/lit/ - Literature

Read Gould's The Mismeasure of Man with it. Some of his science and incriminations may be slightly off but his love for natural history surpasses most other authors. Makes several fair points on the issue but is too bleeding heart to be impartial.

Very good book. Most of the criticisms of it were rather shallow.

>>3461014
>Read Gould's The Mismeasure of Man with it.

Gould was a complete hack. Jensen absolutely took his book apart in his review:

http://www.debunker.com/texts/jens.html

>>3461014
>>3461017
you guys are so gullible.

Our stormbabby was busy whining because everyone is ignoring him

>>3461022

I did say to read it for the natural history, not for his interpretations.

I'm surprised people are still deferring to Gould as an authority after that Morton fiasco.

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/topicseta/gould-morton-lewis-2011.html

Graphs are mostly disinformation, because there are very, very few circumstances in which two factors alone determine an event. The human brain can only think about one thing at a time, so the human mind sees the graph, its simplicity, and agrees with it.

>>3461034

Yeah, I was pretty disappointed. His essays are still great though, except for the obligatory baseball one in each book. Wonderful Life had some great ideas and hypotheses.

>>3461074
>there are very, very few circumstances in which two factors alone determine an event.
Yes.
>Graphs are mostly disinformation
>Something has to be determined exactly by the factors in a graph in order to qualify as information.
Do you know what correlation is?

>>3461091
>Do you know what correlation is?
Extremely limited.

>>3461141

you gotta put your trust somewhere

>>3461017
I agree. More people should read it but don't want to out of cognitive dissonance.

>>3461025
> reading literature I don't like means you go to stormfront!
I thought this board was suppose to be intellgent

Liberals hate any facts that go against their politically correct narrative. They are the true anti-science crowd.

>>3461685
No, it's because it's a racist book. Go waste your time, if you want.

>>3461720
> IQ is racist!
Next your going to tell me race doesn't exist and we have exactly the same intellgence as aborigines.

>>3461721
Everyone knows race is a social construct nowadays and when I say everyone, I mean academia, excluding the minority of intellectual-dwarfs (you and your ilk).

>exactly the same intellgence as aborigines

I'm afraid aborigines can spell intelligence correctly. You can always make the case, that your backwards, hillbilly family never taught you how to spell, but as it is, you're a dumbass and dumber than aborigines.

>>3461729
> muh appeal to authority
So you do think aborigines have exactly the same intelligence as every other race. Good to know im sure people will take you seriously.

>>3461734
forgot pic

>>3461734
wont let me post the other one this one will do though.

>>3461729
Nobody think race exists as an objective line between people, but rather as a term used to describe a group of individuals with similar genetic markers. From a genetic perspective, it is very possible to determine someone's race, as different "races" have different heights, muscle densities, disease risks, etc.

They evolved in different areas under different condition, so naturally they are distinct in the same way as a finch.

>>3461729
I love how you assuke im white. Im asian. the fact you think race doesn't exist and your response only proves how brainwashed you people are.

>>3461759
assume*

It's odd how the same people who readily accept the physical differences between different racial groups but will not accept even the possibility of differences in mental capacity.

I'm not saying there are any differences, but if two groups of people in two separate locations can evolve certain traits to suit their respective environments, why is intelligence not included? We can see that people living in extremely cold climates developed short and stocky builds to conserve heat, we can see that people in areas with high exposure to sunlight developed an increase in melatonin production to guard against skin cancer, we can see that people in areas with little exposure to the sun developed a characteristic of less melatonin to increase production of vitamin D, why then is it so blasphemous to hypothesize that different groups of people developed smarter brains perhaps in response to living in an environment where tool making or agriculture had great importance.

>>3461782
Because dats racist. Therefore its somehow not true.

question. how can you be racist if race doesn't exist?

Oh God, the /pol/ idiots are out tonight

How the fuck do you people define 'race'? Ethnicities I can accept, but races?

>>3461812
fucking sage for communism - racist fuckheads leave /lit/

>a slightly lower IQ means people can't behave civilized and get a 9-5 job

Is that what you're saying?

>>3461822
who are you talking to?

>>3461820
for communism? what? Dude this is literature.

>>3461831
People like OP who are trying to prove some kind of point by showing us collective data.

