a murderer brings their victim[s] back to life. Can you cite examples of this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    Affect compensation (for the victim's family) is one of the purposes of punishment. For this end it does not really matter if the murderer was mentally stunted, or if he even had a mind at all. Ever banged a computer monitor or kicked a car you've just busted a knuckle on while fixing? Same thing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @Intelligent Dasein

    As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.
     
    Perhaps the argument over the meaning of the intelligence quotient has become altogether too involved. One does not need to be a rock solid believer in the scientific veracity of IQ in order to see that the inability to score above 70 on what is essentially just a puzzle test is indicative of poor mental faculties.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    “There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.”

    Also, if the mental state of not being “aware of the moral gravity of their crimes” was a reason not to execute a convicted murderer, you would have to exempt (relatively) high IQ psychopaths like Ted Bundy since psycho-sociopathic killers like Bundy operate without any moral faculties. The sickening depravity of the people (smart or stupid) who end up on death row makes the factor of intelligence complete irrelevant in determining their fate.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @LemmusLemmus
    'Not only do people have worth beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.”'

    That's a beautiful example of the version of postmodern reasoning that is currently fashionable in Northern American universities and that Jordan Peterson likes to rail against: Power games is all there is. Hence, if African Americans do worse on a test, this is evidence that the test is biased, indeed, that it was designed to be biased.

    By implication, measurements of height demonstrate that folding rules are biased against children.

    In some parts of the multiverse, the racial IQ bias is different!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @Lot
    "IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males,"

    And even higher numbers to NE Asians and Hindus than whites.

    A side benefit I see to high IQ asian immigration is a reduction in white guilt. A visible minority with higher incomes and educational attainment and fewer problems with the police that whites raises the issue of why our problem minorities can't do the same.

    iSteve is not exactly a hotbed of white guilt, but it is a real thing IRL. Seeing non-whites work hard and succeed in America like white Americans largely do is so powerfully attractive to the masses because it works to relieve the guilt, showing America is place where merit and hard work sre rewarded more than physical appearance. It isn't just a white liberal thing either. Alan West, Alan Keyes, Herman Cain, and Mia Love, and Ben Carson all succeeded on the right far above their individual merits because the white guilt emotional cluster very well exists on the right too.

    Likewise, the happy co-existence of Jewish and Buddhist Americans gives the white Christian majority the emotional defense they need to crack down on Islam. "See, we get along great with our Mormon, Jain, Buddhist, etc groups, the problem isn't with us being intolerant, it is with Islam being barbaric and incompatible with American values."

    Your omission of Tim Scott on that list suggests that your thoughts on IQ should be taken with extra salt.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @SnakeEyes
    This is an unanticipated boomerang in the face to all those who have argued that IQ tests are racially biased.

    However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    yeah a real dick move to want to execute vicious animals who do heinous things get back to us when it happens to your family

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @Lot
    "So the claim of intellectual equality between the races is literally unfalsifiable."

    Of course!

    Not just because it is a vodoo taboo you'll be hounded out of your job and possibly your home for doubting, but also because every single test of brainpower has the same Jew-NEAsian-White-Mestizo-Mulatto-Arab-Black-Relic Race ordering. No exceptions. Ever.

    Such is the shit sandwich of the left's racial egalitarianism: backward digit recall and eye to finger reaction time tests are culturally biased! You better believe it, your job depends on it. And we might send a violent mob after you if for some reason like academic tenure or self-employment means we can't get you fired.

    Something I forgot to mention, the white/black gaps are actually smaller on the more ‘culturally biased’ parts like vocabulary, information and arithmetic

    http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/cultural-bias-on-iq-tests/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @guest
    "IQ also routinely awards" --IQ awards? What does that even mean?--"higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males..."

    Isn't part of being "abled" being of superior intelligence? Nevermind.

    Are we supposed to believe IQ is a bad thing *because* it benefits white male non-invalids of a certain class? Usually articles like this go to the trouble of establishing or at least implying white male non-invalid middle-class and above (what, you couldn't throw in religious or sexual status?) IQ privilege is unearned. Or are we at a point in our culture where we can zoom past that argument, and start with "favors whites, therefore bad?"

    I won't bother mentioning the fact that IQ tests privilege Asians and Jews the most. Placing white males in the middle of the hierarchy, even, is too high.

    "reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of 'science.'"

    Okay, you don't think IQ is scientific. But you didn't even establish that we're talking about invalid (yeah, I'm using that term again) ideologies. Are ideologies wrong as such? I don't know what "pre-existing" means in this context. Of course it would be difficult to reinforce ideologies that don't yet exist.

    Is "pre-existing" supposed to mean old-fashioned? Is it supposed to have something to do with prejudice? I dunno. Is it ironic that an article discounting intelligence's measurability is so stupidly written?

    are we at a point in our culture where we can zoom past that argument, and start with “favors whites, therefore bad?”

    Yes.

    Indeed, we are well beyond this point.

    The current point is Early Stage Genocide.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. So, prosecutors are “dumbing up” IQ tests to fry or give black perps the needle? Wow, that might just be racist. Nature/Nuture and what not.

    Having tagged black offenders, I would be happy to release them back into the wild; someplace like Congo or Sierra Leone, and let them fend for themselves in the lands that might have influenced and seem to be more amenable to their predispositions toward law and order in a civilised society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  23. That UPI article was pretty bad, as journalism. Really tendentious, and the sourcing was pretty flakey. There were some direct quotes, but then also a lot of “manay experts think”-style laundering of the writer’s own opinions.

    Steve’s much better suited for blogging.

    On the other hand, the New York Times would hire him if his opinions were different.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. Blacks are a magical species of humanity to which opposite and mutually contradictory propositions always and everywhere simultaneously apply. Consider these propositions that would put the producers of the Twilight Zone to shame:

    1. Blacks have a right to live in neighbourhoods in which they constitute a supermajority of the population but there children have a right to attend neighbourhood schools in which at least half of their classmates are white.

    2. The process that creates black supermajority neighbourhoods (namely, white flight) is racist because it reveals a white preference not to live in the vicinity of blacks. However, gentrification (i.e. the opposite of white flight) is also racist because it denies blacks their God-given right to live in neighbourhoods that are supermajority black.

    3. Blacks kids are just as smart as white kids and the only reason for their lack of admissions to Ivy League colleges etc. is because of racist teachers and college admissions officers. However, if black children do not sit in classrooms with at least 50% white children, they won’t breathe in the magic pixie dust that white children emit when they exhale, the inhalation of which allows black children to achieve the same as white children.

    4. Affirmative action is good and its abolition would be a disaster but it simultaneously does not exist and thus cannot explain any particular example of black success. For example, in 2008, you were told it would be a great idea to vote for Obama because it would be great to have a black president. By 2009 (when he actually was president), it was racist to suggest that Mr. Obama’s race had anything to do with his election to the presidency – even though the same people were citing his race as a reason to vote for him a year previously.

    5. When whites wouldn’t listen to black music and Michael Jackson and Run DMC were valorised as pioneers for getting onto MTV, they were racist. However, when they started rapping (the Beastie Boys), twerking (Miley Cyrus) or frizzing up their hair (Rachel Dolezal), that was “cultural appropriation and therefore also racist.

    6. When blacks go to jail at higher rates than whites, this is because of systemic anti-black racism in the criminal justice system which delights in jailing and executing blacks. However, when whites get longer sentences for equivalent offences (i.e. correcting for the number of crimes), this is somehow proof of racism against black victims (who are killed by black perps) in contrast to white victims (who are killed by white perps).

    It’s all part of a fantastic “heads I win-tales you lose” dynamic. And now we’re seeing the latest chapter in the history of contradictory propositions:

    IQ testing is racist because blacks don’t do as well in it as whites. Simultaneously, however, when prosecutors agree that IQ testing is racist against blacks and try to argue that blacks are smarter than their white IQ counterparts, that’s racist as well because it eliminates the statistical advantage (or privilege, if you will) that blacks have in avoiding execution.*

    Of course, what’s most significant about this is not blacks themselves but what their example does for other non-white (but non-black) ethnic groups. As Steve constantly points out, while Asians etc. won’t join a black coalition (anyone fancy being painted white like George Zimmerman), they’ll happily (and, quite frankly, sensibly) join an anti-white coalition, which allows them to hog some of the privileges that blacks are trying to monopolise while claiming to be standing shoulder to shoulder with them – e.g. look at the number of NYT and Atlantic anti-white hate screeds written by people with names like Hong and Kang (whose cousins back home in China were still using a toothpaste known as “Darkie” as recently as 1985)**.

    * I don’t rule out that the prosecutors may be onto something in that while there is no evidence that IQ testing fails to objectively discern black-white gaps, it may well have different manifestations in terms of social dysfunction. For example, the late Arthur Jensen became interested in the subject because of teachers telling him that black children with 70 IQs were much more socially normal than their white counterparts. As such, perhaps low IQ blacks are better socialised than low IQ whites and are thus capable of higher degrees of moral responsibility. Health warning: the foregoing is pure speculation.

    ** Darkie brand toothpaste was changed to “Darlie” in 1985 but the Chinese translation “Black Person Toothpaste” remains the same as it’s been since 1933, which demonstrates how superficially Asians observe PC mores.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal

    ** Darkie brand toothpaste was changed to “Darlie” in 1985 but the Chinese translation “Black Person Toothpaste” remains the same as it’s been since 1933, which demonstrates how superficially Asians observe PC mores.
     
    I lived in Taiwan in the early 1980s, and I remember Darkie Toothpaste very well. I believe it was a Hong Kong brand, since brands from the PRC were illegal to import to Taiwan.

    We Americans used to make fun of some of their brands, such as Long Life Cigarettes, and KKK matches.

    No, seriously, they had KKK matches, and nobody, I mean NOBODY associated it with the Ku Klux Klan. The reason? The Chinese used "3K" for the Klan, so seeing "KKK" simply didn't register. It would be like seeing "MMM" and not associating it with the "3M" company.

    The character on the toothpaste was a very black man with very white teeth, the idea being if you used his toothpaste your teeth could be that white. I believe when they changed the name to Darlie they kept the mascot.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. This author seems kinda confused. If you think a low IQ score doesn’t really measure someone’s true intelligence, then presumably you wouldn’t want it used at all as a bar against being held morally responsible for your crimes. Otherwise he’s just saying he wants IQ used as a shield against black murderers being executed when he really believes low-IQ blacks understand perfectly well what they are doing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. @guest
    "IQ also routinely awards" --IQ awards? What does that even mean?--"higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males..."

    Isn't part of being "abled" being of superior intelligence? Nevermind.

    Are we supposed to believe IQ is a bad thing *because* it benefits white male non-invalids of a certain class? Usually articles like this go to the trouble of establishing or at least implying white male non-invalid middle-class and above (what, you couldn't throw in religious or sexual status?) IQ privilege is unearned. Or are we at a point in our culture where we can zoom past that argument, and start with "favors whites, therefore bad?"

    I won't bother mentioning the fact that IQ tests privilege Asians and Jews the most. Placing white males in the middle of the hierarchy, even, is too high.

    "reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of 'science.'"

    Okay, you don't think IQ is scientific. But you didn't even establish that we're talking about invalid (yeah, I'm using that term again) ideologies. Are ideologies wrong as such? I don't know what "pre-existing" means in this context. Of course it would be difficult to reinforce ideologies that don't yet exist.

    Is "pre-existing" supposed to mean old-fashioned? Is it supposed to have something to do with prejudice? I dunno. Is it ironic that an article discounting intelligence's measurability is so stupidly written?

    The execution-exempt author is suggesting the entire intelligence literature is built on research fatally tainted by confirmation bias.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    What's so difficult about just saying that?

    I mean, if your IQ is above 70.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @Intelligent Dasein

    As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.
     
    Perhaps the argument over the meaning of the intelligence quotient has become altogether too involved. One does not need to be a rock solid believer in the scientific veracity of IQ in order to see that the inability to score above 70 on what is essentially just a puzzle test is indicative of poor mental faculties.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    Demonstrating mens rea is, in Anglo Saxon law, central to establishing criminal responsibility.

    Does someone with an IQ of less than 70 have the wherewithal for mens rea?

    I really don’t know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
    Some crimes are strict liability, which means that mens rea is not an element.
    , @HEL

    Does someone with an IQ of less than 70 have the wherewithal for mens rea?

    I really don’t know.
     
    Don't be daft, of course the overwhelming majority of low-IQ individuals who actually commit serious crimes readily fulfill the mens rea requirements. Mens rea doesn't refer to something philosophical or an esoteric understanding of greater moral issues, it merely refers to the intent to commit the crime. When a man with an IQ of 70 rapes a woman and then slashes her throat he most certainly intended to rape and murder her. That's sufficient for mens rea. The obviousness of this conclusion is why judges and lawyers had to come up with some arbitrary IQ baseline, rather than actually arguing that the defendant doesn't fulfill the mens rea requirement. They'd be hopeless actually arguing it on a case by case basis.

    Perhaps you are referring to insanity defenses, rather than mens rea more generally. There are a variety of insanity tests, and some of them could perhaps be used to absolve the exceptionally stupid. Insanity defense isn't some grand tradition of Anglo-Saxon law though, it is mostly just an arbitrary exception that is only utilized incredibly rarely. That's a TV cliche much more than a legal reality. And I tend to doubt they would work with any regularity even if insanity defenses were commonly central to such cases. The cliched test is, of course, whether or not the defendant knew that the act was wrong. (I dunno whether or not this is really the most common test though, obviously it varies.) Not exactly a demanding standard, very small children seem more than capable of grasping such basic moral principles. Only the really severely retarded would have any chance of winning on such grounds. And if the killer made any attempt whatsoever to hide the crime or evade detection they'd have no defense.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2014/05/cyberbll.html

    Pacific Standard. Get it? It’s like The Atlantic, but it’s Pacific. Totally different. So unlike The Atlantic, it will “attack the conventional wisdom from a west coast perspective.” That’s a quote. “But didn’t the editors come from The Atlantic?” Yes. “So what’s the diff? Does west coast imply the writers will be better looking?” The women will be, unless they write about gender issues, then they will appear gendered. The men will look wise if they’re crushing on social science, or tough and no-nonsense if they’re hating on Republicans. Don’t worry, pics of the writers will be included to suggest an appeal to authority. “Hold on, is the owner of this magazine Sara Miller McCune? The same woman who is responsible for those atrocious SAGE journals like Psychological Science and Evolutionary Perspectives On Human Development that charge CV padding post-docs a few hundred dollars to publish linkbait like “Ovulating Women Prefer Men With Large Sneakers”, that Malcolm Gladwell and media outlets like Pacific Standard then cross promote as valid science?” Yes, but I’m sure it’s a coincidence. “This magazine sounds terrible.” Duh.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. “diminished moral capability”

    I’ve been using a term coined by novelist James Lee Burke: “morally retarded” to describe the low moral state of certain classes, especially the political class. It’s a convenient shorthand term that I find descriptive.

    I think that morals are usually instilled before adulthood by parents and other adults, but adherence to any moral code is voluntary, and also that morality is based in consideration of others. Self absorbed people don’t bother with consideration of others.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @SnakeEyes
    This is an unanticipated boomerang in the face to all those who have argued that IQ tests are racially biased.

    However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    “this is a bit of a dick move by the prosecutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.”

    Agreed that it is a dick move, Mr. Eyes, but criminal prosecution/defense is a dick business. Context is everything…if I was prosecuting a Tookie Williams , a Jeffrey Dahmer, or equivalent, I would have no hesitation using whatever (legal) arguments I could to get that guy planted.

    Also, there is a kind of fun irony to the argument that I.Q. tests are invalid, at least in this context. You know, the petard and all that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @Intelligent Dasein

    As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.
     