I wish statistics actually worked like this, because I'd be rich, 1.90m tall and have the one of the biggest dicks in Europe, but the reality is that that I'm a borderline manlet with an average dick and currently zero income.

What are we supposed to do with this?

>>3461822
What we are saying is that some listerine-guzzling native american with an IQ of 75 should not be put into high government office or have his opinions be given the same weight as an intelligent white or Asian for no other reason than MUH FEELINGS, MUH VISIBLE MINORITY ROLE MODELS.

What we are not saying is that people with a low or lower IQ should be looked down upon or denigrated, or that they cannot be productive members of society. I think its bullshit that the people who do our manual labour are held in as much contempt as they are.

What we are also not saying is that race determines IQ. It is a fact that blacks and aborigines have a lower average IQ than whites, and that there is therefore a greater proportion of stupid blacks and aborigines. It does not mean that there are no very intelligent blacks or aborigines. Remember, you shouldn't take statistics personally.

>>3461840
His exact words were
> What does /lit/ think of this?
You people are so defensive against anyway that dears challenge your leftist dogma.

>>3461847
>What we are not saying is that people with a low or lower IQ should be looked down upon or denigrated, or that they cannot be productive members of society.
>What we are saying is that some listerine-guzzling native american with an IQ of 75 should not be put into high government office or have his opinions be given the same weight as an intelligent white or Asian
> I think its bullshit that the people who do our manual labour are held in as much contempt as they are.

I hope you see the incongruity

absolute drivel

>>3461851
>you people are so defensive against anyway that dears challenge your leftist dogma.
>implying I'm a leftist

Don't you see through your own hypocrisy, you dense fuck? You should receive the treatment described in the post above.

>>3461854
> implying your not
Nice try

>>3461847
>What we are also not saying is that race determines IQ.
Cool, I think we can all agree on this

>>3461855
I bet you have the statistics to prove it.

I'm not the one proposing mass action or government action here, lefty. If you want to hold people in contempt, do it in your free time, statist.

>>3461847
I'm against discrimination of both kinds, but I'm for equal rights. If I remember correctly, this is a classic "liberal" standpoint.

All I derived from your post was
>a slightly lower IQ means people can't behave civilized and get a 9-5 job

>2013
>thinking human worth -//- intelligence

lel

>>3461861
Its not slightly lower its on average 15 points lower which is one standard deviation.

>>3461871
Oh that changes everything!

LYNCH THE BLACK FOLKS!! And surely the below average white, Asian etc etc?

>>3461847
as if we have ever had 1 native-american with an IQ of 75 in a high government office EVER

gtfo

>>3461872
When have I ever said that strawman steve? Its funny how you cant even discuss topics such as this without resorting to such fallacies.

>>3461847
>listerine-guzzling native american with an IQ of 75

>tfw the average American IQ is 80

Looks like the pretentious /lit/ intelligentsia missed The Human Genome Project, not to mention history/poverty of groups that affect IQ and academic achievement.

>>3461876
What is your point then?

>>3461876
Well if they're on average dumber than white people, then I think we need to actively compensate in terms of affirmative action programs. It would be unfair that they should be discriminated against based on their unfortunate genetics which they have had no say on.

>>3461884
The point of affirmative action is to combat the negative effects of socioeconomics, genetics, culture, etc.

>>3461847

>still believing in the clumsy metrics used to fabricate the concept of IQ

>>3461882
nothing I just made post saying the average black has a lower IQ by 15 points then the average white. 15 Points is a pretty big deal especially when considering that they make those tests so education and cultural factors don't apply.

Why did that /pol/fag delete his shitty book recommendation thread?

>>3461920
that wasn't a /pol/ fag

>>3461918
>don't apply
l o l

>>3461852
Alcoholic native americans are not productive members of society, their IQ is not dependent on their alcoholism or vice versa, and they do none of our manual labour.

There is no incongruity.

>>3461858
I'm glad.

>>3461861
75 is not "slightly lower," and it is disingenuous to compare the extremes to the difference between someone who scores 110 and someone who scores 120. The average white american IQ is ~100. The average black american IQ is ~85. Hardly a slight difference. Any black with intelligence, honestly, or a willingness to work hard is worthy of respect. Unfortunately, the regrettable IQ shortfall keeps those in short supply.

>liberal
Equal rights yes, equal outcome no.

>>3461875
>america is the whole world
As regards your "high government office remark," I suggest reading up on the reserve system in Canada.

I should also point out that I said high government office OR have his opinions given the same weight as an intelligent white or Asian. The second is an undeniable occurrence in any part of the world.

>>3461936
Yes that's right .Thats specifically how they are designed so it doesent include such factors.

>>3461939
>he actually believes this is possible

laughinggirls.jpg

>>3461739
>>3461782
Funny how actual thought-out posts get 0 replies because of all that TOLD.

>>3461943
Have you ever seen a IQ test you blithering moron?

>>3461947
>thought-out

hahahahahahahhaha

>A United States Department of Justice report which surveyed homicide statistics between 1974 and 2004 stated that of the crimes surveyed, 52.2% of the offenders were Black.

>>3461951
they are thats why you cant counter them. Your cognitive dissonance is showing.

>>3461951
I'll take that as a concession of defeat. So far the score is as follows.

People who arrive at conclusions based on scientific evidence: 6

Postmodernist high school students who claim that facts disproving their egalitarian agenda and/or that hurts their feelings: 0

whats it about?

>>3461958
TL;DR some people have higher IQ's than others

Get over it, don't try to pass moral judgements based on something so trivial.

>>3461970
Where the fuck have I passed judgments? I'm just tired of our school system ignoring facts in pursuit of some egalitarian wonderland that will never exist.

>>3461967
ITT
captcha: truly xphtrh

>>3461975
Surely those figures aren't that simple. That's implying black students have the same environmental and familal opportunities and priveleges as other 'races'

>>3461980
See >>3461739.

Poor whites at the very bottom of society score almost the exact same as extremely rich black children. You're not doing anyone any favors by denying reality. Just because certain groups are less intelligent doesn't mean we have to enslave them or anything.

>>3461986
No kidding. It's like lefties equate "racial differences include variations in intelligence" with "gas the blacks!"

>>3462001
>>3461986
It's hardly going to do much good for public discourse

>>3462007
So facts that have potential to upset others should be suppressed? Nice to know that lefties are just as anti-science as the religious right.

>>3462017
>implying science isn't ideological

>>3462001
>racial differences include variations in intelligence
So are the Kyrghiz and Kazakh people of different races? What about the Finns and the Lithuanians?

(You're a moron, and a coward, BTW. Man up and do your hating of the nignog in public, without the ridiculous figleaf of 'IQ scores' to cover it up. Irrational xenophobia is OK, everyone does it. Lying to yourself about it is not, however.)

>Tests performed in the United States have consistently demonstrated a significant degree of variation between different racial groups, with the average score of those with African ancestry lower than that of European ancestry and the average score of those with East Asian ancestry being higher than that of European ancestry
>East Asian ancestry being higher than that of European ancestry
>East Asian ancestry being higher than that of European ancestry
>East Asian ancestry being higher than that of European ancestry

Thread claimed by future masters of the world, Korea.

>>3462007
and? We shouldn't just stick our heads in the sand and lie ourselves when the truth is right in front of us

>>3462020
>So are the Kyrghiz and Kazakh people of different races? What about the Finns and the Lithuanians?

Why do you bleeding hearts talk about things that you clearly haven't looked into at all? I've said multiple times that race isn't black and white, but rather a term used to describe certain genetic clustering.

>>3461721
*you're

A thread about the Turner diaries, about The Bell Curve, and about The G Factor?

There's one samefagging stormfag OP who's especially bored today.

>>3462024
Why give such a primacy to something as arbitrary as IQ?

Why not measure social skills, utility, trustworthyness, loyalty, creativity or whatever?

>>3462020
What are you going on about? You are clearly irrational you see someone discussing something you don't like and you just can't take it because you are intellectually dishonest.

>>3462027
>people who have opinions that hurt my "le feels" are all from Stormfront and want to kill 12 trillion jews xD

>>3462021
Sunny hijack.

>>3462028
You could do it with another test. IQ test are not "arbitrary" its a pretty decent measure of intelligence but it is in by no means perfect however its probably the best known test thay mankind has when measureing things like abstract thought and problem solving.

>>3461952
Try to find anything that says a high-income black population commits any more crime than a high-income white population. Hard mode: make sure both have the same population density.

She's so sexy, so cool.

She's the baddest girl I've seen.

I'm wondering why I only see her in my dreams.

The love of my life, she's the only one for me.