    Perhaps the argument over the meaning of the intelligence quotient has become altogether too involved. One does not need to be a rock solid believer in the scientific veracity of IQ in order to see that the inability to score above 70 on what is essentially just a puzzle test is indicative of poor mental faculties.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    Exactly. Well said ID.

    Same with psychotics. It’s not the job of the courts to sit in God like judgment and determine if the murderer has some sort of innocent soul, unfortunately burdened with a really stupid or psychotic brain. The courts aren’t sentencing their soul, but their actual biological being on this material planet with their nasty murdering brain.

    Kill them all and let God sort them out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Kill them all and let God sort them out.

    Yeah!

    I say we revive the practice of putting animals on trial that harm people.

    , @Charles Erwin Wilson II
    Agree.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. I get it now. IQ is a bona fide occupational qualification for murderers. Griggs v. Duke Power is upheld.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. @Hippopotamusdrome
    Another David M. Perry about the "War on Hanukkah":

    The GOP Theocracy: Xmas vs Hanukkah Statements.
    ...
    The RNC puts out messages on holidays. Here’s the text for Hanukkah:
    ...
    And here’s part of that they say for Christmas:
    ...
    1. Notice the “As our Jewish friends” vs “We.”
    2. Notice the simple statement of theological belief as fact for the Christian statement.
    ...
    We should realize, once more, that the GOP believes only Christians are real Americans

     

    We should realize, once more, that the GOP believes only Christians are real Americans

    Maybe that’s because Christians aren’t automatically guaranteed the right to become citizens of a foreign nation, unlike every single Jew in the world?

    Or because the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. is a “Christian nation” in 1892?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. @Intelligent Dasein

    As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.
     
    Perhaps the argument over the meaning of the intelligence quotient has become altogether too involved. One does not need to be a rock solid believer in the scientific veracity of IQ in order to see that the inability to score above 70 on what is essentially just a puzzle test is indicative of poor mental faculties.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    This comment by Intelligent Dasein contains two valid and not obvious points.

    The first is that IQ tests were originally developed to see if people were retarded. They are by design most valuable in measuring if someone is retarded, and much less reliable to see if someone is a genius.

    The second is that the strongest, and really the only strong argument for the death penalty (I happen to be an opponent) is as a preventive measure. Some people are incapable of functioning without attacking other people because they are too stupid to understand right and wrong, are psycopaths, or whatever. Until medicine can get to the point where whatever is wrong with their brains is repairable, there is nothing that can be done about them but to eliminate them. Not only should having an IQ under 70 not be a bar to execution, we should be executing only people with IQs under 70!

    Read More
    • Replies: @roo_ster
    Vengance is as strong a reason as prevention of future harm done by the executed. When govt refuses to take vengeance on those who grievously harm its citizens, govt undermines its own legitimacy and re-opens to door to blood feud. We give up our right to blood feud only because we have some assurance that govt will meet out vengeance on our behalf.
    , @DFH

    The first is that IQ tests were originally developed to see if people were retarded. They are by design most valuable in measuring if someone is retarded, and much less reliable to see if someone is a genius.
     
    They are the best indicator of g that we have. That's why they are used by intelligence researchers. They correlate better with life outcomes than any other indicator.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    really the only strong argument for the death penalty (I happen to be an opponent) is as a preventive measure.
     
    Only if you don't care about justice.
    , @europeasant
    "Some people are incapable of functioning without attacking other people because they are too stupid to understand right and wrong, are psycopaths, or whatever"

    Yet people are not tested for IQ when voting for politicians. Does anyone believe that people with IQ below 80 can understand complicated ideas? Of course we can dumb down everything we read to an IQ of about 80.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. It all seems a bit immaterial. People have to do and say things all the time in the course of their work that they don’t really believe in.

    If your job is to defend murderers and get them the lightest possible sentence, you are going to think of any kind of argument you can to save them from execution, and if you earn your crust as a prosecutor you want to find any plausible-sounding argument you can to send them to the gallows.

    IQ test scores can be manipulated in certain ways, for example by deliberately acting dumb, but at least their end product is a two or three figure number that can be compared to the scores of other people. Blacks with low scores and convictions for murder should be compared with other black murderers to determine whether they can be executed per Supreme Court rules.

    The problem is that the Supreme Court has said they should not be killed if they are of abnormally low intelligence, but has not stated that they should not be imprisoned for the same reason, which, like many Supreme Court rulings, makes no sense.

    Personally I don’t see why persons of abnormally low intelligence should not be executed, because killing people is by definition a stupid thing to do, but we are not going to legalize it because the law penalizes the stupid or the pate-addled.

    But then I am in no danger of being appointed to the Supreme Court.

    Of course this problem only exists in certain states, because other states have abolished the death penalty, which fact seems to be poorly understood even by judges. Just recently in the case of the gymnastics pedophile Larry Nassar, the judge stated in court that she had just signed his death sentence, which was bollocks, as he was being sentenced to prison, not death. Possibly she meant that in her opinion he was certain to die in prison, but either way she was confused.

    Read More
    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    "because killing people is by definition a stupid thing to do"

    Is it?

    It's certainly wicked, but it may not be stupid. If you think a rival gangster is going to hurt your family, you might find it perfectly wise to hunt him down and get him first. Pre-meditated murder all the way, but you'll do it carefully so that you won't get caught.

    See, these are the murderers I want executed promptly so that the other guys in the gang can see the consequences and adjust their behavior.

    I'd also be okay with re-erecting the mental institutions for the criminally insane or stupid (said people currently being housed in standard prisons) but 50 years of liberals stands in the way.
    , @Mr. Anon

    Personally I don’t see why persons of abnormally low intelligence should not be executed, because killing people is by definition a stupid thing to do, but we are not going to legalize it because the law penalizes the stupid or the pate-addled.
     
    From a purely cost-benefit point-of-view, a lot of crime is a stupid thing to do. And the mean IQ of prison populations is, I believe, lower than that of the population at large. Convicts, as a group, are not known for making especially good decisions. As you say - should we just stop punishing people because the people we punish often aren't very bright?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @DFH

    Not only do people have worth beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.”
     
    So, according to Mr. Perry, if a test shows a racial difference, this is evidence that the test is racist. So the claim of intellectual equality between the races is literally unfalsifiable.

    (The class one seems to be going even further into madness though. Does Perry really believe that the children of rubbish collectors are on average as intelligent as those of CEOs, and its only classist IQ tests that show otherwise?)

    So called rubbish collection in the UK ___ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4969542/Rubbish-collector-shocked-man-hiding-wheelie-bin.html

    In the USA we don’t have any rubbish collectors but we do have garbage men. Matter of fact in some large cities they can make a mint. In NYC they make $70,000 w bulletproof pensions and bennies. $70,000 in 2009 (internet) so making more now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Seventy grand per annum probably ought to be minimum wage in Manhattan, at today's real estate prices there.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Now, prosecutors in at least eight states have been hiring experts to testify about the racist nature of IQ, in order to kill more black and brown men.

    Ain’t no fun when the rabbitt got the gun.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  38. For the first time ever I’m sympathetic to IQ deniers. Anything that kills more stupid (or intelligent, for that matter) murderers is good.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    In the Sound and the Fury, Dilsey is being terrorized by her black boyfriend, but she has to go back to her dwelling. Resigned to her fait she utters, ‘I am just a n*****’. As one who has little patience for today’s blacks that struck me as very moving/sad. Can you imagine trying to make it in this world with such limited intellectual firepower? It seems as though racial hostility is irresolvable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. @SnakeEyes
    This is an unanticipated boomerang in the face to all those who have argued that IQ tests are racially biased.

    However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    Dick move maybe, but highly eugenic and eucivic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. The racial question aside, not executing murderers below a certain IQ is bad eugenics.

    Just sayin’ ;)

    Read More
    • Replies: @DFH
    You might find this video interesting, it's speculation about the eugentic effect that execution had on Europe

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P78Zd8265_k&t=13s
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Intelligent Dasein

    As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.
     
    Perhaps the argument over the meaning of the intelligence quotient has become altogether too involved. One does not need to be a rock solid believer in the scientific veracity of IQ in order to see that the inability to score above 70 on what is essentially just a puzzle test is indicative of poor mental faculties.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    I was never comvinced of the logic of sparing the stupidly evil and insanely evil.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @LemmusLemmus
    'Not only do people have worth beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.”'

    That's a beautiful example of the version of postmodern reasoning that is currently fashionable in Northern American universities and that Jordan Peterson likes to rail against: Power games is all there is. Hence, if African Americans do worse on a test, this is evidence that the test is biased, indeed, that it was designed to be biased.

    By implication, measurements of height demonstrate that folding rules are biased against children.

    LemmusLemmus writes, “By implication, measurements of height demonstrate that folding rules are biased against children.”

    Pardon my low IQ, L.L., but what does this mean? I have never encountered folding rules. Folding of what? Height of what? Please explain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Mark, Luftkin Tools made a wooden folding rule, as in a foldable measuring stick, usually six foot long when unfolded. Great tool, pre retractable steel tapes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @eD
    This comment by Intelligent Dasein contains two valid and not obvious points.

    The first is that IQ tests were originally developed to see if people were retarded. They are by design most valuable in measuring if someone is retarded, and much less reliable to see if someone is a genius.

    The second is that the strongest, and really the only strong argument for the death penalty (I happen to be an opponent) is as a preventive measure. Some people are incapable of functioning without attacking other people because they are too stupid to understand right and wrong, are psycopaths, or whatever. Until medicine can get to the point where whatever is wrong with their brains is repairable, there is nothing that can be done about them but to eliminate them. Not only should having an IQ under 70 not be a bar to execution, we should be executing only people with IQs under 70!

    Vengance is as strong a reason as prevention of future harm done by the executed. When govt refuses to take vengeance on those who grievously harm its citizens, govt undermines its own legitimacy and re-opens to door to blood feud. We give up our right to blood feud only because we have some assurance that govt will meet out vengeance on our behalf.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    "Compassion towards the wicked is cruelty to all beings."

    ---Maimonides
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. The courts use IQ in parenting rights cases too. In cases of child abuse and child neglect, child protective services agencies take the children and place them in foster care. State lawyers then routinely get IQ tests (as part of psychological testing), and use “cognitive deficits,” which everyone agrees cannot be remediated, as one of the reasons justifying terminating the parent’s rights to their children. No one ever calls the science into question, ever.

    Read More
    • Replies: @larry lurker
    Is this really widespread, applied to black and white parents alike? Because of course you'd expect it to result in massive disparate impact, which people would notice.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @SnakeEyes
    This is an unanticipated boomerang in the face to all those who have argued that IQ tests are racially biased.

    However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    No more bloodthirsty than the murderers on trial.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Trending words at the Online Etymology Dictionary:

    Trending Words

    1. authority
    2. black
    3. man
    4. cuckold
    5. human
    6. architect
    7. spirit
    8. quarry
    9. sabbath
    10. magic

    Someone else will have to ask them if the order given is significant, as I lack the time. This #3, concerned for his #5 #7, will follow #1 by keeping #9, then heading off to the #8 to earn the rent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. @eD
    This comment by Intelligent Dasein contains two valid and not obvious points.

    The first is that IQ tests were originally developed to see if people were retarded. They are by design most valuable in measuring if someone is retarded, and much less reliable to see if someone is a genius.

    The second is that the strongest, and really the only strong argument for the death penalty (I happen to be an opponent) is as a preventive measure. Some people are incapable of functioning without attacking other people because they are too stupid to understand right and wrong, are psycopaths, or whatever. Until medicine can get to the point where whatever is wrong with their brains is repairable, there is nothing that can be done about them but to eliminate them. Not only should having an IQ under 70 not be a bar to execution, we should be executing only people with IQs under 70!

    The first is that IQ tests were originally developed to see if people were retarded. They are by design most valuable in measuring if someone is retarded, and much less reliable to see if someone is a genius.

    They are the best indicator of g that we have. That’s why they are used by intelligence researchers. They correlate better with life outcomes than any other indicator.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Why should low IQ exempt someone from the death penalty? Even the basest simpleton knows that murder is wrong. Stupidity is no excuse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill B.

    Why should low IQ exempt someone from the death penalty? Even the basest simpleton knows that murder is wrong. Stupidity is no excuse.
     
    I am inclined to agree with you.

    A low IQ murderer might calculate wrongly that he can get away with murder or misunderstand the source of his problems/anger. But being, say, hot-tempered or impulsive or possessing a sour personality or being greedy are not contained by IQ. They are something else.

    This reminds me of the European judges who argue that an alien immigrant who, say, rapes a boy should not be harshly punished because he didn't understand the cultural nuances. Rubbish - no cultural knowledge is necessary to know it was wrong.

    Similarly even the dullest among us surely knows that murder is wrong and evil or would they not do it all the time?

    (What happens in African countries where the mean IQ is below 70 I wonder?)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @Seamus Padraig
    Doublethink.

    Heads I win, tails you lose.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @Jonathan Mason
    It all seems a bit immaterial. People have to do and say things all the time in the course of their work that they don't really believe in.

    If your job is to defend murderers and get them the lightest possible sentence, you are going to think of any kind of argument you can to save them from execution, and if you earn your crust as a prosecutor you want to find any plausible-sounding argument you can to send them to the gallows.

    IQ test scores can be manipulated in certain ways, for example by deliberately acting dumb, but at least their end product is a two or three figure number that can be compared to the scores of other people. Blacks with low scores and convictions for murder should be compared with other black murderers to determine whether they can be executed per Supreme Court rules.

    The problem is that the Supreme Court has said they should not be killed if they are of abnormally low intelligence, but has not stated that they should not be imprisoned for the same reason, which, like many Supreme Court rulings, makes no sense.

    Personally I don't see why persons of abnormally low intelligence should not be executed, because killing people is by definition a stupid thing to do, but we are not going to legalize it because the law penalizes the stupid or the pate-addled.

    But then I am in no danger of being appointed to the Supreme Court.

    Of course this problem only exists in certain states, because other states have abolished the death penalty, which fact seems to be poorly understood even by judges. Just recently in the case of the gymnastics pedophile Larry Nassar, the judge stated in court that she had just signed his death sentence, which was bollocks, as he was being sentenced to prison, not death. Possibly she meant that in her opinion he was certain to die in prison, but either way she was confused.

    “because killing people is by definition a stupid thing to do”

    Is it?

    It’s certainly wicked, but it may not be stupid. If you think a rival gangster is going to hurt your family, you might find it perfectly wise to hunt him down and get him first. Pre-meditated murder all the way, but you’ll do it carefully so that you won’t get caught.

    See, these are the murderers I want executed promptly so that the other guys in the gang can see the consequences and adjust their behavior.

    I’d also be okay with re-erecting the mental institutions for the criminally insane or stupid (said people currently being housed in standard prisons) but 50 years of liberals stands in the way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.
     
    Perhaps the argument over the meaning of the intelligence quotient has become altogether too involved. One does not need to be a rock solid believer in the scientific veracity of IQ in order to see that the inability to score above 70 on what is essentially just a puzzle test is indicative of poor mental faculties.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    It doesn’t seem to occur to anybody that lawyers for these defendants may be coaching their clients to deliberately score low when they’re being judged for mental competence. In other words, score so badly that your neck will be saved. Of course this is happening. Any good lawyer would think of it, and any liberal lawyer would feel obligated to pull off this kind of fraud.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. How many of those sub-70 IQ scores just reflect the test subject (testee?) not giving a crap? And especially when the testee is a criminal, thus someone already low on cooperation and agreeableness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  54. @SnakeEyes
    This is an unanticipated boomerang in the face to all those who have argued that IQ tests are racially biased.

    However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    Or it just might be that the prosecutors aren’t suckers. They know that the people who are being spared the death penalty by this rule are vicious, monstrous creatures, whereas the death penalty opponents want us to believe such killers are Lennie Small, just simple-minded giants who don’t know their own strength.