My L.O.V.E., ohhhh my L.O.V.E.

>>3462028
IQ isn't something that existed until the test. It's not quite the same thing as intelligence. If you had trustQ for example, it wouldn't measure your actual trustworthiness, but some vague notion of your potential to be trustworthy. This is also one of the many reasons why IQ is balls. It's really very similar to stats in RPGs.

>>3462040
>its probably the best known test thay mankind has when measureing things like abstract thought and problem solving.
who gives a shit about abstract thought and problem solving

>>3462041
seem difficult to find we can tell poor whites commit less crime then poor blacks by comparing west virgina and Mississippi crime rates.

>>3462041
It's time to give up.

>>3462044
>Asking who gives a fuck about abstract thought on /lit/
Seriously?

Official racial hierarchy -

Jews > East Asians > Western Europeans > Eastern Europeans > Persians > Arabs > Darker Asians > Blacks = Aboriginals

>>3462046
Skimmed and found nothing concerning what I was actually talking about - crime.

>>3462046
are you guys going to make a point soon? What do you want to achieve if we agree that some score higher in tests than others? Who gives a shit?

>>3462046
>small group (130)
>no margins of error
That graph, if anything, shows that adopted kids might do worse, and if they do are about equally worse.

/pol/ is leaking. enact all containment protocols.

>>3462052
>>3462050
>>3462044
You're the only ones who are interpreting black mental inferiority as some sort of justification for genocide. I would just like to prevent our schools from being dumbed down even further to accommodate those who aren't as intelligent, it hurts us as a country to keep lowering our standards.

See >>3461975

>>3461183
This is unrelated though.

There is a law underlying this, even if that law was made from induction.

Pressure is determined by amount of molecules, or matter, per area / space. Your graph shows this, but your graph does not show the underlying law. A vacuum for example, but not get more pressure if you decreased the volume, as there was zero pressure to begin with.

Not sure what you wanted to show with your post, but thanks for the pic, saved it.

>>3462056
Who's /pol/ here? I fully acknowledge Jewish mental superiority.

At least 187 Jews and people of half- or three-quarters-Jewish ancestry have been awarded the Nobel Prize,1 accounting for 22% of all individual recipients worldwide between 1901 and 2012, and constituting 36% of all US recipients2 during the same period.3 In the research fields of Chemistry, Economics, Physics, and Physiology/Medicine, the corresponding world and US percentages are 27% and 39%, respectively. Among women laureates in the four research fields, the Jewish percentages (world and US) are 38% and 50%, respectively. Of organizations awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, 24% were founded principally by Jews or by people of half-Jewish descent. (Jews currently make up approximately 0.2% of the world's population and 2% of the US population.)

Chemistry (33 prize winners, 20% of world total, 30% of US total)
Economics (29 prize winners, 41% of world total, 53% of US total)
Literature (13 prize winners, 12% of world total, 27% of US total)
Peace (9 prize winners, 9% of world total, 10% of US total)4
Physics (50 prize winners, 26% of world total, 37% of US total)
Physiology or Medicine (53 prize winners, 26% of world total, 39% of US total)

/lit/ is one of the most normalfag boards, so they are too immersed in pop culture to accept the truth. When you've been brainwashed by a PC culture and public school system, it's hard to truly blossom as an individual.

Oh and this throws a monkey wrench into things. Genetically speaking, calling "black" a "race" is fucking stupid, because there is more genetic diversity in Sub-Saharan Africa alone than on every other continent combined.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com009-05-01/news/36836404_1_geneticakeup-sarah-tishkoff-africans

>>3462062
I blame the jews who own the publishing industry.

>>3462063
There's more diversity as far as the differences within the specific African genetic cluster, but as usual the article aims to be intentionally misleading. There's much more distance between clusters than there are inside clusters.

>>3462062
>implying science and Enlightenment appeals to reason and instrumental rationalism hasn't brainwashed you totally and utterly

>>3462063
You are such a fucking sheep it's amusing.

>>3462070
>appeals to reason

I knew this was coming.

>f-facts don't exist because they render my naive idealistic worldview hopeless!!!! d-d-define definition!!! prove I exist!

>>3462059

>what's /pol/ about this thread?
>posts the most /pol/ thing ever

Why are you people here? This thread is nothing to do with literature, it belongs on /pol/. I'm slightly confused.

>>3462081
Proving that Jews are superior to whites is /pol/? Do you even know what you're talking about?

>>3462074
I laughed harder then I should have. That impression of /lit/ was spot on.

>>3462081
We are discussing a book. The bell curve I wish we could just set aside random hostilities and just talk about it without having to change the subject though.

>>3462068
What is the definition of a "genetic cluster"? What is your definition of a "genetic difference"? And where did that chart come from? (I'm not sure what it says because the axis aren't labeled)

>>3462087

Caring and obsessing over race, jews, IQ and statistics about race and IQ and jews is /pol/, it belongs on /pol/ and has nothing to do with /lit/ I don't have a problem with you guys, I'm just intrigued as to why you spilled out. Was /pol/ not big enough? Do you need another board?

>>3462074
Enlightenment's reliance upon universal principle and reason is always incipiently totalitarian, because the appeal to an always-correct Reason is itself a system of control and will always exclude what it makes marginal, simply by seeing it as non-rational.
Science denies all interpretations and questions all beliefs for the sake of the truth. However science never questions or doubts the value of truth itself. This unbending faith in absolute truth is only a disguised version of the ascetic priest's unbending faith in an absolute God.

Stay serfs to science, worshippers

>>3462091
>What is the definition of a "genetic cluster"?

A group of people with similar genetic traits.

>What is your definition of a "genetic difference"?

A large array of things. Different clusters of people that we refer to as "races" have different height levels, eye size, muscle density, susceptibility to diseases, fat storing locations, the list goes on. It's helpful to make note of these differences, especially for health reasons and certain groups may be especially sensitive to specific viruses or illnesses.

nothing justifies going against consensus science as a layman

I used to be brainwashed by this racial nonsense but I've since been blue-pilled. There simply is not conclusive evidence that race exists outside of being a social construct. You'll notice that every time a scientist tries to define it, they start out by assuming that it is true to begin with. The most fallacious fucking brainwashing on the planet.

>>3462092
/pol/ obsesses about and hates the Jews, so I was acknowledging that I fully accept the mental superiority of the Jewish people. How dense are you?

>>3462097
>>3462094

>>3462089

I don't mean to be hostile, it's just that this discussion and thread would be far more at home on /pol/ than here.

>>3462095
how are these 'racial' groups?

>>3462101
>huge chunk of /pol/ are butthurt muslims

>>3462102
get the fuck out back to /v/

>>3461074
>Graphs are mostly disinformation

>>3462104
It's a descriptive term used to refer to a genetic cluster of people. How hard is this to understand?

>>3461729
>race is a social construct

A scientific construct based on genetics and phenotypes actually. It's a perfectly legitimate way to categorise peoples.

>>3462109
it's pretty hard to jump to those conclusions when you actually follow a rational train of thought and don't fill in the gaps with preconceived biases

genetic clusters are genetic clusters. they have nothing to do with 'race'

>>3462111
>scientific

no it was a term in use before genetics was even a field. it was based on the 'empirical' observation that some people looked different to others

>>3462114
>genetic clusters are genetic clusters. they have nothing to do with 'race'

Jesus you're fucking thick. How many times do I have to state that race isn't like a fucking on and off switch? It's just a word used to refer to certain groups of people who are genetically similar.

Talking with something so brainwashed is physically painful.

>>3462095

man race, woman race, googly eye race, walking stick race, fat race

>>3462119
>It's just a word used to refer to certain groups of people who are genetically similar.

based on arbitrary principles?

what definition are you going by? link me to this definition

or are you just interpreting 'genetic similarity' to affirm whatever scale you want to be talking about at the time?

>>3462122
Many dichotomies exist, race is just one of them. Men and women are indeed genetically different, shocking I know.

>>3462124
>based on arbitrary principles?

What the actual fuck are you even babbling about? I guess I'll quote myself since you seem to suffer from memory loss.

>Different clusters of people that we refer to as "races" have different height levels, eye size, muscle density, susceptibility to diseases, fat storing locations, the list goes on. It's helpful to make note of these differences, especially for health reasons and certain groups may be especially sensitive to specific viruses or illnesses.