    Obviously they never quite come out and say this, but the terminology used naturally evokes this image. The notion that someone is retarded, or some euphemism for this term, now has strong connotations suggesting that person has some sort of developmental disorder. Surely most everyone nowadays went to school with at least one retarded individual who was futilely mainstreamed into regular class rooms. This is who we are intended envision in the debate over executing those with low intelligence, but these are not the people committing the murders. Not in any substantial numbers, anyway.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. There is actually a rather subtle but important point here. Jensen long ago observed (and had observed to him) that blacks with IQs below 70 often seemed otherwise quite normal in all other respects — they were quite talkative and sociable, for example, and it really required an IQ test or some equivalent set of cognitive problems to reveal what otherwise might not have been at all obvious, namely, that they just couldn’t perform what seemed to others like very simple tasks requiring understanding.

    Whites with IQs below 70, on the other hand, almost always seemed far more generally deficient and abnormal, often literally slow, and physically different.

    Jensen’s general thought was that it typically required some kind of genetic defect or defect in physiological development to induce an IQ below 70 in whites, but that in blacks, it was just the lower end of a normal curve.

    I’m not sure what consequences this would imply for how to handle the two different cases in terms of punishment. But at first blush one would think that blacks who are of below 70 IQ and who are otherwise normal should be expected to live up to society’s laws more so than whites who seem to suffer from some generalized genetic or physiological defect.

    Read More
    • Agree: Triumph104
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    To follow up the point, it seems that some peoples in Africa -- pygmies for example -- may well have an average IQ close to 70. Yet of course the vast majority of them are perfectly normal in their general development and ability to abide by the norms of social behavior, at least as that gets defined within their tribe.

    Are we to say that close to half their population shouldn't be held accountable for murders if they commit them?
    , @jim jones
    My experience is that stupid people talk in cliches and therefore seem quite normal in everyday life
    , @Paleo Liberal
    One interesting thing:

    We are not 100% sure WHAT the IQ test measures. What we DO know is there is a strong positive correlation between what the IQ test measures and types of intelligence necessary to thrive in European and American cultures.

    There is a school of thought that there are certain OTHER types of intelligence, which are NOT measured by an IQ test. For example, Jung seemed to think that many academics had much poorer emotional skills than did average working-class people. I think Jung came to some incorrect conclusions, so I won't go into more detail.

    Let's assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa, and some other tribal cultures. These may include the sort of emotional intelligence necessary to deal with maybe 200 other people in a village, the ability to tell stories and sing and dance (which makes people more attractive to those of the opposite sex. This is especially necessary for men). This may include what some people call physical intelligence -- the ability to read a situation quickly and apply whatever physical skills are needed.

    Consider the possibility that in both African and European societies, there is a positive correlation between different types of intelligence, but NOT a 1-1 relationship. Therefore, an African with a low IQ may have the same level of emotional intelligence as a European with a considerably higher IQ. Or the African may be a more creative musician, etc.

    A famous example of this would be Mohammed Ali. Remember, the Army originally rejected Ali due to his extremely low IQ. When they wanted to induct him, Ali had not gotten smarter. The Army was taking dumber people.

    However, Ali had quite a few skills that absolutely required types of intelligence NOT measured by IQ tests. He had a great emotional intelligence. He was quite creative. As far as physical intelligence, the guy was way off the charts. He also had a great deal of discipline and determination. Consider the Rumble in the Jungle against Foreman. Ali used his great people skills and creativity to get the Africans and the Media on his side. Then he used his incredible physical intelligence, combined with an almost superhuman discipline, to follow the rope-a-dope strategy and win the match.

    OK, so Ali was a bit of an outlier. He was below average for African Americans on the IQ test, but off the charts on other types of intelligence.

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.



    NOTE: I am not pushing this view. I am merely stating what the consequences of the hypothesis that there are many types of intelligence would be. And, one of the consequences is that African peoples have intelligence of sorts not measured by IQ tests. Whether these sorts of intelligence are valuable in European or Asian societies is a different question.
    , @TelfoedJohn
    An 70-85 IQ black could possibly be more useful to society than an 70-85 IQ white, because in other traits he may be more normal. Imagine you had to populate a spaceship to a nearby star, and you were forced to have 20% 80 IQ people. Would you rather have the 80 IQ whites who probably have physical and social impairments, or the blacks who were otherwise normal?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. The validity and reliability of psychometric tests is a pretty esoteric subject and it’s a reasonable wager that even psychologists who do not specialize in tests-and-measurements are not well-versed in the subject. (The three psychologists in my family likely know something about the instruments they use at work, which do not include IQ tests). It’s amusing that this guy, who scribbles for a living, is so vehement on the subject.

    Read More
    • LOL: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Charles Murray's twitter feed is a very good thing to follow because he mentions every interesting article or good joke he comes across, but you have to ignore him complaining rather religiously that Trump exists, and then you have a reliable portion where a total stranger yells at him, Murray asks, "have you read the book?" and the stranger barks "that has nothing to do with it."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. The attorney quoted in this post,Robert Sanger, can’t be related to the famous eugenicist, Margaret Sanger, because she would be please at the elimination of low IQ minorities.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  58. Put two thousand Blacks with IQs below 70 in Malibu, California. Do the same to Chappaqua, New York. Make sure the below 70 IQ Blacks are situated extremely close to the abodes of Rob Reiner and Hillary Clinton.

    Make Rob “Meathead” Reiner and Hillary Clinton live cheek by jowl with the Blacks that they say they love so much. Hypocrite baby boomer slobs like Reiner and Clinton want you to experience the joys of living in a town or city full of Blacks with IQs below 70. They wouldn’t put up with it in a million years.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  59. This reminds me that one essential criterion for admitting immigrants is the ability to know right from wrong. Usually, people are quite candid in their answers if you gave them scenarios and then asked them what they felt was permissible behavior. A battery of highly invasive psychological tests should be the minimum for admission into the country.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  60. All vicious dogs are below IQ 70. By the reasoning of the cabal that thinks mentally disabled people shouldn’t be executed for their crimes, that means vicious dogs should never be put down. In fact, the argument that they don’t understand the moral implications of their crimes is stronger than in borderline humans.

    But we put them down. Because they are dangerous.

    An IQ 60 violent murderer is a particularly dangerous creature. I’m more inclined to put him down than I am a more intelligent murderer who maybe had some articulable reason for the crime, and can then understand, perhaps, why he shouldn’t do it again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. @DFH

    Not only do people have worth beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.”
     
    So, according to Mr. Perry, if a test shows a racial difference, this is evidence that the test is racist. So the claim of intellectual equality between the races is literally unfalsifiable.

    (The class one seems to be going even further into madness though. Does Perry really believe that the children of rubbish collectors are on average as intelligent as those of CEOs, and its only classist IQ tests that show otherwise?)

    For at least 70 years psychometricians have been trying to produce an accurate IQ test that makes these average racial difference disappear. Fame and fortune await the researcher who succeeds, and they all know it.

    Yet nobody has discovered this Holy Grail, almost certainly because it doesn’t exist.

    The critics of IQ are forced to make an entirely unjustified assumption that all IQ researchers are fudging the data to make white (and Asian) folks look better.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @candid_observer
    There is actually a rather subtle but important point here. Jensen long ago observed (and had observed to him) that blacks with IQs below 70 often seemed otherwise quite normal in all other respects -- they were quite talkative and sociable, for example, and it really required an IQ test or some equivalent set of cognitive problems to reveal what otherwise might not have been at all obvious, namely, that they just couldn't perform what seemed to others like very simple tasks requiring understanding.

    Whites with IQs below 70, on the other hand, almost always seemed far more generally deficient and abnormal, often literally slow, and physically different.

    Jensen's general thought was that it typically required some kind of genetic defect or defect in physiological development to induce an IQ below 70 in whites, but that in blacks, it was just the lower end of a normal curve.

    I'm not sure what consequences this would imply for how to handle the two different cases in terms of punishment. But at first blush one would think that blacks who are of below 70 IQ and who are otherwise normal should be expected to live up to society's laws more so than whites who seem to suffer from some generalized genetic or physiological defect.

    To follow up the point, it seems that some peoples in Africa — pygmies for example — may well have an average IQ close to 70. Yet of course the vast majority of them are perfectly normal in their general development and ability to abide by the norms of social behavior, at least as that gets defined within their tribe.

    Are we to say that close to half their population shouldn’t be held accountable for murders if they commit them?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @AnotherDad

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.
     
    Exactly. Well said ID.

    Same with psychotics. It's not the job of the courts to sit in God like judgment and determine if the murderer has some sort of innocent soul, unfortunately burdened with a really stupid or psychotic brain. The courts aren't sentencing their soul, but their actual biological being on this material planet with their nasty murdering brain.

    Kill them all and let God sort them out.

    Kill them all and let God sort them out.

    Yeah!

    I say we revive the practice of putting animals on trial that harm people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @Intelligent Dasein

    As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.
     
    Perhaps the argument over the meaning of the intelligence quotient has become altogether too involved. One does not need to be a rock solid believer in the scientific veracity of IQ in order to see that the inability to score above 70 on what is essentially just a puzzle test is indicative of poor mental faculties.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes.

    Possibly, but it’s a pretty old principle. Goes at least as far back in common law as the M’Naghten rule in 1847.

    The idea is that we don’t execute people for crimes they are incapable of realizing are wrong. As others have noted, this Rule would also prohibit imprisoning them, if applied logically.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Punishment is a stupid concept -- punish me with anything, I declare myself to be a glorious martyr suffering on behalf of a cause, I am unpunished. The only thing we have a right to talk about is danger to the conmunity (which also removes all of the possible arrogance of being the punishers of another human being). A low-IQ violent felon with no impulse control is self-explanatorily a danger to the community.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @candid_observer
    There is actually a rather subtle but important point here. Jensen long ago observed (and had observed to him) that blacks with IQs below 70 often seemed otherwise quite normal in all other respects -- they were quite talkative and sociable, for example, and it really required an IQ test or some equivalent set of cognitive problems to reveal what otherwise might not have been at all obvious, namely, that they just couldn't perform what seemed to others like very simple tasks requiring understanding.

    Whites with IQs below 70, on the other hand, almost always seemed far more generally deficient and abnormal, often literally slow, and physically different.

    Jensen's general thought was that it typically required some kind of genetic defect or defect in physiological development to induce an IQ below 70 in whites, but that in blacks, it was just the lower end of a normal curve.

    I'm not sure what consequences this would imply for how to handle the two different cases in terms of punishment. But at first blush one would think that blacks who are of below 70 IQ and who are otherwise normal should be expected to live up to society's laws more so than whites who seem to suffer from some generalized genetic or physiological defect.

    My experience is that stupid people talk in cliches and therefore seem quite normal in everyday life

    Read More
    • Replies: @dr kill
    I properly address each Black person I pass by, an informal personal poll , their usual response is 'Alright'. I agree that use of cliches is a sign of stupidity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @eD
    This comment by Intelligent Dasein contains two valid and not obvious points.

    The first is that IQ tests were originally developed to see if people were retarded. They are by design most valuable in measuring if someone is retarded, and much less reliable to see if someone is a genius.

    The second is that the strongest, and really the only strong argument for the death penalty (I happen to be an opponent) is as a preventive measure. Some people are incapable of functioning without attacking other people because they are too stupid to understand right and wrong, are psycopaths, or whatever. Until medicine can get to the point where whatever is wrong with their brains is repairable, there is nothing that can be done about them but to eliminate them. Not only should having an IQ under 70 not be a bar to execution, we should be executing only people with IQs under 70!

    really the only strong argument for the death penalty (I happen to be an opponent) is as a preventive measure.

    Only if you don’t care about justice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @AnotherDad

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.
     
    Exactly. Well said ID.

    Same with psychotics. It's not the job of the courts to sit in God like judgment and determine if the murderer has some sort of innocent soul, unfortunately burdened with a really stupid or psychotic brain. The courts aren't sentencing their soul, but their actual biological being on this material planet with their nasty murdering brain.

    Kill them all and let God sort them out.

    Agree.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. I know I’m a terrible person, but I find the whole situation as described to be absolutely hilarious.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  69. Finally, after 25 years, we can discuss this without Ricky Ray Rector being mentioned.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  70. @Jonathan Mason
    It all seems a bit immaterial. People have to do and say things all the time in the course of their work that they don't really believe in.

    If your job is to defend murderers and get them the lightest possible sentence, you are going to think of any kind of argument you can to save them from execution, and if you earn your crust as a prosecutor you want to find any plausible-sounding argument you can to send them to the gallows.

    IQ test scores can be manipulated in certain ways, for example by deliberately acting dumb, but at least their end product is a two or three figure number that can be compared to the scores of other people. Blacks with low scores and convictions for murder should be compared with other black murderers to determine whether they can be executed per Supreme Court rules.

    The problem is that the Supreme Court has said they should not be killed if they are of abnormally low intelligence, but has not stated that they should not be imprisoned for the same reason, which, like many Supreme Court rulings, makes no sense.

    Personally I don't see why persons of abnormally low intelligence should not be executed, because killing people is by definition a stupid thing to do, but we are not going to legalize it because the law penalizes the stupid or the pate-addled.

    But then I am in no danger of being appointed to the Supreme Court.

    Of course this problem only exists in certain states, because other states have abolished the death penalty, which fact seems to be poorly understood even by judges. Just recently in the case of the gymnastics pedophile Larry Nassar, the judge stated in court that she had just signed his death sentence, which was bollocks, as he was being sentenced to prison, not death. Possibly she meant that in her opinion he was certain to die in prison, but either way she was confused.

    Personally I don’t see why persons of abnormally low intelligence should not be executed, because killing people is by definition a stupid thing to do, but we are not going to legalize it because the law penalizes the stupid or the pate-addled.

    From a purely cost-benefit point-of-view, a lot of crime is a stupid thing to do. And the mean IQ of prison populations is, I believe, lower than that of the population at large. Convicts, as a group, are not known for making especially good decisions. As you say – should we just stop punishing people because the people we punish often aren’t very bright?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Almost all the racial legal grievances you are left with when you throw out the pure nonsense are the brainchildren of anti-racism legislation projects, like mandatory minimum sentencing or that awful sentencing guideline grid. Imagine if instead of trying to slip in a million tweaks we just kept what we had.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. @Art Deco
    The validity and reliability of psychometric tests is a pretty esoteric subject and it's a reasonable wager that even psychologists who do not specialize in tests-and-measurements are not well-versed in the subject. (The three psychologists in my family likely know something about the instruments they use at work, which do not include IQ tests). It's amusing that this guy, who scribbles for a living, is so vehement on the subject.

    Charles Murray’s twitter feed is a very good thing to follow because he mentions every interesting article or good joke he comes across, but you have to ignore him complaining rather religiously that Trump exists, and then you have a reliable portion where a total stranger yells at him, Murray asks, “have you read the book?” and the stranger barks “that has nothing to do with it.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. I realize that the various suits over lethal injection drugs are lawfare against capital punishment, not actually concerned about humane-ness, but why not just give them an overdose of heroin? They’re out like someone flicked a switch without pain.

    Alternately (although this may be getting into “modest proposal” territory), it ought to be decreed that capital punishment may be administered by any method that is approved for so-called “assisted suicide”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  74. I’ve been waiting for years for someone with the balls to make this argument. Trumpian Balls, one might say. As Jeff Goldblum might have said in Independence Day, “They’re using our own shields against us!”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  75. I haven’t seen much Pygmy crime in the US but if they have to lock up a criminal, smart or not, quit letting them after being radicalized in prison.

    Read More
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    I've often suspected that if there were a large number of Pygmies in the US, the differences between them and the rest of the population on cognitive traits would be so extreme and undeniable that even the powers of rationalization enjoyed by our elites wouldn't be enough to convince them that pygmies were the same genetically as other groups on those traits.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @candid_observer
    There is actually a rather subtle but important point here. Jensen long ago observed (and had observed to him) that blacks with IQs below 70 often seemed otherwise quite normal in all other respects -- they were quite talkative and sociable, for example, and it really required an IQ test or some equivalent set of cognitive problems to reveal what otherwise might not have been at all obvious, namely, that they just couldn't perform what seemed to others like very simple tasks requiring understanding.