>>3462127
You're embarrassing yourself here, please just stop

>>3462127
so yes they're just arbitrary principles

hey buddy i'm genetically different to you so by your asinine logic i must be a different race entirely

do you understand now how fucking vague the concept is that you're defending? is is coincidence that you completely avoided finding the definition in a standardised publication for me to check so i know you're not bullshitting?

you're fucking brainwashed, junior. don't fool yourself otherwise

>>3462134
It's alright, I'll allow you to leave now if you want to save face.

>I was just pretending to be retarded xD

>>3462136
Please see a doctor immediately, you are clearly suffering from a severe mental condition that impairs your reading comprehension abilities. Good luck, I hope you get things sorted out.

>>3462142
or you can actually respond to my points

if not then i'm not going to let slip that you lost. what happens in this thread stays in this thread, chief ;)

>>3462145
It's difficult to have a discussion with someone who lacks reading abilities. I've stated exactly what I mean by race multiple times. It refers to a group of people who are genetically related, and clustered together by certain biological traits. This is very simple to understand.

>>3462157
but the size of the group is based on what principles?

YOU

HAVE

YET

TO

ADDRESS

THIS

POINT

>>3462160
He's a moron, let it go

>>3462160
Simmer down, child.

See these charts? >>3462068
>>3462095

Each groups of Arabs have a subset of clusters that isolate them into different groups, but if you look at Arabs at the whole they are more similar to themselves than to other racial groups. Same deal with whites, you can look at individual white subsets as group, but you could also identify whites together as one big cluster. It's a relative term.

>>3462172
you are an embarassment
just stop

>>3462169
>>3462160
>2010+5-2
>responding to yourself

>>3462174
>I got told so I'll ask my opponent to stop beating me to a pulp

I'll have to decline.

>>3462172
yeah great some overlapping blobs and scattered acronyms really convince me that race is real and you're not engaging in some fallacious shit by assuming the initial point

have you read the studies or did you just pick some nice looking pictures and assume you knew what they meant?

>>3462180
>ramble ramble ramble

Are you giving up? Ask nicely and I'll allow you to leave this thread without metaphorically breaking your legs via my superior intellect. All I need to hear is "please master". Go on, ask.

>>3462182
have you read the studies or did you just pick some nice looking pictures and assume you knew what they meant?

>>3462185
>All I need to hear is "please master". Go on, ask.

>>3462188
so that answer is "no i haven't read the studies"

i'd read them myself if your graphs actually had citations

i've just concluded a very scientific study myself based on acute observation:
>(clueless assholes) you
>(intelligent people) me
source: me

>>3462190
>All I need to hear is "please master". Go on, ask.

So far I've demolished every argument you've presented while you have desperately tried to keep up with my intellect. By responding to this post, you will have officially ceded the argument.

>>3462192
nice catch-all arguments from your grab-bag of internet trolling techniques but the only argument i've presented is that you lack conclusive evidence to suggest race exists

the only way you could demolish that is by actually backing up your sources, clarifying your definitions, and working through the logical fallacies. you have failed to do any of these three things and everyone can see it. i can't cede an argument that i already won several posts ago

>>3462197
>By responding to this post, you will have officially ceded the argument.

It's over, I've officially won. Time to celebrate.

>>3462201
>i can't cede an argument that i already won several posts ago

now back to /v/

>>3462201
>He names his images

>>3462202
>>By responding to this post, you will have officially ceded the argument.

You can't just make up rules as you go, these are the agreed upon guidelines, and as per the code of conduct you have officially lost. By responding to this post, you are hereby metaphorically signing this document admitting that I am the victor.

>>3462208
you really are embarrassing yourself.

it's all a joke now!!! apparently!!!!

note in your diary how you suffered another loss on the internet since it matters so much to you. i've done all i need to

>$10 says you reply to this post anyway because you need to

I have just been informed that my opponent(whom I have defeated) has just signed the binding document, making my victory official. Wow! I don't even know what to say.. I'm so happy. I'm never won a debate so easily before! I wonder if he was just pretending to be retarded or something?

But who cares, right? A win is a win is a win! Time to celebrate!

Wonderful literature discussion guys.

reported for imagebomd

>>3462094
>science = faith in absolute truth
>science's quest for understanding is the same as religion's pretence of having everything figured out already

Confirmed for plebian intellect.

>>3462232
>Replying to a thread stating that you've reported it or another post is also disallowed—please do not announce your reports.

Reported.