    Whites with IQs below 70, on the other hand, almost always seemed far more generally deficient and abnormal, often literally slow, and physically different.

    Jensen's general thought was that it typically required some kind of genetic defect or defect in physiological development to induce an IQ below 70 in whites, but that in blacks, it was just the lower end of a normal curve.

    I'm not sure what consequences this would imply for how to handle the two different cases in terms of punishment. But at first blush one would think that blacks who are of below 70 IQ and who are otherwise normal should be expected to live up to society's laws more so than whites who seem to suffer from some generalized genetic or physiological defect.

    One interesting thing:

    We are not 100% sure WHAT the IQ test measures. What we DO know is there is a strong positive correlation between what the IQ test measures and types of intelligence necessary to thrive in European and American cultures.

    There is a school of thought that there are certain OTHER types of intelligence, which are NOT measured by an IQ test. For example, Jung seemed to think that many academics had much poorer emotional skills than did average working-class people. I think Jung came to some incorrect conclusions, so I won’t go into more detail.

    Let’s assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa, and some other tribal cultures. These may include the sort of emotional intelligence necessary to deal with maybe 200 other people in a village, the ability to tell stories and sing and dance (which makes people more attractive to those of the opposite sex. This is especially necessary for men). This may include what some people call physical intelligence — the ability to read a situation quickly and apply whatever physical skills are needed.

    Consider the possibility that in both African and European societies, there is a positive correlation between different types of intelligence, but NOT a 1-1 relationship. Therefore, an African with a low IQ may have the same level of emotional intelligence as a European with a considerably higher IQ. Or the African may be a more creative musician, etc.

    A famous example of this would be Mohammed Ali. Remember, the Army originally rejected Ali due to his extremely low IQ. When they wanted to induct him, Ali had not gotten smarter. The Army was taking dumber people.

    However, Ali had quite a few skills that absolutely required types of intelligence NOT measured by IQ tests. He had a great emotional intelligence. He was quite creative. As far as physical intelligence, the guy was way off the charts. He also had a great deal of discipline and determination. Consider the Rumble in the Jungle against Foreman. Ali used his great people skills and creativity to get the Africans and the Media on his side. Then he used his incredible physical intelligence, combined with an almost superhuman discipline, to follow the rope-a-dope strategy and win the match.

    OK, so Ali was a bit of an outlier. He was below average for African Americans on the IQ test, but off the charts on other types of intelligence.

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.

    NOTE: I am not pushing this view. I am merely stating what the consequences of the hypothesis that there are many types of intelligence would be. And, one of the consequences is that African peoples have intelligence of sorts not measured by IQ tests. Whether these sorts of intelligence are valuable in European or Asian societies is a different question.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    The goal of an IQ test or any aptitude test is to try and find the innate talents somebody has so that they can be pointed in the right directions and be a success in life. Things that are on the typical IQ test are things that can be easily and QUICKLY determined.

    Of course, there are other components that lead to success and we could argue that they are some kind of intelligence as well. The problem with most of them is that they cannot be tested within a few hours or even days.

    Take something like conscientiousness. Since a lot of success is just showing up this is a very important component of a successful person and shows maturity and intelligence. However, how do you measure that in a one hour test. Only after a long period of time does this aptitude show which is why college admissions use both high school transcripts and SAT scores.

    Then you have issues like how well does something relate to success. Emotional maturity certainly has a place in success. Some people become basket cases and some turn to drugs or alcohol with the slightest little adversity in their lives. While we can certainly see some people handling stress better then others even during relatively short periods, we can't be sure how the lack of emotional maturity correlates with success. As we can see, we have a lot of snowflakes making good money at places like Google.

    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    Let’s assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa

     

    I assume it is White-man's technologies that are necessary to thrive in Africa. What was the population density per square mile before Africa was Colonized?
    , @dfordoom

    There is a school of thought that there are certain OTHER types of intelligence, which are NOT measured by an IQ test.
     
    If you're a HBD-er and you believe that evolution has resulted in some groups of people having more of whatever it is that IQ tests measure then it's not unreasonable to believe that evolution has also resulted in some groups of people not only having differing quantities of IQ but also differing types of intelligence.

    It often seems to me that many high IQ people lack a certain quality of judgment. They are inclined to over-intellectualise things and to believe ideas that are intellectually satisfying even though those ideas do not correspond to reality. Only a high IQ person could believe in utter nonsense like postmodernism.

    At this point in time the societies that are most determined to destroy themselves are high IQ societies.

    IQ might turn out to have a lot less in the way of survival value than we'd like to think.
    , @Anonymous
    Ali was no cognitive heavyweight by any normal measure, but judging by interviews and talk show appearances I'd say his IQ was probably a lot higher than 70, perhaps high eighties or low nineties. I suspect he may have been coached to sandbag the Army test.

    Would have been interesting to have had him thoroughly tested by real pros at the start of his career and through his boxing days.
    , @Stan Adams

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.
     
    Steve has made this point before.

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/06/what-70-iq-looks-like.html

    This is reminiscent of the Supreme Court's 2002 decision that effectively banned the death penalty for murderers with IQs of 70 or below. In the extended families of Supreme Court justices, IQs of 70 or less are inevitably associated with clear organic cases of mental retardation, such as Down Syndrome. But among African Americans, about 1/6th are no more than 70 IQ, just as about 1/6th are smarter than the average white American.
     
    , @ScarletNumber
    I think he is full of shit, but Howard Gardner thinks there are 8 types of intelligence. The Harvard developmental psychologist is still alive.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @candid_observer
    There is actually a rather subtle but important point here. Jensen long ago observed (and had observed to him) that blacks with IQs below 70 often seemed otherwise quite normal in all other respects -- they were quite talkative and sociable, for example, and it really required an IQ test or some equivalent set of cognitive problems to reveal what otherwise might not have been at all obvious, namely, that they just couldn't perform what seemed to others like very simple tasks requiring understanding.

    Whites with IQs below 70, on the other hand, almost always seemed far more generally deficient and abnormal, often literally slow, and physically different.

    Jensen's general thought was that it typically required some kind of genetic defect or defect in physiological development to induce an IQ below 70 in whites, but that in blacks, it was just the lower end of a normal curve.

    I'm not sure what consequences this would imply for how to handle the two different cases in terms of punishment. But at first blush one would think that blacks who are of below 70 IQ and who are otherwise normal should be expected to live up to society's laws more so than whites who seem to suffer from some generalized genetic or physiological defect.

    An 70-85 IQ black could possibly be more useful to society than an 70-85 IQ white, because in other traits he may be more normal. Imagine you had to populate a spaceship to a nearby star, and you were forced to have 20% 80 IQ people. Would you rather have the 80 IQ whites who probably have physical and social impairments, or the blacks who were otherwise normal?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter
    What role would 80 IQ blacks (and their offspring) play on an interstellar colony?
    , @Hippopotamusdrome
    I'll take the 80 IQ whites, at least they will not try rape and muder me as much.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. For decades defense attorneys have been arguing during the penalty phase that black defendants convicted of murder should not be executed due to a low IQ.

    This is also frequently used to appeal a death penalty verdict.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  79. Well readers, riddle me this:

    Is an 85 IQ black facing capital charges smart enough to throw his pre-trial IQ test to just below 70?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  80. @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    LemmusLemmus writes, "By implication, measurements of height demonstrate that folding rules are biased against children."

    Pardon my low IQ, L.L., but what does this mean? I have never encountered folding rules. Folding of what? Height of what? Please explain.

    Mark, Luftkin Tools made a wooden folding rule, as in a foldable measuring stick, usually six foot long when unfolded. Great tool, pre retractable steel tapes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bronxite
    This was a reference to ‘heightism’ ; using the folding wooden ruler to measure the height of children.

    Another of the many contradictions noted was: shortly after the election of david n dinkens ( the men’s room attendant at the 21 club) as NYC mayor; much
    Demonstrating “ its our city now” & “ we built dis city”.

    Many of these demonstrators were part of the al sharpton/ sonny carson professional paid protester crowd. A few years earlier these same ‘folks’ were trying to shake down construction sites/builders/ trade unions for construction jobs. If they could not get construction/ union jobs; how did they ‘build dis city’

    Note : this was before illegals infested the NY metro area; construction trades were dominated/ industry controlled by americans, providing good living for middle class.

    https://www.amazon.com/Apex-Tool-Group-X46-Folding/dp/B00002N5KI
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. How about two standard deviations below the norm? The stupidest two percent of any group could only be imprisoned.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  82. @SnakeEyes
    This is an unanticipated boomerang in the face to all those who have argued that IQ tests are racially biased.

    However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    “You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.”

    It is a very.. lawyerly.. argument, but let’s face the reality. This is only occurring because some twisted lawyer first came up with a concept under which a full 15 percent of blacks may not be executed!

    This would be one thing if we were talking about just whites under IQ 70, who are practically all organically retarded and don’t really do crime. But very different for the ungratefuls. The 85′s with IQ’s under 70 are a group that contains some truly vicious individuals who do awful things that prosecutors would be going after hard, even just to satisfy their own shriveled moral senses, let alone the public outrage.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @SnakeEyes
    This is an unanticipated boomerang in the face to all those who have argued that IQ tests are racially biased.

    However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    > However, this is a bit of a dick move by the proescutors. You have to be pretty bloodthirsty to come up with this angle on sentencing.

    Well, perhaps reviewing what these poor helpless mentally challenged souls actually do when the get hold of a gun or a knife or a woman tends to make one a little bloodthirsty.

    Read More
    • Agree: MBlanc46
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @Paleo Liberal
    One interesting thing:

    We are not 100% sure WHAT the IQ test measures. What we DO know is there is a strong positive correlation between what the IQ test measures and types of intelligence necessary to thrive in European and American cultures.

    There is a school of thought that there are certain OTHER types of intelligence, which are NOT measured by an IQ test. For example, Jung seemed to think that many academics had much poorer emotional skills than did average working-class people. I think Jung came to some incorrect conclusions, so I won't go into more detail.

    Let's assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa, and some other tribal cultures. These may include the sort of emotional intelligence necessary to deal with maybe 200 other people in a village, the ability to tell stories and sing and dance (which makes people more attractive to those of the opposite sex. This is especially necessary for men). This may include what some people call physical intelligence -- the ability to read a situation quickly and apply whatever physical skills are needed.

    Consider the possibility that in both African and European societies, there is a positive correlation between different types of intelligence, but NOT a 1-1 relationship. Therefore, an African with a low IQ may have the same level of emotional intelligence as a European with a considerably higher IQ. Or the African may be a more creative musician, etc.

    A famous example of this would be Mohammed Ali. Remember, the Army originally rejected Ali due to his extremely low IQ. When they wanted to induct him, Ali had not gotten smarter. The Army was taking dumber people.

    However, Ali had quite a few skills that absolutely required types of intelligence NOT measured by IQ tests. He had a great emotional intelligence. He was quite creative. As far as physical intelligence, the guy was way off the charts. He also had a great deal of discipline and determination. Consider the Rumble in the Jungle against Foreman. Ali used his great people skills and creativity to get the Africans and the Media on his side. Then he used his incredible physical intelligence, combined with an almost superhuman discipline, to follow the rope-a-dope strategy and win the match.

    OK, so Ali was a bit of an outlier. He was below average for African Americans on the IQ test, but off the charts on other types of intelligence.

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.



    NOTE: I am not pushing this view. I am merely stating what the consequences of the hypothesis that there are many types of intelligence would be. And, one of the consequences is that African peoples have intelligence of sorts not measured by IQ tests. Whether these sorts of intelligence are valuable in European or Asian societies is a different question.

    The goal of an IQ test or any aptitude test is to try and find the innate talents somebody has so that they can be pointed in the right directions and be a success in life. Things that are on the typical IQ test are things that can be easily and QUICKLY determined.

    Of course, there are other components that lead to success and we could argue that they are some kind of intelligence as well. The problem with most of them is that they cannot be tested within a few hours or even days.

    Take something like conscientiousness. Since a lot of success is just showing up this is a very important component of a successful person and shows maturity and intelligence. However, how do you measure that in a one hour test. Only after a long period of time does this aptitude show which is why college admissions use both high school transcripts and SAT scores.

    Then you have issues like how well does something relate to success. Emotional maturity certainly has a place in success. Some people become basket cases and some turn to drugs or alcohol with the slightest little adversity in their lives. While we can certainly see some people handling stress better then others even during relatively short periods, we can’t be sure how the lack of emotional maturity correlates with success. As we can see, we have a lot of snowflakes making good money at places like Google.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
    That is true.

    The problem with tests of creativity, emotional intelligence, etc. are that they are difficult to administer.

    Here is an interesting question, and I could argue either way on it:

    If the IQ test is designed in such a way that it omits areas of intelligence that are difficult to measure, AND blacks tend to do better in those areas of intelligence than whites (there is only a certain amount of room in the brain, after all), does that mean the IQ test is unintentionally racist?

    The argument that it is: if the average IQ 85 black can function in society better than the average IQ 85 white due to increased levels of certain types of intelligence for the black guy, then the test is unintentionally racist.

    The counterargument: the IQ test was never designed to be precise. It is designed so that there is a strong positive correlation between those things that allow someone to thrive in European-American society and the IQ.

    As I said, I can go either way on it. I personally believe the IQ test misses some factors that make at least some blacks higher functioning than the IQ test would indicate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @Logan
    There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes.

    Possibly, but it's a pretty old principle. Goes at least as far back in common law as the M'Naghten rule in 1847.

    The idea is that we don't execute people for crimes they are incapable of realizing are wrong. As others have noted, this Rule would also prohibit imprisoning them, if applied logically.

    Punishment is a stupid concept — punish me with anything, I declare myself to be a glorious martyr suffering on behalf of a cause, I am unpunished. The only thing we have a right to talk about is danger to the conmunity (which also removes all of the possible arrogance of being the punishers of another human being). A low-IQ violent felon with no impulse control is self-explanatorily a danger to the community.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @TelfoedJohn
    An 70-85 IQ black could possibly be more useful to society than an 70-85 IQ white, because in other traits he may be more normal. Imagine you had to populate a spaceship to a nearby star, and you were forced to have 20% 80 IQ people. Would you rather have the 80 IQ whites who probably have physical and social impairments, or the blacks who were otherwise normal?

    What role would 80 IQ blacks (and their offspring) play on an interstellar colony?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal

    What role would 80 IQ blacks (and their offspring) play on an interstellar colony?
     
    Ever read Brave New World? That shows the uses of low IQ people, at least in that society.

    Someone with an IQ of 80 could make a good janitor, for example.
    Maybe just use a robot instead.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @Intelligent Dasein

    As staunch defenders of the much-maligned concept of the intelligence quotient, these scientists found vindication in the Supreme Court’s embrace of intelligence testing, though they cautioned that the Justices’ understanding of the complex subject was simplistic.
     
    Perhaps the argument over the meaning of the intelligence quotient has become altogether too involved. One does not need to be a rock solid believer in the scientific veracity of IQ in order to see that the inability to score above 70 on what is essentially just a puzzle test is indicative of poor mental faculties.

    But on the other hand, I think the judges erred in this decision. There is no good reason for limiting capital punishment only to those who are aware of the moral gravity of their crimes. A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.

    Should only murderers be put to death?
    I was reading an English newspaper from around 1820 the other day and noticed a list of court decisions and sentences, with the occasional quotation from the judgment. The following caught my eye:
    Lord Justice Neville, in announcing his sentence upon a young man of twenty who had been caught red-handed in the act of stealing a handkerchief, remarked that it would perhaps benefit the boy to be sent off to the wilds of Australia for life. But, on the other hand, who knew what might become of him there?
    At this point the narrative ended, and the reporter simply recorded the actual sentence: DEATH.

    A bit extreme perhaps, but surely the direction we need to be heading.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J1234

    At this point the narrative ended, and the reporter simply recorded the actual sentence: DEATH.

    A bit extreme perhaps, but surely the direction we need to
    BE HEADING.
     

    :) Pun intended?

    John Locke believed in capital punishment for property crimes. I don't agree with that position, but I do understand his logic. Locke saw property as sort of an extension of one's self. His argument was that if somebody had rejected society's rules with regards to property, would they not also ultimately reject society's rules with regards to liberty and life if given a chance?

    Probably some wisdom in that. How many murderers today were first thieves? A lot. But not all. Nor are all thieves murderers.

    , @Intelligent Dasein

    Should only murderers be put to death?
     
    I'm in favor of the death penalty for an expanded list of crimes beyond homicides.

    The degrees of punishment meted out by a society depend on its overall level of wealth, comfort, and stability. When everyone is living from hand to mouth (as they were throughout most human history) nobody thinks it excessive to hand down a sentence of death for stealing a loaf of bread, and petty thieves are marched to gallows while the public jeers and applauds. This is not because the denizens of past centuries were more cruel than we are, but because they felt the weight of the crime so much more.

    Modern people, accustomed to living in comfort and abundance, have largely lost the instinct to punish. "What do I care about these parasites of mine," they say. "I have more than enough for all." Not only do the crimes no longer sting, and therefore render it difficult to summon up a spirit of indignation, but the held-over formulas of Christian morality concerning forgiveness, long since transvaluated into egotistic bromides, allow for magnanimous moral posturing on the part of those who would lessen every sentence and excuse every fault. This, by the way, also explains why it has been so difficult to get Americans to take their immigration problem seriously. No one feels any sense of ownership in the country and no one cares until it is their ox getting gored.

    I highly recommend everyone read Nietzsche's The Genealogy of Morals for a wealth of insight on this topic, if the have not done so already.

    , @Anonymous

    Should only murderers be put to death?
     
    Murderers (and not all of those), traitors in time of declared war, grievous body mutilators like acid attackers in some circumstances maybe.

    Rapists, if proven to real standards, should have their penises and testicles removed.
    , @guest
    Handkerchief theft shouldn't qualify, in my opinion.

    As federal law stands, I believe there are three capital crimes in addition to regular murder: certain kinds of felony murder, espionage, and treason.

    I wouldn't mid adding certain kinds of rape and grievous assault.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. So, every single stinkin’ IQ test is “biased” against certain people; presumably the “white” paper on which it’s written recoils in horror at the proximity of black or brown skin, and magically changes the ink printed on it so that more difficult questions appear! Liberals know this to a scientific certainty, so that when black/brown people are being tested to qualify as police officers or “fire fighters” [God forbid we should call men who do that job 'firemen' - so....sexist!] we have to add a handicap to their score, or drastically ratchet down the ‘passing’ score. BUT, if you give the same ‘racist’ test to some ‘person of color’ on Death Row, he [and it's virtually ALWAYS a 'he!"] must NOT get the Bonus Points awarded if that puts him over the threshold for a one-way gurney ride! Do I have that situation sorted out according to PC logic?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  89. Well, the author is correct in that IQ by itself represents an inadequate and reductionist view of intelligence, but then he immediately goes off the deep end with regards to causality between social environments and test scores. The “argument” usually works this way: Leftist academics claim that IQ scores are biased against blacks, and therefore meaningless…until a study comes along showing that blacks have made some collective advances in IQ, and then IQ scores suddenly become profoundly relevant. Got it?

    So how will we know when tests are no longer biased? When blacks score the same as whites or Asians. A moral outcome will determine the viability of a scientific assessment.

    Amren has posted an article by a black law academic saying that blacks should be considered disabled by society. Of course, her point is that racism is at fault, but it’s really blackness that’s at fault. I don’t know to what extent it’s genetic vs. social, but expecting blacks to behave or perform at the same level of other groups probably isn’t realistic. In that sense, they are disabled. They probably do deserve some sort of disability benefit, but only with the understanding that it’s because they are perceived as less capable by the rest of society. And like everyone else on disability, they lose all benefits once they earn over a certain amount.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  90. What convicted animal on Death Row, aware of this loophole awarded by nine simpletons in black robes, couldn’t finagle the results of his IQ test to score even LOWER than Ruth Bader Ginsberg, or that “wise Latina?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  91. @dave37
    I haven't seen much Pygmy crime in the US but if they have to lock up a criminal, smart or not, quit letting them after being radicalized in prison.

    I’ve often suspected that if there were a large number of Pygmies in the US, the differences between them and the rest of the population on cognitive traits would be so extreme and undeniable that even the powers of rationalization enjoyed by our elites wouldn’t be enough to convince them that pygmies were the same genetically as other groups on those traits.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @Buffalo Joe
    Mark, Luftkin Tools made a wooden folding rule, as in a foldable measuring stick, usually six foot long when unfolded. Great tool, pre retractable steel tapes.

    This was a reference to ‘heightism’ ; using the folding wooden ruler to measure the height of children.

    Another of the many contradictions noted was: shortly after the election of david n dinkens ( the men’s room attendant at the 21 club) as NYC mayor; much
    Demonstrating “ its our city now” & “ we built dis city”.

    Many of these demonstrators were part of the al sharpton/ sonny carson professional paid protester crowd. A few years earlier these same ‘folks’ were trying to shake down construction sites/builders/ trade unions for construction jobs. If they could not get construction/ union jobs; how did they ‘build dis city’

    Note : this was before illegals infested the NY metro area; construction trades were dominated/ industry controlled by americans, providing good living for middle class.

    https://www.amazon.com/Apex-Tool-Group-X46-Folding/dp/B00002N5KI

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Joe Magarac
    The racial question aside, not executing murderers below a certain IQ is bad eugenics.

    Just sayin' ;)

    You might find this video interesting, it’s speculation about the eugentic effect that execution had on Europe

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Irish Paleo
    Blacks are a magical species of humanity to which opposite and mutually contradictory propositions always and everywhere simultaneously apply. Consider these propositions that would put the producers of the Twilight Zone to shame:

    1. Blacks have a right to live in neighbourhoods in which they constitute a supermajority of the population but there children have a right to attend neighbourhood schools in which at least half of their classmates are white.

    2. The process that creates black supermajority neighbourhoods (namely, white flight) is racist because it reveals a white preference not to live in the vicinity of blacks. However, gentrification (i.e. the opposite of white flight) is also racist because it denies blacks their God-given right to live in neighbourhoods that are supermajority black.

    3. Blacks kids are just as smart as white kids and the only reason for their lack of admissions to Ivy League colleges etc. is because of racist teachers and college admissions officers. However, if black children do not sit in classrooms with at least 50% white children, they won't breathe in the magic pixie dust that white children emit when they exhale, the inhalation of which allows black children to achieve the same as white children.

    4. Affirmative action is good and its abolition would be a disaster but it simultaneously does not exist and thus cannot explain any particular example of black success. For example, in 2008, you were told it would be a great idea to vote for Obama because it would be great to have a black president. By 2009 (when he actually was president), it was racist to suggest that Mr. Obama's race had anything to do with his election to the presidency - even though the same people were citing his race as a reason to vote for him a year previously.

    5. When whites wouldn't listen to black music and Michael Jackson and Run DMC were valorised as pioneers for getting onto MTV, they were racist. However, when they started rapping (the Beastie Boys), twerking (Miley Cyrus) or frizzing up their hair (Rachel Dolezal), that was "cultural appropriation and therefore also racist.

    6. When blacks go to jail at higher rates than whites, this is because of systemic anti-black racism in the criminal justice system which delights in jailing and executing blacks. However, when whites get longer sentences for equivalent offences (i.e. correcting for the number of crimes), this is somehow proof of racism against black victims (who are killed by black perps) in contrast to white victims (who are killed by white perps).

    It's all part of a fantastic "heads I win-tales you lose" dynamic. And now we're seeing the latest chapter in the history of contradictory propositions:

    IQ testing is racist because blacks don't do as well in it as whites. Simultaneously, however, when prosecutors agree that IQ testing is racist against blacks and try to argue that blacks are smarter than their white IQ counterparts, that's racist as well because it eliminates the statistical advantage (or privilege, if you will) that blacks have in avoiding execution.*

    Of course, what's most significant about this is not blacks themselves but what their example does for other non-white (but non-black) ethnic groups. As Steve constantly points out, while Asians etc. won't join a black coalition (anyone fancy being painted white like George Zimmerman), they'll happily (and, quite frankly, sensibly) join an anti-white coalition, which allows them to hog some of the privileges that blacks are trying to monopolise while claiming to be standing shoulder to shoulder with them - e.g. look at the number of NYT and Atlantic anti-white hate screeds written by people with names like Hong and Kang (whose cousins back home in China were still using a toothpaste known as "Darkie" as recently as 1985)**.

    * I don't rule out that the prosecutors may be onto something in that while there is no evidence that IQ testing fails to objectively discern black-white gaps, it may well have different manifestations in terms of social dysfunction. For example, the late Arthur Jensen became interested in the subject because of teachers telling him that black children with 70 IQs were much more socially normal than their white counterparts. As such, perhaps low IQ blacks are better socialised than low IQ whites and are thus capable of higher degrees of moral responsibility. Health warning: the foregoing is pure speculation.

    ** Darkie brand toothpaste was changed to "Darlie" in 1985 but the Chinese translation "Black Person Toothpaste" remains the same as it's been since 1933, which demonstrates how superficially Asians observe PC mores.

    ** Darkie brand toothpaste was changed to “Darlie” in 1985 but the Chinese translation “Black Person Toothpaste” remains the same as it’s been since 1933, which demonstrates how superficially Asians observe PC mores.

    I lived in Taiwan in the early 1980s, and I remember Darkie Toothpaste very well. I believe it was a Hong Kong brand, since brands from the PRC were illegal to import to Taiwan.

    We Americans used to make fun of some of their brands, such as Long Life Cigarettes, and KKK matches.

    No, seriously, they had KKK matches, and nobody, I mean NOBODY associated it with the Ku Klux Klan. The reason? The Chinese used “3K” for the Klan, so seeing “KKK” simply didn’t register. It would be like seeing “MMM” and not associating it with the “3M” company.

    The character on the toothpaste was a very black man with very white teeth, the idea being if you used his toothpaste your teeth could be that white. I believe when they changed the name to Darlie they kept the mascot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    They did keep the mascot, after whitening him. As both a black and a white man he's a smartly-turned-out aristocrat in a tall silk hat and white bow tie.
    , @The Last Real Calvinist
    Darlie's on sale throughout Hong Kong even now, and the mascot is indeed as you've described: LINK
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. @Old Palo Altan
    Should only murderers be put to death?
    I was reading an English newspaper from around 1820 the other day and noticed a list of court decisions and sentences, with the occasional quotation from the judgment. The following caught my eye:
    Lord Justice Neville, in announcing his sentence upon a young man of twenty who had been caught red-handed in the act of stealing a handkerchief, remarked that it would perhaps benefit the boy to be sent off to the wilds of Australia for life. But, on the other hand, who knew what might become of him there?
    At this point the narrative ended, and the reporter simply recorded the actual sentence: DEATH.

    A bit extreme perhaps, but surely the direction we need to be heading.

    At this point the narrative ended, and the reporter simply recorded the actual sentence: DEATH.

    A bit extreme perhaps, but surely the direction we need to
    BE HEADING.

    :) Pun intended?

    John Locke believed in capital punishment for property crimes. I don’t agree with that position, but I do understand his logic. Locke saw property as sort of an extension of one’s self. His argument was that if somebody had rejected society’s rules with regards to property, would they not also ultimately reject society’s rules with regards to liberty and life if given a chance?

    Probably some wisdom in that. How many murderers today were first thieves? A lot. But not all. Nor are all thieves murderers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
    Pun not intented -I hate puns.

    On the other hand I had written something different to begin with and changed it without quite knowing why.

    So perhaps my subconscious likes puns, even if I don't.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @Paleo Liberal
    One interesting thing:

    We are not 100% sure WHAT the IQ test measures. What we DO know is there is a strong positive correlation between what the IQ test measures and types of intelligence necessary to thrive in European and American cultures.

    There is a school of thought that there are certain OTHER types of intelligence, which are NOT measured by an IQ test. For example, Jung seemed to think that many academics had much poorer emotional skills than did average working-class people. I think Jung came to some incorrect conclusions, so I won't go into more detail.

    Let's assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa, and some other tribal cultures. These may include the sort of emotional intelligence necessary to deal with maybe 200 other people in a village, the ability to tell stories and sing and dance (which makes people more attractive to those of the opposite sex. This is especially necessary for men). This may include what some people call physical intelligence -- the ability to read a situation quickly and apply whatever physical skills are needed.

    Consider the possibility that in both African and European societies, there is a positive correlation between different types of intelligence, but NOT a 1-1 relationship. Therefore, an African with a low IQ may have the same level of emotional intelligence as a European with a considerably higher IQ. Or the African may be a more creative musician, etc.

    A famous example of this would be Mohammed Ali. Remember, the Army originally rejected Ali due to his extremely low IQ. When they wanted to induct him, Ali had not gotten smarter. The Army was taking dumber people.

    However, Ali had quite a few skills that absolutely required types of intelligence NOT measured by IQ tests. He had a great emotional intelligence. He was quite creative. As far as physical intelligence, the guy was way off the charts. He also had a great deal of discipline and determination. Consider the Rumble in the Jungle against Foreman. Ali used his great people skills and creativity to get the Africans and the Media on his side. Then he used his incredible physical intelligence, combined with an almost superhuman discipline, to follow the rope-a-dope strategy and win the match.

    OK, so Ali was a bit of an outlier. He was below average for African Americans on the IQ test, but off the charts on other types of intelligence.

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.



    NOTE: I am not pushing this view. I am merely stating what the consequences of the hypothesis that there are many types of intelligence would be. And, one of the consequences is that African peoples have intelligence of sorts not measured by IQ tests. Whether these sorts of intelligence are valuable in European or Asian societies is a different question.

    Let’s assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa

    I assume it is White-man’s technologies that are necessary to thrive in Africa. What was the population density per square mile before Africa was Colonized?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal

    I assume it is White-man’s technologies that are necessary to thrive in Africa. What was the population density per square mile before Africa was Colonized?
     
    Perhaps I was imprecise. There has not been much evolution in the past few hundred years, compared to the age of the species.

    It would be better to say that, if there are different types of intelligence, perhaps Europeans tended to do better with those types of intelligence that allowed one to thrive in pre-modern Europe, while Africans tended to do better with those types of intelligence that allowed one to thrive in pre-modern Africa.

    AND, that those factors that allowed one to thrive in pre-modern Europe or pre-modern Asia tend to be those picked up by the IQ test,

    AND that those factors are often the same as those that allow one to thrive in modern societies, with some outliers such as Mohammed Ali, or various singers, musicians, rappers, athletes, etc.


    As far as population density, don't forget that the population density of Europe (AND Africa) greatly increased due to certain tubers (yams, potatoes, etc.) being introduced from South America.
    Also, the great drop in population in Ireland (the Potato Famine) was because the Irish didn't learn the proper methods of potato husbandry practiced in South America. Potato famines simply didn't happen in the Andes because they weren't stupid enough to bet everything on one variety of potato.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @Jim Bob Lassiter
    What role would 80 IQ blacks (and their offspring) play on an interstellar colony?

    What role would 80 IQ blacks (and their offspring) play on an interstellar colony?

    Ever read Brave New World? That shows the uses of low IQ people, at least in that society.