>>3462235
>can't see the irony of his post
>2013
>being this stupid
good job

>>3462238
rused

>>3462097
I used to be brainwashed by this species nonsense but I've since been blue-pilled. There simply is not conclusive evidence that species exist outside of being a social construct. You'll notice that every time a scientist tries to define it, they start out by assuming that it is true to begin with. The most fallacious fucking brainwashing on the planet.

>>3461847
But blacks (subsaharan africans) and aborigines are genetically the furthest apart. all the other racial groups are between them.

Doesn't that sort of make everybody black/aborigine?

>>3462240
>implying

>>3462244

ITT: what's taxonomy guise

>>3462246
not how it works, although the neanderthal stuff is accurate. you still end up with the australian and african bushmen on either ends of the distribution

What's wrong with recognizing that there are genetic differences between groups in the human race?
there are, and it's ridiculously obvious, it doesn't mean anything else than that though

>>3462246
For anyone who's wondering, that image is complete nonsense.

>>3462261
how do you know?

>>3462261
Cool argument, faggot.

>>3462258
This is not wrong: In my biogeography class ( taught by a very racist American Indian/Scots halfbreed) We determined that using genetic markers there were at least half a million viable races in the world in 1989. There may have been as many as twenty million. (a biogeographical race is a population with sufficient biodiversity to avoid "breeding out" due to founder effect attrition. More than half of those races would be in subsaharan africa though, since that's where the most genetic diversity and the highest robustness of genotypic expression is found. Which makes sense considering it's pretty much the oldest grouping of populations on earth.

and it wouldn't be wrong to say that the genetic diversity of the earth the "human" diversity, is pretty much an african thing, with a few stragglers in other parts of the world.

>>3462264
You need more evidence than "It was posted by someone from /pol/ in a race thread"? Or that it repeatedly states opinion as fact?
How about because I've studied palaeoanthropology and can tell you it's complete bullshit. I'm not going to get drawn into the specifics, stop bumping this troll thread.

>>3462292
>I'm not going to get drawn into the specifics

Isn't that convenient.

>>3462283

Here's a quote from the guy, near as I remember it.

"While it's perfectly reasonable to say, based on how you draw the criteria, that there's only one human race on earth, you could just as reasonably draw them another way so that there are ten million or so, though you'd still have all but a hundred or so in Africa. Your problem comes when you start using phenotypic markers, like skin color. No matter how you work it 99% of the races on earth have black skin, including the ones at the ends of the diverstiy spectrum."

He hated the idea of considering American Black to be a race (it was in the seventies) and he hated the idea of calling "white" a race, he considered all caucasians to be an offshoot of a subgroup of a few African black populations. Had the genetic data to back it up too.

>>3462298
I know right its like they are afraid of getting teared apart.

>>3462318
Yeah. It's not like anyone has anything better to do than argue about race on 4chan. Clearly, if they say they don't want to they must be multikult agents who're terrified of being bested by strong aryan logic.

>>3462324
If they bother to post here obviously they dont.

Holy fucking shit /pol/ it's been almost a week now. Please fucking go away.

>>3462325
Clearly indisputable, as usual.

>>3462333
>people who have different opinions are all from X(a place a don't like)

>>3462338
Don't pretend like you're not a fucking /pol/fag. Please crawl back to your cesspool you pigfuck. You shitstains have fagged up this board quite enough. I'd take a whole fucking front page of babbys first existential crisis threads over your banal anti-intellectual horseshit.

>>3462344
>facts are anti-intellectual

What I'd like to know is why discussions of race always seem to turn into "Duh, black people are dumb." Race is a fascinating topic, Gene flow within and between populations is amazingly complex and interesting, yet we seem to always concentrate on basically human folklore and anecdotal crap.

When is someone going to start a discussion of races of passerines or gramma grasses? Though i guess if they do, it wouldn't be a /lit/ thread.
Like this one
oh, wait...

>>3462347
>facts

Lurk moar faggot. We reject all meta-narratives around here. Get on our level or go the fuck back to /pol/. You're not going to convince anyone around here of anything with your shitposting.

>>3462350

most people who seem to particularly care about racial difference tend to start with an aim to prove blacks are dumb or even non human

when society gets past a general prejudice about race will be when actual racial difference can be scientifically explored without too many grave social consequences

>>3462358
>facts
>shitposting

>>3462362
Reading the Wikipedia article for a book that fits your shitty myopic worldview does not equal having factual knowledge of the subjects said book touches upon.

Hit the books, cupcake. When you've actually studied the subjects you pretend to be an armchair scholar of get back at us. Until then, slouch on back to /pol/ you fucking halfwit.

>>3462382
Golly, you seem a bit buttblasted. Are you upset that facts run counter to the narrative you have in your head concerning society? Did I hurt babbys feelings? Do you need a hug?

>>3462292
>somebody from /pol/ posted it on /pol/ therefore it can not contain any trace of truth even obscured by the obvious bias
everything isn't black and white anon, maybe it is true but somebody on /pol/ used it accompanied by less related images to make people think it means something it doesn't.
come on now, you can't just refute it based on "but dats racist", I'd honestly like your evidence towards it so i can refute it just like you're doing but this far i haven't seen a trace of why you're right

>>3461714
/pol/tard detected

>>3462398
You seem a little paranoid, did you forget to equip your tinfoil hat this morning?

>>3462393
I don't subscribe to any narratives, you massive faggot. Like I said, get on our level or get the fuck out.

>>3462403
>our
>we
>we
>we
>we
>us

Trying a bit too hard to fit in.

>>3462400
>/pol/fag making tinfoil hat jokes

>>3462410
>>>/mlp/

You're from there because I said so. Please leave.

>>3462409
Oh, but I do fit in. See, here on /lit/ we are intelligent, well read and don't subscribe to crass groupthink unlike you fuckheaded shitstains over at /pol/. What's really hilarious, within the context of your post, is that you don't even have to try to fit in over at /pol/. You just post whatever millions of stupid-as-fuck variants of "le merchant" you have saved on your shitty PC and then presto, you're a bonafide /pol/fag.

Please go.

>>3462412
What's hilarious that you're bound to find deeper & more intellectual discussion on /mlp/ than on /pol/. How does that make you feel, lil' fascist? How does it feel to know that you and your constituency will always be known for its sheer stupidity, its myopia and its utter ignorance in the face of practically every issue facing humanity today? How does it feel to know that a bunch of fags with mommy issues discussing a cartoon for little girls come off as more intelligent than you?

There's always hope, you know. You could take OUR red pill instead. Pic related, sweetcheeks. See if you can get past the first few pages.

>>3462412
You're bound to find deeper & more intellectual discussion on /mlp/ than on /pol/. How does that make you feel, lil' fascist? How does it feel to know that you and your constituency will always be known for its sheer stupidity, its myopia and its utter ignorance in the face of practically every issue facing humanity today? How does it feel to know that a bunch of fags with mommy issues discussing a cartoon for little girls come off as more intelligent than you?

There's always hope, you know. You could take OUR red pill instead. Pic related, sweetcheeks. See if you can get past the first few pages.

>>3462412
What was the deal with /pol/ and /mlp/ and that hasbro crap? Are they your nazi, and you their pony now?

>>3462418
>>3462439
Trying way too hard.

>>3462439
L
E
L

Why do /pol/tards have to project their "white guilt" and "cognitive dissonance" all the time?

Nobody gives a shit. Liberalism is "race blind".

>>3462439
Now that's a good psychology book. OP, read that instead.

>>3462452
Why should the unequal be made equal? Try and provide an argument that isn't "because my feelings".

>>3462442
Trying too hard? Kid, while I'm intellectually raping you I'm also in the middle of working on my thesis whilst at the same time catching up on archived issues of Cambridge's Classical Quarterly. What I'm doing with you is the equivalent of picking your nose or taking a bathroom break to pinch a loaf.

>>3462462
>I'm just pretending to be retarded LOL

>>3462459
Did I even say so, child?

>hyperconservatives accusing others of thinking with their feelings

>>3462468
Liberalism promotes equality for all. Why should inferior beings be equal to higher races?

>>3462466
I'm not trolling. There is no pretense. I'm being a honest as I possibly can when I tell you that you are an egregiously obtuse piece of shit.

>>3462471
equal rights =/= equality

Why would you want to limit inferior beings opportunities? To make sure they stay inferior, just in case?

>>3462471

Jesus Christ.

It doesn't matter do you, does it, the words that you type

>>3462462
are you black or non-white or just being a silly

>>3462479
Someones mad how exactly did you "intellectually rape" him? All you did was make insults and spurred out buzzwords.

bump