    Someone with an IQ of 80 could make a good janitor, for example.
    Maybe just use a robot instead.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @TelfoedJohn
    An 70-85 IQ black could possibly be more useful to society than an 70-85 IQ white, because in other traits he may be more normal. Imagine you had to populate a spaceship to a nearby star, and you were forced to have 20% 80 IQ people. Would you rather have the 80 IQ whites who probably have physical and social impairments, or the blacks who were otherwise normal?

    I’ll take the 80 IQ whites, at least they will not try rape and muder me as much.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @MarkinLA
    The goal of an IQ test or any aptitude test is to try and find the innate talents somebody has so that they can be pointed in the right directions and be a success in life. Things that are on the typical IQ test are things that can be easily and QUICKLY determined.

    Of course, there are other components that lead to success and we could argue that they are some kind of intelligence as well. The problem with most of them is that they cannot be tested within a few hours or even days.

    Take something like conscientiousness. Since a lot of success is just showing up this is a very important component of a successful person and shows maturity and intelligence. However, how do you measure that in a one hour test. Only after a long period of time does this aptitude show which is why college admissions use both high school transcripts and SAT scores.

    Then you have issues like how well does something relate to success. Emotional maturity certainly has a place in success. Some people become basket cases and some turn to drugs or alcohol with the slightest little adversity in their lives. While we can certainly see some people handling stress better then others even during relatively short periods, we can't be sure how the lack of emotional maturity correlates with success. As we can see, we have a lot of snowflakes making good money at places like Google.

    That is true.

    The problem with tests of creativity, emotional intelligence, etc. are that they are difficult to administer.

    Here is an interesting question, and I could argue either way on it:

    If the IQ test is designed in such a way that it omits areas of intelligence that are difficult to measure, AND blacks tend to do better in those areas of intelligence than whites (there is only a certain amount of room in the brain, after all), does that mean the IQ test is unintentionally racist?

    The argument that it is: if the average IQ 85 black can function in society better than the average IQ 85 white due to increased levels of certain types of intelligence for the black guy, then the test is unintentionally racist.

    The counterargument: the IQ test was never designed to be precise. It is designed so that there is a strong positive correlation between those things that allow someone to thrive in European-American society and the IQ.

    As I said, I can go either way on it. I personally believe the IQ test misses some factors that make at least some blacks higher functioning than the IQ test would indicate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The IQ issue raises a question which I have never been able to resolve. If intelligence is a product of the activity of the mind, then how can the mind measure it’s own activity. Seems like the kind of paradox raised in Goedel’s infamous Incompleteness Theorem.

    When the subject of intelligence comes up I always think of Justice Potter Stewart who, when asked to define pornography, famously replied “I know it when I see it.” Ditto for intelligence. Otherwise, as the philosopher Wittgenstein said (in another context) ” I pass in silence.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  101. @Paleo Liberal

    ** Darkie brand toothpaste was changed to “Darlie” in 1985 but the Chinese translation “Black Person Toothpaste” remains the same as it’s been since 1933, which demonstrates how superficially Asians observe PC mores.
     
    I lived in Taiwan in the early 1980s, and I remember Darkie Toothpaste very well. I believe it was a Hong Kong brand, since brands from the PRC were illegal to import to Taiwan.

    We Americans used to make fun of some of their brands, such as Long Life Cigarettes, and KKK matches.

    No, seriously, they had KKK matches, and nobody, I mean NOBODY associated it with the Ku Klux Klan. The reason? The Chinese used "3K" for the Klan, so seeing "KKK" simply didn't register. It would be like seeing "MMM" and not associating it with the "3M" company.

    The character on the toothpaste was a very black man with very white teeth, the idea being if you used his toothpaste your teeth could be that white. I believe when they changed the name to Darlie they kept the mascot.

    They did keep the mascot, after whitening him. As both a black and a white man he’s a smartly-turned-out aristocrat in a tall silk hat and white bow tie.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @Hippopotamusdrome


    Let’s assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa

     

    I assume it is White-man's technologies that are necessary to thrive in Africa. What was the population density per square mile before Africa was Colonized?

    I assume it is White-man’s technologies that are necessary to thrive in Africa. What was the population density per square mile before Africa was Colonized?

    Perhaps I was imprecise. There has not been much evolution in the past few hundred years, compared to the age of the species.

    It would be better to say that, if there are different types of intelligence, perhaps Europeans tended to do better with those types of intelligence that allowed one to thrive in pre-modern Europe, while Africans tended to do better with those types of intelligence that allowed one to thrive in pre-modern Africa.

    AND, that those factors that allowed one to thrive in pre-modern Europe or pre-modern Asia tend to be those picked up by the IQ test,

    AND that those factors are often the same as those that allow one to thrive in modern societies, with some outliers such as Mohammed Ali, or various singers, musicians, rappers, athletes, etc.

    As far as population density, don’t forget that the population density of Europe (AND Africa) greatly increased due to certain tubers (yams, potatoes, etc.) being introduced from South America.
    Also, the great drop in population in Ireland (the Potato Famine) was because the Irish didn’t learn the proper methods of potato husbandry practiced in South America. Potato famines simply didn’t happen in the Andes because they weren’t stupid enough to bet everything on one variety of potato.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @DFH

    Not only do people have worth beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.”
     
    So, according to Mr. Perry, if a test shows a racial difference, this is evidence that the test is racist. So the claim of intellectual equality between the races is literally unfalsifiable.

    (The class one seems to be going even further into madness though. Does Perry really believe that the children of rubbish collectors are on average as intelligent as those of CEOs, and its only classist IQ tests that show otherwise?)

    Since IQ appears to be heritable, is it racist for low IQ parents to give birth? Or are they racist simply in that their children have similarly low IQ scores?

    Of course, the same logic would apply to high IQ parents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The kindest thing society could do for people of insufficient IQ to do well in that society would be to make sure they don't give birth or impregnate another to do so. A hundred years ago we had people who had figured that out, but instead of honoring them as profoundly decent , moral and well meaning we curse them as "Nazis" even though many of them lived and in some cases died before the idea of National Socialism was even invented. Some of them were even Jewish.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. @AndrewR
    "recompense"

    I wasn't aware that murdering a murderer brings their victim[s] back to life. Can you cite examples of this?

    Affect compensation (for the victim’s family) is one of the purposes of punishment. For this end it does not really matter if the murderer was mentally stunted, or if he even had a mind at all. Ever banged a computer monitor or kicked a car you’ve just busted a knuckle on while fixing? Same thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Lot
    "So the claim of intellectual equality between the races is literally unfalsifiable."

    Of course!

    Not just because it is a vodoo taboo you'll be hounded out of your job and possibly your home for doubting, but also because every single test of brainpower has the same Jew-NEAsian-White-Mestizo-Mulatto-Arab-Black-Relic Race ordering. No exceptions. Ever.

    Such is the shit sandwich of the left's racial egalitarianism: backward digit recall and eye to finger reaction time tests are culturally biased! You better believe it, your job depends on it. And we might send a violent mob after you if for some reason like academic tenure or self-employment means we can't get you fired.

    the same Jew-NEAsian-White-Mestizo-Mulatto-Arab-Black-Relic Race ordering

    More accurately the same Ashkenazi-NEAsian……… Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews test out closer to white averages.

    That said there are numerically a lot more incredibly smart Whites than people of all other races combined because of the width of the white bell curve. Also we have a lot of doofuses as well.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @NickG

    A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.
     
    Demonstrating mens rea is, in Anglo Saxon law, central to establishing criminal responsibility.

    Does someone with an IQ of less than 70 have the wherewithal for mens rea?

    I really don't know.

    Some crimes are strict liability, which means that mens rea is not an element.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @Old Palo Altan
    Should only murderers be put to death?
    I was reading an English newspaper from around 1820 the other day and noticed a list of court decisions and sentences, with the occasional quotation from the judgment. The following caught my eye:
    Lord Justice Neville, in announcing his sentence upon a young man of twenty who had been caught red-handed in the act of stealing a handkerchief, remarked that it would perhaps benefit the boy to be sent off to the wilds of Australia for life. But, on the other hand, who knew what might become of him there?
    At this point the narrative ended, and the reporter simply recorded the actual sentence: DEATH.

    A bit extreme perhaps, but surely the direction we need to be heading.

    Should only murderers be put to death?

    I’m in favor of the death penalty for an expanded list of crimes beyond homicides.

    The degrees of punishment meted out by a society depend on its overall level of wealth, comfort, and stability. When everyone is living from hand to mouth (as they were throughout most human history) nobody thinks it excessive to hand down a sentence of death for stealing a loaf of bread, and petty thieves are marched to gallows while the public jeers and applauds. This is not because the denizens of past centuries were more cruel than we are, but because they felt the weight of the crime so much more.

    Modern people, accustomed to living in comfort and abundance, have largely lost the instinct to punish. “What do I care about these parasites of mine,” they say. “I have more than enough for all.” Not only do the crimes no longer sting, and therefore render it difficult to summon up a spirit of indignation, but the held-over formulas of Christian morality concerning forgiveness, long since transvaluated into egotistic bromides, allow for magnanimous moral posturing on the part of those who would lessen every sentence and excuse every fault. This, by the way, also explains why it has been so difficult to get Americans to take their immigration problem seriously. No one feels any sense of ownership in the country and no one cares until it is their ox getting gored.

    I highly recommend everyone read Nietzsche’s The Genealogy of Morals for a wealth of insight on this topic, if the have not done so already.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
    You put your finger on one of the principal problems: the emasculated Christianity so sickeningly personified by "pope" Francis. It is only too likely, given the supine nature of the church's leadership today, that he will succeed in bringing about the unconditional condemnation of the death penalty in a revised edition of the the Catholic catechism.
    A Church which would turn its back in this way on its perennial and reasoned thinking on this matter would no longer be worthy of belief about anything. In other words, it would no longer be the Church, but just another church among many, far too many.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. @dearieme
    "As a concept, IQ is terrible." You could say the same thing about Quantum Mechanics. The question is "does it work?".

    Solid burn.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @william munny
    The courts use IQ in parenting rights cases too. In cases of child abuse and child neglect, child protective services agencies take the children and place them in foster care. State lawyers then routinely get IQ tests (as part of psychological testing), and use "cognitive deficits," which everyone agrees cannot be remediated, as one of the reasons justifying terminating the parent's rights to their children. No one ever calls the science into question, ever.

    Is this really widespread, applied to black and white parents alike? Because of course you’d expect it to result in massive disparate impact, which people would notice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @jim jones
    My experience is that stupid people talk in cliches and therefore seem quite normal in everyday life

    I properly address each Black person I pass by, an informal personal poll , their usual response is ‘Alright’. I agree that use of cliches is a sign of stupidity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @Paleo Liberal
    One interesting thing:

    We are not 100% sure WHAT the IQ test measures. What we DO know is there is a strong positive correlation between what the IQ test measures and types of intelligence necessary to thrive in European and American cultures.

    There is a school of thought that there are certain OTHER types of intelligence, which are NOT measured by an IQ test. For example, Jung seemed to think that many academics had much poorer emotional skills than did average working-class people. I think Jung came to some incorrect conclusions, so I won't go into more detail.

    Let's assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa, and some other tribal cultures. These may include the sort of emotional intelligence necessary to deal with maybe 200 other people in a village, the ability to tell stories and sing and dance (which makes people more attractive to those of the opposite sex. This is especially necessary for men). This may include what some people call physical intelligence -- the ability to read a situation quickly and apply whatever physical skills are needed.

    Consider the possibility that in both African and European societies, there is a positive correlation between different types of intelligence, but NOT a 1-1 relationship. Therefore, an African with a low IQ may have the same level of emotional intelligence as a European with a considerably higher IQ. Or the African may be a more creative musician, etc.

    A famous example of this would be Mohammed Ali. Remember, the Army originally rejected Ali due to his extremely low IQ. When they wanted to induct him, Ali had not gotten smarter. The Army was taking dumber people.

    However, Ali had quite a few skills that absolutely required types of intelligence NOT measured by IQ tests. He had a great emotional intelligence. He was quite creative. As far as physical intelligence, the guy was way off the charts. He also had a great deal of discipline and determination. Consider the Rumble in the Jungle against Foreman. Ali used his great people skills and creativity to get the Africans and the Media on his side. Then he used his incredible physical intelligence, combined with an almost superhuman discipline, to follow the rope-a-dope strategy and win the match.

    OK, so Ali was a bit of an outlier. He was below average for African Americans on the IQ test, but off the charts on other types of intelligence.

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.



    NOTE: I am not pushing this view. I am merely stating what the consequences of the hypothesis that there are many types of intelligence would be. And, one of the consequences is that African peoples have intelligence of sorts not measured by IQ tests. Whether these sorts of intelligence are valuable in European or Asian societies is a different question.

    There is a school of thought that there are certain OTHER types of intelligence, which are NOT measured by an IQ test.

    If you’re a HBD-er and you believe that evolution has resulted in some groups of people having more of whatever it is that IQ tests measure then it’s not unreasonable to believe that evolution has also resulted in some groups of people not only having differing quantities of IQ but also differing types of intelligence.

    It often seems to me that many high IQ people lack a certain quality of judgment. They are inclined to over-intellectualise things and to believe ideas that are intellectually satisfying even though those ideas do not correspond to reality. Only a high IQ person could believe in utter nonsense like postmodernism.

    At this point in time the societies that are most determined to destroy themselves are high IQ societies.

    IQ might turn out to have a lot less in the way of survival value than we’d like to think.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @NickG

    A dumb, senseless killer should also be put to death, if only to protect the public and provide recompense to the victims.
     
    Demonstrating mens rea is, in Anglo Saxon law, central to establishing criminal responsibility.

    Does someone with an IQ of less than 70 have the wherewithal for mens rea?

    I really don't know.

    Does someone with an IQ of less than 70 have the wherewithal for mens rea?

    I really don’t know.

    Don’t be daft, of course the overwhelming majority of low-IQ individuals who actually commit serious crimes readily fulfill the mens rea requirements. Mens rea doesn’t refer to something philosophical or an esoteric understanding of greater moral issues, it merely refers to the intent to commit the crime. When a man with an IQ of 70 rapes a woman and then slashes her throat he most certainly intended to rape and murder her. That’s sufficient for mens rea. The obviousness of this conclusion is why judges and lawyers had to come up with some arbitrary IQ baseline, rather than actually arguing that the defendant doesn’t fulfill the mens rea requirement. They’d be hopeless actually arguing it on a case by case basis.

    Perhaps you are referring to insanity defenses, rather than mens rea more generally. There are a variety of insanity tests, and some of them could perhaps be used to absolve the exceptionally stupid. Insanity defense isn’t some grand tradition of Anglo-Saxon law though, it is mostly just an arbitrary exception that is only utilized incredibly rarely. That’s a TV cliche much more than a legal reality. And I tend to doubt they would work with any regularity even if insanity defenses were commonly central to such cases. The cliched test is, of course, whether or not the defendant knew that the act was wrong. (I dunno whether or not this is really the most common test though, obviously it varies.) Not exactly a demanding standard, very small children seem more than capable of grasping such basic moral principles. Only the really severely retarded would have any chance of winning on such grounds. And if the killer made any attempt whatsoever to hide the crime or evade detection they’d have no defense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NickG

    The cliched test is, of course, whether or not the defendant knew that the act was wrong.
     
    I understand that in UK and most Anglo Saxon law, ignorance of the fact that something is a crime is no defence.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @JeremiahJohnbalaya
    Since IQ appears to be heritable, is it racist for low IQ parents to give birth? Or are they racist simply in that their children have similarly low IQ scores?

    Of course, the same logic would apply to high IQ parents.

    The kindest thing society could do for people of insufficient IQ to do well in that society would be to make sure they don’t give birth or impregnate another to do so. A hundred years ago we had people who had figured that out, but instead of honoring them as profoundly decent , moral and well meaning we curse them as “Nazis” even though many of them lived and in some cases died before the idea of National Socialism was even invented. Some of them were even Jewish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @Clyde
    So called rubbish collection in the UK ___ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4969542/Rubbish-collector-shocked-man-hiding-wheelie-bin.html

    In the USA we don't have any rubbish collectors but we do have garbage men. Matter of fact in some large cities they can make a mint. In NYC they make $70,000 w bulletproof pensions and bennies. $70,000 in 2009 (internet) so making more now.

    Seventy grand per annum probably ought to be minimum wage in Manhattan, at today’s real estate prices there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Paleo Liberal
    One interesting thing:

    We are not 100% sure WHAT the IQ test measures. What we DO know is there is a strong positive correlation between what the IQ test measures and types of intelligence necessary to thrive in European and American cultures.

    There is a school of thought that there are certain OTHER types of intelligence, which are NOT measured by an IQ test. For example, Jung seemed to think that many academics had much poorer emotional skills than did average working-class people. I think Jung came to some incorrect conclusions, so I won't go into more detail.

    Let's assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa, and some other tribal cultures. These may include the sort of emotional intelligence necessary to deal with maybe 200 other people in a village, the ability to tell stories and sing and dance (which makes people more attractive to those of the opposite sex. This is especially necessary for men). This may include what some people call physical intelligence -- the ability to read a situation quickly and apply whatever physical skills are needed.

    Consider the possibility that in both African and European societies, there is a positive correlation between different types of intelligence, but NOT a 1-1 relationship. Therefore, an African with a low IQ may have the same level of emotional intelligence as a European with a considerably higher IQ. Or the African may be a more creative musician, etc.

    A famous example of this would be Mohammed Ali. Remember, the Army originally rejected Ali due to his extremely low IQ. When they wanted to induct him, Ali had not gotten smarter. The Army was taking dumber people.

    However, Ali had quite a few skills that absolutely required types of intelligence NOT measured by IQ tests. He had a great emotional intelligence. He was quite creative. As far as physical intelligence, the guy was way off the charts. He also had a great deal of discipline and determination. Consider the Rumble in the Jungle against Foreman. Ali used his great people skills and creativity to get the Africans and the Media on his side. Then he used his incredible physical intelligence, combined with an almost superhuman discipline, to follow the rope-a-dope strategy and win the match.

    OK, so Ali was a bit of an outlier. He was below average for African Americans on the IQ test, but off the charts on other types of intelligence.

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.



    NOTE: I am not pushing this view. I am merely stating what the consequences of the hypothesis that there are many types of intelligence would be. And, one of the consequences is that African peoples have intelligence of sorts not measured by IQ tests. Whether these sorts of intelligence are valuable in European or Asian societies is a different question.

    Ali was no cognitive heavyweight by any normal measure, but judging by interviews and talk show appearances I’d say his IQ was probably a lot higher than 70, perhaps high eighties or low nineties. I suspect he may have been coached to sandbag the Army test.

    Would have been interesting to have had him thoroughly tested by real pros at the start of his career and through his boxing days.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @Old Palo Altan
    Should only murderers be put to death?
    I was reading an English newspaper from around 1820 the other day and noticed a list of court decisions and sentences, with the occasional quotation from the judgment. The following caught my eye:
    Lord Justice Neville, in announcing his sentence upon a young man of twenty who had been caught red-handed in the act of stealing a handkerchief, remarked that it would perhaps benefit the boy to be sent off to the wilds of Australia for life. But, on the other hand, who knew what might become of him there?
    At this point the narrative ended, and the reporter simply recorded the actual sentence: DEATH.

    A bit extreme perhaps, but surely the direction we need to be heading.

    Should only murderers be put to death?

    Murderers (and not all of those), traitors in time of declared war, grievous body mutilators like acid attackers in some circumstances maybe.

    Rapists, if proven to real standards, should have their penises and testicles removed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. @Seamus Padraig
    Doublethink.

    The IQ experts were particularly amused that newspapers that routinely condemn IQ tests as biased and meaningless were quick to endorse intelligence exams in this case.

    “To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morally while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forger it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself–that was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word “doublethink” involved the use of doublethink.” – 1984 by George Orwell

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @Paleo Liberal
    One interesting thing:

    We are not 100% sure WHAT the IQ test measures. What we DO know is there is a strong positive correlation between what the IQ test measures and types of intelligence necessary to thrive in European and American cultures.

    There is a school of thought that there are certain OTHER types of intelligence, which are NOT measured by an IQ test. For example, Jung seemed to think that many academics had much poorer emotional skills than did average working-class people. I think Jung came to some incorrect conclusions, so I won't go into more detail.

    Let's assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa, and some other tribal cultures. These may include the sort of emotional intelligence necessary to deal with maybe 200 other people in a village, the ability to tell stories and sing and dance (which makes people more attractive to those of the opposite sex. This is especially necessary for men). This may include what some people call physical intelligence -- the ability to read a situation quickly and apply whatever physical skills are needed.

    Consider the possibility that in both African and European societies, there is a positive correlation between different types of intelligence, but NOT a 1-1 relationship. Therefore, an African with a low IQ may have the same level of emotional intelligence as a European with a considerably higher IQ. Or the African may be a more creative musician, etc.

    A famous example of this would be Mohammed Ali. Remember, the Army originally rejected Ali due to his extremely low IQ. When they wanted to induct him, Ali had not gotten smarter. The Army was taking dumber people.

    However, Ali had quite a few skills that absolutely required types of intelligence NOT measured by IQ tests. He had a great emotional intelligence. He was quite creative. As far as physical intelligence, the guy was way off the charts. He also had a great deal of discipline and determination. Consider the Rumble in the Jungle against Foreman. Ali used his great people skills and creativity to get the Africans and the Media on his side. Then he used his incredible physical intelligence, combined with an almost superhuman discipline, to follow the rope-a-dope strategy and win the match.

    OK, so Ali was a bit of an outlier. He was below average for African Americans on the IQ test, but off the charts on other types of intelligence.

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.



    NOTE: I am not pushing this view. I am merely stating what the consequences of the hypothesis that there are many types of intelligence would be. And, one of the consequences is that African peoples have intelligence of sorts not measured by IQ tests. Whether these sorts of intelligence are valuable in European or Asian societies is a different question.

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.

    Steve has made this point before.

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/06/what-70-iq-looks-like.html

    This is reminiscent of the Supreme Court’s 2002 decision that effectively banned the death penalty for murderers with IQs of 70 or below. In the extended families of Supreme Court justices, IQs of 70 or less are inevitably associated with clear organic cases of mental retardation, such as Down Syndrome. But among African Americans, about 1/6th are no more than 70 IQ, just as about 1/6th are smarter than the average white American.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Blacks and Whites, in general, have very different cognitive maps, and reducing all the kinds of intelligence to a single number across the races does have unfair aspects. The 85 average underclass Black can do some things as well, or nearly as well, as a 100 IQ White, while failing completely at others.

    But IQ tests do somewhat closely parallel the kinds of intelligence it takes to succeed in a White, Western society. We know that about a tenth of blacks can really "make it" on White terms in the sense of genuinely succeeding against White competition on a truly level playing field. Maybe another five or so percent aren't quite there but are close enough not to be abject failures once positioned there.

    A lot of blacks do just fine on assembly lines, in the military in well defined repetitive positions, and in retail and food service jobs with basic but firm structure. For these, the best solution is to protect those jobs by cutting off (non merantile-minority) MENA and mestizo immigrants especially and arrange for America to return to the manufacture of consumer products and maybe somewhat more labor intensive agriculture.

    Yet others can not succeed at any job, for a variety of reasons. Once they have proven that to be the case, they (these particular ones) are a certain liability on our society, or any other. We can subsidize, sterilize and disenfranchise them, we can (voluntarily via incentives, or otherwise) geographically separate them, or we can, let's just say it, euthanize them. Or they are a growing liability that will in time kill us.

    To be clear I do not advocate euthanizing them. I do advocate the first two options on a voluntary basis, not that I think they are feasible to implement.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @Negrolphin Pool
    The execution-exempt author is suggesting the entire intelligence literature is built on research fatally tainted by confirmation bias.

    What’s so difficult about just saying that?

    I mean, if your IQ is above 70.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @Old Palo Altan
    Should only murderers be put to death?
    I was reading an English newspaper from around 1820 the other day and noticed a list of court decisions and sentences, with the occasional quotation from the judgment. The following caught my eye:
    Lord Justice Neville, in announcing his sentence upon a young man of twenty who had been caught red-handed in the act of stealing a handkerchief, remarked that it would perhaps benefit the boy to be sent off to the wilds of Australia for life. But, on the other hand, who knew what might become of him there?
    At this point the narrative ended, and the reporter simply recorded the actual sentence: DEATH.

    A bit extreme perhaps, but surely the direction we need to be heading.

    Handkerchief theft shouldn’t qualify, in my opinion.

    As federal law stands, I believe there are three capital crimes in addition to regular murder: certain kinds of felony murder, espionage, and treason.

    I wouldn’t mid adding certain kinds of rape and grievous assault.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @DFH

    Not only do people have worth beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.”
     
    So, according to Mr. Perry, if a test shows a racial difference, this is evidence that the test is racist. So the claim of intellectual equality between the races is literally unfalsifiable.

    (The class one seems to be going even further into madness though. Does Perry really believe that the children of rubbish collectors are on average as intelligent as those of CEOs, and its only classist IQ tests that show otherwise?)

    didn’t he mean (((abled middle- and upper-class white males)))?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. @roo_ster
    Vengance is as strong a reason as prevention of future harm done by the executed. When govt refuses to take vengeance on those who grievously harm its citizens, govt undermines its own legitimacy and re-opens to door to blood feud. We give up our right to blood feud only because we have some assurance that govt will meet out vengeance on our behalf.

    “Compassion towards the wicked is cruelty to all beings.”

    —Maimonides

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Stan Adams

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.
     
    Steve has made this point before.

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/06/what-70-iq-looks-like.html

    This is reminiscent of the Supreme Court's 2002 decision that effectively banned the death penalty for murderers with IQs of 70 or below. In the extended families of Supreme Court justices, IQs of 70 or less are inevitably associated with clear organic cases of mental retardation, such as Down Syndrome. But among African Americans, about 1/6th are no more than 70 IQ, just as about 1/6th are smarter than the average white American.
     

    Blacks and Whites, in general, have very different cognitive maps, and reducing all the kinds of intelligence to a single number across the races does have unfair aspects. The 85 average underclass Black can do some things as well, or nearly as well, as a 100 IQ White, while failing completely at others.

    But IQ tests do somewhat closely parallel the kinds of intelligence it takes to succeed in a White, Western society. We know that about a tenth of blacks can really “make it” on White terms in the sense of genuinely succeeding against White competition on a truly level playing field. Maybe another five or so percent aren’t quite there but are close enough not to be abject failures once positioned there.

    A lot of blacks do just fine on assembly lines, in the military in well defined repetitive positions, and in retail and food service jobs with basic but firm structure. For these, the best solution is to protect those jobs by cutting off (non merantile-minority) MENA and mestizo immigrants especially and arrange for America to return to the manufacture of consumer products and maybe somewhat more labor intensive agriculture.

    Yet others can not succeed at any job, for a variety of reasons. Once they have proven that to be the case, they (these particular ones) are a certain liability on our society, or any other. We can subsidize, sterilize and disenfranchise them, we can (voluntarily via incentives, or otherwise) geographically separate them, or we can, let’s just say it, euthanize them. Or they are a growing liability that will in time kill us.

    To be clear I do not advocate euthanizing them. I do advocate the first two options on a voluntary basis, not that I think they are feasible to implement.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    Thomas Jefferson wrote:

    Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me, that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous.

    It would be unfair to follow them to Africa for this investigation. We will consider them here, on the same stage with the whites, and where the facts are not apocryphal on which a judgment is to be formed.

    It will be right to make great allowances for the difference of condition, of education, of conversation, of the sphere in which they move. Many millions of them have been brought to, and born in America. Most of them indeed have been confined to tillage, to their own homes, and their own society: yet many have been so situated, that they might have availed themselves of the conversation of their masters; many have been brought up to the handicraft arts, and from that circumstance have always been associated with the whites. Some have been liberally educated, and all have lived in countries where the arts and sciences are cultivated to a considerable degree, and have had before their eyes samples of the best works from abroad.

    The Indians, with no advantages of this kind, will often carve figures on their pipes not destitute of design and merit. They will crayon out an animal, a plant, or a country, so as to prove the existence of a germ in their minds which only wants cultivation. They astonish you with strokes of the most sublime oratory; such as prove their reason and sentiment strong, their imagination glowing and elevated.

    But never yet could I find that a black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never see even an elementary trait, of painting or sculpture. In music they are more generally gifted than the whites with accurate ears for tune and time, and they have been found capable of imagining a small catch. Whether they will be equal to the composition of a more extensive run of melody, or of complicated harmony, is yet to be proved.

    Misery is often the parent of the most affecting touches in poetry. Among the blacks is misery enough, God knows, but no poetry.
    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    blacks do just fine on assembly lines, in the military

     

    No they don't. That's why cars are made in the South with illegal immigrants and not in Detroit. The military literally screens applicants with iq tests.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. @Paleo Liberal

    ** Darkie brand toothpaste was changed to “Darlie” in 1985 but the Chinese translation “Black Person Toothpaste” remains the same as it’s been since 1933, which demonstrates how superficially Asians observe PC mores.
     
    I lived in Taiwan in the early 1980s, and I remember Darkie Toothpaste very well. I believe it was a Hong Kong brand, since brands from the PRC were illegal to import to Taiwan.

    We Americans used to make fun of some of their brands, such as Long Life Cigarettes, and KKK matches.

    No, seriously, they had KKK matches, and nobody, I mean NOBODY associated it with the Ku Klux Klan. The reason? The Chinese used "3K" for the Klan, so seeing "KKK" simply didn't register. It would be like seeing "MMM" and not associating it with the "3M" company.

    The character on the toothpaste was a very black man with very white teeth, the idea being if you used his toothpaste your teeth could be that white. I believe when they changed the name to Darlie they kept the mascot.

    Darlie’s on sale throughout Hong Kong even now, and the mascot is indeed as you’ve described: LINK

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @Anonymous
    Blacks and Whites, in general, have very different cognitive maps, and reducing all the kinds of intelligence to a single number across the races does have unfair aspects. The 85 average underclass Black can do some things as well, or nearly as well, as a 100 IQ White, while failing completely at others.

    But IQ tests do somewhat closely parallel the kinds of intelligence it takes to succeed in a White, Western society. We know that about a tenth of blacks can really "make it" on White terms in the sense of genuinely succeeding against White competition on a truly level playing field. Maybe another five or so percent aren't quite there but are close enough not to be abject failures once positioned there.

    A lot of blacks do just fine on assembly lines, in the military in well defined repetitive positions, and in retail and food service jobs with basic but firm structure. For these, the best solution is to protect those jobs by cutting off (non merantile-minority) MENA and mestizo immigrants especially and arrange for America to return to the manufacture of consumer products and maybe somewhat more labor intensive agriculture.

    Yet others can not succeed at any job, for a variety of reasons. Once they have proven that to be the case, they (these particular ones) are a certain liability on our society, or any other. We can subsidize, sterilize and disenfranchise them, we can (voluntarily via incentives, or otherwise) geographically separate them, or we can, let's just say it, euthanize them. Or they are a growing liability that will in time kill us.

    To be clear I do not advocate euthanizing them. I do advocate the first two options on a voluntary basis, not that I think they are feasible to implement.

    Thomas Jefferson wrote:

    Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me, that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous.

    It would be unfair to follow them to Africa for this investigation. We will consider them here, on the same stage with the whites, and where the facts are not apocryphal on which a judgment is to be formed.

    It will be right to make great allowances for the difference of condition, of education, of conversation, of the sphere in which they move. Many millions of them have been brought to, and born in America. Most of them indeed have been confined to tillage, to their own homes, and their own society: yet many have been so situated, that they might have availed themselves of the conversation of their masters; many have been brought up to the handicraft arts, and from that circumstance have always been associated with the whites. Some have been liberally educated, and all have lived in countries where the arts and sciences are cultivated to a considerable degree, and have had before their eyes samples of the best works from abroad.

    The Indians, with no advantages of this kind, will often carve figures on their pipes not destitute of design and merit. They will crayon out an animal, a plant, or a country, so as to prove the existence of a germ in their minds which only wants cultivation. They astonish you with strokes of the most sublime oratory; such as prove their reason and sentiment strong, their imagination glowing and elevated.

    But never yet could I find that a black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never see even an elementary trait, of painting or sculpture. In music they are more generally gifted than the whites with accurate ears for tune and time, and they have been found capable of imagining a small catch. Whether they will be equal to the composition of a more extensive run of melody, or of complicated harmony, is yet to be proved.

    Misery is often the parent of the most affecting touches in poetry. Among the blacks is misery enough, God knows, but no poetry.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Thomas Jefferson-and many other leading lights of his time- were a lot smarter than we are today. So many of these people had Blacks, and so many other things figured out perfectly. It's too bad their knowledge is not required to be taught to all today.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. @eD
    This comment by Intelligent Dasein contains two valid and not obvious points.

    The first is that IQ tests were originally developed to see if people were retarded. They are by design most valuable in measuring if someone is retarded, and much less reliable to see if someone is a genius.

    The second is that the strongest, and really the only strong argument for the death penalty (I happen to be an opponent) is as a preventive measure. Some people are incapable of functioning without attacking other people because they are too stupid to understand right and wrong, are psycopaths, or whatever. Until medicine can get to the point where whatever is wrong with their brains is repairable, there is nothing that can be done about them but to eliminate them. Not only should having an IQ under 70 not be a bar to execution, we should be executing only people with IQs under 70!

    “Some people are incapable of functioning without attacking other people because they are too stupid to understand right and wrong, are psycopaths, or whatever”

    Yet people are not tested for IQ when voting for politicians. Does anyone believe that people with IQ below 80 can understand complicated ideas? Of course we can dumb down everything we read to an IQ of about 80.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Stan Adams
    Thomas Jefferson wrote:

    Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me, that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous.

    It would be unfair to follow them to Africa for this investigation. We will consider them here, on the same stage with the whites, and where the facts are not apocryphal on which a judgment is to be formed.

    It will be right to make great allowances for the difference of condition, of education, of conversation, of the sphere in which they move. Many millions of them have been brought to, and born in America. Most of them indeed have been confined to tillage, to their own homes, and their own society: yet many have been so situated, that they might have availed themselves of the conversation of their masters; many have been brought up to the handicraft arts, and from that circumstance have always been associated with the whites. Some have been liberally educated, and all have lived in countries where the arts and sciences are cultivated to a considerable degree, and have had before their eyes samples of the best works from abroad.

    The Indians, with no advantages of this kind, will often carve figures on their pipes not destitute of design and merit. They will crayon out an animal, a plant, or a country, so as to prove the existence of a germ in their minds which only wants cultivation. They astonish you with strokes of the most sublime oratory; such as prove their reason and sentiment strong, their imagination glowing and elevated.

    But never yet could I find that a black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never see even an elementary trait, of painting or sculpture. In music they are more generally gifted than the whites with accurate ears for tune and time, and they have been found capable of imagining a small catch. Whether they will be equal to the composition of a more extensive run of melody, or of complicated harmony, is yet to be proved.

    Misery is often the parent of the most affecting touches in poetry. Among the blacks is misery enough, God knows, but no poetry.

    Thomas Jefferson-and many other leading lights of his time- were a lot smarter than we are today. So many of these people had Blacks, and so many other things figured out perfectly. It’s too bad their knowledge is not required to be taught to all today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. “but IQ also routinely awards higher numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing ideologies in the name of “science.””

    I guess that he has never heard about East Asians and Jews, both of whom outperform Gentile Whites on IQ tests.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  129. @Paleo Liberal
    One interesting thing:

    We are not 100% sure WHAT the IQ test measures. What we DO know is there is a strong positive correlation between what the IQ test measures and types of intelligence necessary to thrive in European and American cultures.

    There is a school of thought that there are certain OTHER types of intelligence, which are NOT measured by an IQ test. For example, Jung seemed to think that many academics had much poorer emotional skills than did average working-class people. I think Jung came to some incorrect conclusions, so I won't go into more detail.

    Let's assume for a minute that there are certain types of intelligence which are necessary to thrive in Africa, and some other tribal cultures. These may include the sort of emotional intelligence necessary to deal with maybe 200 other people in a village, the ability to tell stories and sing and dance (which makes people more attractive to those of the opposite sex. This is especially necessary for men). This may include what some people call physical intelligence -- the ability to read a situation quickly and apply whatever physical skills are needed.

    Consider the possibility that in both African and European societies, there is a positive correlation between different types of intelligence, but NOT a 1-1 relationship. Therefore, an African with a low IQ may have the same level of emotional intelligence as a European with a considerably higher IQ. Or the African may be a more creative musician, etc.

    A famous example of this would be Mohammed Ali. Remember, the Army originally rejected Ali due to his extremely low IQ. When they wanted to induct him, Ali had not gotten smarter. The Army was taking dumber people.

    However, Ali had quite a few skills that absolutely required types of intelligence NOT measured by IQ tests. He had a great emotional intelligence. He was quite creative. As far as physical intelligence, the guy was way off the charts. He also had a great deal of discipline and determination. Consider the Rumble in the Jungle against Foreman. Ali used his great people skills and creativity to get the Africans and the Media on his side. Then he used his incredible physical intelligence, combined with an almost superhuman discipline, to follow the rope-a-dope strategy and win the match.

    OK, so Ali was a bit of an outlier. He was below average for African Americans on the IQ test, but off the charts on other types of intelligence.

    Consider the differences between an African with an IQ of 70 and a European with an IQ of 70. The European is probably stone cold stupid in every sense of the word. Unless the European is an idiot savant, he is probably way below average in every form of intelligence.

    The African with an IQ of 70 could very well have levels of creativity, emotional skills and physical skills that would be superior to a European with an IQ of 100.



    NOTE: I am not pushing this view. I am merely stating what the consequences of the hypothesis that there are many types of intelligence would be. And, one of the consequences is that African peoples have intelligence of sorts not measured by IQ tests. Whether these sorts of intelligence are valuable in European or Asian societies is a different question.

    I think he is full of shit, but Howard Gardner thinks there are 8 types of intelligence. The Harvard developmental psychologist is still alive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    The Harvard developmental psychologist is still alive.
     
    And why shouldn't we expect him to be? He's only 74, the same age as Keith Richards, whose survival would give us considerably more reason to pause.

    The way you wrote that, I would expected him to be 100 or so, as, say , Edgerton lived to.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @ScarletNumber
    I think he is full of shit, but Howard Gardner thinks there are 8 types of intelligence. The Harvard developmental psychologist is still alive.

    The Harvard developmental psychologist is still alive.

    And why shouldn’t we expect him to be? He’s only 74, the same age as Keith Richards, whose survival would give us considerably more reason to pause.

    The way you wrote that, I would expected him to be 100 or so, as, say , Edgerton lived to.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal

    And why shouldn’t we expect him to be? He’s only 74, the same age as Keith Richards, whose survival would give us considerably more reason to pause.
     
    It is possible Keith Richards is a genetic fluke.



    We know Ozzy Ozborne is a genetic fluke. At one point Ozzy commissioned some scientists to explain why he, Ozzy, was still alive.

    The conclusions:

    1. Sharon. If Sharon had not gotten Ozzy to straighten up his act, he would be dead now.

    2. Ozzy really is a genetic fluke. It turns out that he metabolizes alcohol differently from normal people, making alcohol significantly less toxic to him.
    , @ScarletNumber
    Because a lot of the most famous educational theorists such as Dewey, Piaget, Maslow, et al are long dead.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @Anonymous
    Blacks and Whites, in general, have very different cognitive maps, and reducing all the kinds of intelligence to a single number across the races does have unfair aspects. The 85 average underclass Black can do some things as well, or nearly as well, as a 100 IQ White, while failing completely at others.

    But IQ tests do somewhat closely parallel the kinds of intelligence it takes to succeed in a White, Western society. We know that about a tenth of blacks can really "make it" on White terms in the sense of genuinely succeeding against White competition on a truly level playing field. Maybe another five or so percent aren't quite there but are close enough not to be abject failures once positioned there.

    A lot of blacks do just fine on assembly lines, in the military in well defined repetitive positions, and in retail and food service jobs with basic but firm structure. For these, the best solution is to protect those jobs by cutting off (non merantile-minority) MENA and mestizo immigrants especially and arrange for America to return to the manufacture of consumer products and maybe somewhat more labor intensive agriculture.

    Yet others can not succeed at any job, for a variety of reasons. Once they have proven that to be the case, they (these particular ones) are a certain liability on our society, or any other. We can subsidize, sterilize and disenfranchise them, we can (voluntarily via incentives, or otherwise) geographically separate them, or we can, let's just say it, euthanize them. Or they are a growing liability that will in time kill us.

    To be clear I do not advocate euthanizing them. I do advocate the first two options on a voluntary basis, not that I think they are feasible to implement.

    blacks do just fine on assembly lines, in the military

    No they don’t. That’s why cars are made in the South with illegal immigrants and not in Detroit. The military literally screens applicants with iq tests.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. @Anonymous

    The Harvard developmental psychologist is still alive.
     
    And why shouldn't we expect him to be? He's only 74, the same age as Keith Richards, whose survival would give us considerably more reason to pause.

    The way you wrote that, I would expected him to be 100 or so, as, say , Edgerton lived to.

    And why shouldn’t we expect him to be? He’s only 74, the same age as Keith Richards, whose survival would give us considerably more reason to pause.

    It is possible Keith Richards is a genetic fluke.

    We know Ozzy Ozborne is a genetic fluke. At one point Ozzy commissioned some scientists to explain why he, Ozzy, was still alive.

    The conclusions:

    1. Sharon. If Sharon had not gotten Ozzy to straighten up his act, he would be dead now.

    2. Ozzy really is a genetic fluke. It turns out that he metabolizes alcohol differently from normal people, making alcohol significantly less toxic to him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. @Fidelios Automata
    Why should low IQ exempt someone from the death penalty? Even the basest simpleton knows that murder is wrong. Stupidity is no excuse.

    Why should low IQ exempt someone from the death penalty? Even the basest simpleton knows that murder is wrong. Stupidity is no excuse.

    I am inclined to agree with you.

    A low IQ murderer might calculate wrongly that he can get away with murder or misunderstand the source of his problems/anger. But being, say, hot-tempered or impulsive or possessing a sour personality or being greedy are not contained by IQ. They are something else.

    This reminds me of the European judges who argue that an alien immigrant who, say, rapes a boy should not be harshly punished because he didn’t understand the cultural nuances. Rubbish – no cultural knowledge is necessary to know it was wrong.

    Similarly even the dullest among us surely knows that murder is wrong and evil or would they not do it all the time?

    (What happens in African countries where the mean IQ is below 70 I wonder?)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. @Anonymous

    The Harvard developmental psychologist is still alive.
     
    And why shouldn't we expect him to be? He's only 74, the same age as Keith Richards, whose survival would give us considerably more reason to pause.

    The way you wrote that, I would expected him to be 100 or so, as, say , Edgerton lived to.

    Because a lot of the most famous educational theorists such as Dewey, Piaget, Maslow, et al are long dead.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @Intelligent Dasein

    Should only murderers be put to death?
     
    I'm in favor of the death penalty for an expanded list of crimes beyond homicides.

    The degrees of punishment meted out by a society depend on its overall level of wealth, comfort, and stability. When everyone is living from hand to mouth (as they were throughout most human history) nobody thinks it excessive to hand down a sentence of death for stealing a loaf of bread, and petty thieves are marched to gallows while the public jeers and applauds. This is not because the denizens of past centuries were more cruel than we are, but because they felt the weight of the crime so much more.

    Modern people, accustomed to living in comfort and abundance, have largely lost the instinct to punish. "What do I care about these parasites of mine," they say. "I have more than enough for all." Not only do the crimes no longer sting, and therefore render it difficult to summon up a spirit of indignation, but the held-over formulas of Christian morality concerning forgiveness, long since transvaluated into egotistic bromides, allow for magnanimous moral posturing on the part of those who would lessen every sentence and excuse every fault. This, by the way, also explains why it has been so difficult to get Americans to take their immigration problem seriously. No one feels any sense of ownership in the country and no one cares until it is their ox getting gored.

    I highly recommend everyone read Nietzsche's The Genealogy of Morals for a wealth of insight on this topic, if the have not done so already.

    You put your finger on one of the principal problems: the emasculated Christianity so sickeningly personified by “pope” Francis. It is only too likely, given the supine nature of the church’s leadership today, that he will succeed in bringing about the unconditional condemnation of the death penalty in a revised edition of the the Catholic catechism.
    A Church which would turn its back in this way on its perennial and reasoned thinking on this matter would no longer be worthy of belief about anything. In other words, it would no longer be the Church, but just another church among many, far too many.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. @J1234

    At this point the narrative ended, and the reporter simply recorded the actual sentence: DEATH.

    A bit extreme perhaps, but surely the direction we need to
    BE HEADING.
     

    :) Pun intended?

    John Locke believed in capital punishment for property crimes. I don't agree with that position, but I do understand his logic. Locke saw property as sort of an extension of one's self. His argument was that if somebody had rejected society's rules with regards to property, would they not also ultimately reject society's rules with regards to liberty and life if given a chance?

    Probably some wisdom in that. How many murderers today were first thieves? A lot. But not all. Nor are all thieves murderers.

    Pun not intented -I hate puns.

    On the other hand I had written something different to begin with and changed it without quite knowing why.

    So perhaps my subconscious likes puns, even if I don’t.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. @HEL

    Does someone with an IQ of less than 70 have the wherewithal for mens rea?

    I really don’t know.
     
    Don't be daft, of course the overwhelming majority of low-IQ individuals who actually commit serious crimes readily fulfill the mens rea requirements. Mens rea doesn't refer to something philosophical or an esoteric understanding of greater moral issues, it merely refers to the intent to commit the crime. When a man with an IQ of 70 rapes a woman and then slashes her throat he most certainly intended to rape and murder her. That's sufficient for mens rea. The obviousness of this conclusion is why judges and lawyers had to come up with some arbitrary IQ baseline, rather than actually arguing that the defendant doesn't fulfill the mens rea requirement. They'd be hopeless actually arguing it on a case by case basis.

    Perhaps you are referring to insanity defenses, rather than mens rea more generally. There are a variety of insanity tests, and some of them could perhaps be used to absolve the exceptionally stupid. Insanity defense isn't some grand tradition of Anglo-Saxon law though, it is mostly just an arbitrary exception that is only utilized incredibly rarely. That's a TV cliche much more than a legal reality. And I tend to doubt they would work with any regularity even if insanity defenses were commonly central to such cases. The cliched test is, of course, whether or not the defendant knew that the act was wrong. (I dunno whether or not this is really the most common test though, obviously it varies.) Not exactly a demanding standard, very small children seem more than capable of grasping such basic moral principles. Only the really severely retarded would have any chance of winning on such grounds. And if the killer made any attempt whatsoever to hide the crime or evade detection they'd have no defense.

    The cliched test is, of course, whether or not the defendant knew that the act was wrong.

    I understand that in UK and most Anglo Saxon law, ignorance of the fact that something is a crime is no defence.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Research has identified embedded racism in IQ tests nature.

    FIFT.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored