[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2017/01/28: An issue regarding the front page of /jp/ has been fixed. Also, thanks to all who contacted us about sponsorship.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 784 KB, 2612x1666, 930485430985.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10288844 No.10288844 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Is there any evidence that increasing diversity in an academic institution (women, blacks, hispanics, gays) leads to better scientific output?

Why is political inclination not considered diversity in academia? 80% of academia is left-wing. Conservatives, libertarians, ancaps, and minarchists are as rare in academia as any other minority, and by definition they can offer different perspectives.

>> No.10288953

I think you're referring to the humanities. By definition, conservatives are opposed to any changes to tradition and the status quo because they think everything is currently fine the way it is.

However, the humanities requires you to have a critical and open perspective of society, and that doesn't really fit well with conservative ideology.

>> No.10288956

Fun fact, it actually does the opposite to what they think it does:

>> No.10288964

Nope. All disciplines of academia are overrun by liberals, including math and science.

>> No.10288981

In theory increase diversity be it population or politics should lead to better or at least varied scientific output.

Conservatives take issue with academia because it challenges traditional power structures (be it God, religious/cultural practices, philosophy, financial prioritization). So rather than adapting their structures to modern research they are interested in modern research adapting to their power structure. So academia research that produces practical/ consumer base technology is okay with them. Smartphones and computers do not challenge the power structures. Academic research involving sciencentific findings that require society to alter their behavior is not okay with them. Germ theory, evolution and climate change do challenge the power structures. Shit involving quantum mechanics though seems to be ignored for the most part by conservatives.

As for libertarianism I think the main issue is the how they view the support structure of academia both in authority and financially. Which is either to much or to little depending on the branch of libertarian philosophy you ascribe too. They really don't have a reason not to be involved other than they aren't interested in hard science but soft science aka physics vs social science.

>> No.10289023


this is the most asinine thing i've ever heard in my life. "conserative" and "progressive" are intradiegetic labels. your entire world view is based on a ridiculous fiction. all people like you know how to do is listen to NPR and bitch. domesticated cattle, that's what you are.

>> No.10289034

Maybe in every case except for chinks and pajeets. Can't understand a word that these fuckers say. Send all of em on a boat back to their shithole

>> No.10289041

Liberals are far more afraid of challenges to their beliefs than conservatives. Try to talk to an academic about
-IQ differences between races,
-how communism is antithetical to human nature,
-how immigration and welfare cannot coexist,
-how government is too expansive and inefficient
-how Islam is incompatible with Western culture
-sexual market value
-physiological and psychological differences between genders and races,
and dozens of other "taboo" topics, and see if he doesn't try to silence you, shame you, or quickly resort to ad hominem attacks.

>> No.10289045

It actually does:

Seeking out politically charged people to do science is a bad idea.

Now delete this shitty thread.

>> No.10289051

I don't think you read what I posted.
Essentially, the more equal the make it, the more you "fix" nurture, and so nature becomes over-expressed. At the moment, we aren't at that tipping point, yet.
But once we are, you'll be getting the polar opposite.

>> No.10289055

>le forbidden science
Maybe it's just pseudoscience

I didn't read it. Mine is more relevant to ethnicity than gender though.

>> No.10289062

>I didn't read it. Mine is more relevant to ethnicity than gender though.
Oh, I have no problem with ethnicity, so long as they're there based purely on meritocratic reasoning.
But the facts being, the "freer" you make it, the more nature is expressed (in relation to gender).

>> No.10289070

I had a grand total of 4 leftie profs at my state R1 during undergrad, and those were for geneds.
The rest of my profs in major courses and sciences/math were conservative.
My chinese diffeq prof showed us pics of his apartment and gun collection, he had 50k+ rounds and 100+ guns in his 1br apartment downtown and shot all day on sat/sun.
My program chair organized clay shoots and had an email signature that shat on environmentalists.
One prof I had for two major courses would talk shit on the lefties in the class from another major who had to take his courses.
Petroleum engineering is quite based.

>> No.10289075

>maybe it's just pseudoscience
and maybe you're another indoctrinated brainlet
Go ahead, give me 1 (one) piece of evidence that invalidates any of any of the "le forbidden science" topics I listed

>> No.10289081

which university, and how long ago?

>> No.10289085

Not going to risk connecting some of my favorite people to this shithole, but I graduated in May.

>> No.10289086

>immigration and welfare cannot coexist,
>they exist

Absolutely BTFO

>> No.10289096

There is some evidence for IQ differences between the races, but once culture and nutrition is taken into account, you're talking a 5 point difference between the averages.

>> No.10289109

I can’t speak for anyone else but myself, but I fucking hate when my professor is some foreigner with a heavy accent. I’m better off just staying home and reading the damn textbook.

>> No.10289113

>but I fucking hate when my professor is some foreigner with a heavy accent. I’m better off just staying home and reading the damn textbook.

i only hate it when every professor is some foreigner with a heavy accent.

>> No.10289116

You're trolling but I'll respond anyway. The context of the phrase is:

A first-world country cannot accept a boundless number of migrants and simultaneously give them welfare for a long time - the burden on the country's taxpayers will become too great before long and collapse the country's economy, making it a third world shithole just like the one the migrants escaped in the first place.

Of course migration and welfare can coexist for a short period of time, the point is it's unsustainable.

>> No.10289122


>> No.10289125
File: 138 KB, 1800x820, IQ_by_Country.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.10289128

This is from a standard psychology textbook, it is a mainstream stance. No matter how much you dislike it.

>> No.10289136

see large-sample studies by
Lynn & Vanhanen
Wicherts, Dolan & van der Maas
I don't give a fuck what your commie psychology book says, show me contrary evidence consisting of higher-sample studies, or fuck off

>> No.10289138

Ah, I guess the science is solved. Not so taboo after all.

>> No.10289140

Lynn's data is flawed:
>The majority of the data points were based upon convenience rather than representative samples. Some points were not even based on residents of the country. For instance, the “data point” for Suriname was based on tests given to Surinamese who had migrated to the Netherlands, and the “data point” for Ethiopia was based on the IQ scores of a highly selected group that had emigrated to Israel and, for cultural and historical reasons, was hardly representative of the Ethiopian population. The data point for Mexico was based upon a weighted averaging of the results of a study of “Native American and Mestizo children in southern Mexico” with result of a study of residents of Argentina. Upon reading the original reference, we found that the “data point” that Lynn and Vanhanen used for the lowest IQ estimate, Equatorial Guinea, was actually the mean IQ of a group of Spanish children in a home for the developmentally disabled in Spain. Corrections were applied to adjust for differences in IQ across cohorts (the “Flynn” effect), on the assumption that the same correction could be applied internationally, without regard to the cultural or economic development level of the country involved. While there appears to be rather little evidence on cohort effect upon IQ across the developing countries, one study in Kenya (Daley, Whaley, Sigman, Espinosa, & Neumann, 2003)[5] shows a substantially larger cohort effect than is reported for developed countries.

>> No.10289144

>>10289136 see >>10289140.
Lynn's data is extremely flawed, you hack.

>> No.10289152
File: 1.16 MB, 1420x890, iq_and_race_from_richard_gross.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

As for what the textbook says:
>See picture.
But keep in mind that IQ is thought to have a large heritable component.
>The general figure for the heritability of IQ, according to an authoritative American Psychological Association report, is 0.45 for children, and rises to around 0.75 for late adolescents and adults.[77][78] Heritability measures in infancy are as low as 0.2, around 0.4 in middle childhood, and as high as 0.9 in adulthood.[79][80] One proposed explanation is that people with different genes tend to reinforce the effects of those genes, for example by seeking out different environments.[9][81]
But it certainly isn't as dramatic as Lynn's bullshit.

>> No.10289157


What part is false?

>> No.10289162
File: 26 KB, 1357x628, National_IQ_per_country_-_estimates_by_Lynn_and_Vanhanen_2006.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Of course every leftist armchair psychologist in the world is going to try to discredit this study. The study provides a direct, powerful argument against migration to the West from Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East. Migrants overwhelmingly vote for leftist policies for free gibmedats.

As I said, I don't give a fuck how many commies you find to poke holes in the study. Show me a better study, with a higher sample size, with proper sampling methodology, which shows that IQ is uniform across nations. That's the only thing I'll believe.

I'll wait.

>> No.10289165

Lmao, you've posted nothing. In fact, you just posted the discredited Lynn data, again.
Note that textbook excerpt, see how many citations that has within the text.
Provides some actual fucking evidence, you dweeb.

>> No.10289170

And that's funny, because I own a textbook and actually have a BSc in neurological psychology, how about you? And no, /pol/ degree doesn't count.

>> No.10289172

>I own a textbook and actually have a BSc in neurological psychology
I bet you're some leftie non-fascist or something! What a cuck!

>> No.10289173

All your textbook shows is a bunch of armchair intellectuals agreeing with each other. Who among them went to every country in the world and measured the IQ of a large representative sample of the population? Can you give me the link?

>> No.10289177

Lmao, /pol/ seriously needs to stop shitting up this board. Not everyone enjoys your Alex Jones lizard stories, about chemtrails and gay frogs.
>Post on science board
>But wont actually take on board what science says
>Even when given overwhelming evidence, because he prefers the data from a massively discredited source
No wonder the Jews outsmart you dumbass fucks.

>> No.10289185

>Who among them went to every country in the world and measured the IQ of a large representative sample of the population? Can you give me the link?
Goalposts much. Why don't you find the evidence for your own retarded standpoint? After all, that's how the scientific method works, you're meant to defend your point, not me. You are.

>> No.10289191


I'm still waiting for a link to the large-sample study with reliable sampling methodology which shows IQ is within 5 points between nations. How much longer will it be?

>conspiracy theorist, Alex Jones, pol
And there go the ad hominem attacks, that didn't take long did it

I showed you my evidence. You said it's discredited by a bunch of opinions, I say I don't give a fuck about opinions. I want data. Do you have any or not?

>> No.10289196

Deny deny deny, that's all a conservative can ever do, you'll contribute nothing to this world besides cucking yourself to the rich elite. You wanna know where the overwhelming majority of the RNC's funding comes from?

>> No.10289209
File: 284 KB, 684x474, culture_bias_and_iq.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>I'm still waiting for a link to the large-sample study with reliable sampling methodology which shows IQ is within 5 points between nations. How much longer will it be?
>Your thesis is not your dissertation. Neither is it a one liner about what you are doing. Your thesis is "a position or proposition that a person (as a candidate for scholastic honors) advances and offers to maintain by argument." [Webster's 7th New Collegiate Dictionary]. "I looked at how people play chess" is not a thesis; " people adapt memories of old games to play new games" is. Similarly, "I wrote a program to play chess" is not a thesis; "playing chess requires a database of actual games" is. A thesis has to claim something.
>A defense presents evidence for a thesis. What kind of evidence is apprpropriate depends on what kind of thesis is being defended.
It's up to you to defend your own thesis, I have defended mine. Defend yours, idiot.

>And there go the ad hominem attacks, that didn't take long did it
Wrong again, dumb dumb. An ad hom is a personal attack, without addressing the argument, I've done both. So, it is just an insult.

>I showed you my evidence. You said it's discredited by a bunch of opinions, I say I don't give a fuck about opinions. I want data. Do you have any or not?
Fun fact, those aren't opinions because those are facts that were errors in Lynn's methology, admitted by Lynn himself.
Shows what you know, idiot.

Also, for a fun little add on. IQ tests are also culture unfair, which is why you would need to make an IQ tests for each culture, and wouldn't be fair when aggregating the data, as they'd be from different tests (which I sort of what Lynn did, but used an unfair test, in an unfair way, with poor methodology).

Come on you shill cuck, stop with this ideological and (((intellectual))) (((usury))).

>> No.10289213

>discredited by overwhelming evidence
Like what? You realize some psychologist writing his opinion piece or does not constitute evidence. The only evidence for this matter is a large-scale study. What are the large-scale studies that discredit Lynn's?

>thinking neo-liberals and neo-conservatives aren't the exact same fucking thing

>> No.10289221

These things were admitted in Lynn's own methodology. Have you even read his book, you dumb wigger?

>> No.10289227

>thinking neo-liberals and neo-conservatives aren't the exact same fucking thing
To a fascist they are. Fascist.

>> No.10289230

lmao you fucking pedant thanks for the link in what an argument is
now how about a link that proves IQ is within 5 points between nations like you claimed here:
>hurr IQ is unfair cuz it's Western-centric
>Africa is only poor cuz whites exploited it
>my textbook says so
>I have a BS in psychology so my opinion is more valid than everyone's personal experiences with colored people
you're fucking hilarious with your weaseling. If you're a troll, well done sir

>> No.10289233

>He doesn't know the difference between an ethnic group and a nation state.
How is /pol/ so downright stupid? Did your mom feed you lead paint as a child?

>> No.10289243

more pedantic weaseling, excellent
If we take the entire population of Somalia and put them in Japan, and take the entire population of Japan and put them in Somalia, do you think the black people are going to instantly gain 40 IQ points and the yellow people are instantly going to lose 40 IQ points?

Your own IQ must be 40 fucking brainlet

>> No.10289254
File: 188 KB, 600x400, 农民.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Well no, as I've already said, IQ has a major genetic component, and I never said that it did not.
In fact: >>10289152 asserts the estimates of genetic input.
However, there is some enviromental input, so perhaps, they might gain a few IQ points over a couple of generations, sure.

But again, do you have any other data apart from the self-admittedly shoddy methodology of Richard Lynn? No? Oh dear, it looks like I can defend my thesis, but you can't.

That's a real shame.

>> No.10289256

>thinking communists and fascists aren't the exact same fucking thing

How was AP Calc yesterday? Did you get to integrals yet?

>> No.10289273

IQ differences arose from geography. Europe had harsh winters where you would die of cold and starvation if you do not plan ahead and harvest crops, build sturdy houses, and don't eat the seed crop. Those who could not defer gratification perished. Africans and Native Americans living in more temperate climates with abundant wild animals and year-round vegetation did not have a need for such things and their cognitive abilities remained low.

>> No.10289287

What about Arctic natives? How come that doesn't apply to them?
You see, the problem with you /pol/ idiots is that you're too reductionist, you speak half-truths.
You only bother to read as much as you care to, before it offends you. It's sad really.
First of all, that's now how evolution works. What happens is random mutation, it is then if those random mutations are either beneficial, either beneficial nor hampering, or hampering.
If they are beneficial, they get selected for.
If they are neither, they get passed on due to being ignored.
If they are hampering, to the point at which you die, you die before passing on the genetic information.
In other words, clearly the mutation occured within certain more northernly populations and became successful for X reason.

>> No.10289294

AP Calc made me a Brazillian Integralist.

>> No.10289299


>Liberals are far more afraid of challenges to their beliefs than conservatives.

We aren't talking about beliefs though. We are talking about power structures which is a completely different beast. Even if they don't like challenges to their beliefs, conservatives are absolutely no better. Perhaps you are thinking about non-dualists and spiritualists who are open to various types of beliefs and perspectives. They are not conservatives though, never get that confused.

>and dozens of other "taboo" topics

If they were taboo then it wouldn't be so easy for you or the average person to get a hold of that information. Let alone talk to them about that information. The truth is several of those "taboo" subjects you outlined are out of date because the categorization isn't accurate enough for further usage. In the medical/genetics field "race" isn't accurate enough to provide custom medicine or full genome analysis. Which is why haplotype/haplogroup exist. In neurology IQ isn't accurate enough to explain complex intelligence. Which is why neuroplasticity exist. Other topics such as Sexual Market value get plenty of play both in commercial sector and research. Unless you're one of those people who think men being attracted to neoteny features should give you the right to break local law and fuck 11 year old girls or ostracize older women because wrinkles doesn't get your penis hard.

>> No.10289309

>for X reason
the reason is what I listed
And the Arctic was only settled for about 5000 years, not long enough to cause significant divergence.

>> No.10289313
File: 111 KB, 453x1469, african_iq.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Perfect, found what I was looking for:
>See picture.
Found what I was looking for, finally.
Citations listed:
>Jelte M. Wicherts, Denny Borsboom en Conor V. Dolan: Why national IQs do not support evolutionary theories of intelligence en Evolution, brain size, and the national IQ of peoples around 3000 years B.C. Personality and Individual Differences (48, 2010).
>Jelte M. Wicherts, Conor V. Dolan en Han L.J. van der Maas. A systematic literature review of the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans en The dangers of unsystematic selection methods and the representativeness of 46 samples of African test-takers. Intelligence (38, 2010).
>Jelte M. Wicherts, Conor V. Dolan, Jerry S. Carlson, en Han L.J. van der Maas: Raven's test performance of sub-Saharan Africans: Average performance, psychometric properties, and the Flynn Effect. Learning and Individual Differences (20, 2010).
And, this also happens to link back to the cultural bias mentioned in the textbook excerpt, here: >>10289209

>> No.10289332

OK, thanks, I'll read these. It'll take me some time.
I still have many questions about race and IQ, (e.g. focusing on the US to remove cultural differences: black vs white SAT scores, why IQ is the best predictor of economic success, etc) but I'll parse through these links first

>> No.10289336
File: 1.45 MB, 1050x903, smug_anime_2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

How I feel right now.

>> No.10289343

Don't be smug, you haven't convinced me of anything. But maybe I'll be convinced after I read all of what you posted there. My first-hand observations and life experiences have been consistent with the propositions I laid out, but I'm open to having my mind changed by stronger evidence.

>> No.10289352
File: 96 KB, 300x300, smug_anime.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The purpose of an argument isn't convince, as the ability to accept new information as valid is fully within the realm of the individual.
Therefore, what I am smug about is pulling the "rabbit out of the hat", as it were. The ability to halt the argument, with a significant enough donation to warrant attention.
That's what I'm smug about.

>> No.10289355

>*isn't to convince

>> No.10289382

>which is expected to continue if living conditions in Africa improve in future
If we keep spoonfeeding them maybe they'll be less stupid!

>> No.10289388

It's the right thing to do, after we left the continent in such disarray after the collapse of colonialism.
I mean, look what happened in Rwanda, thanks to colonial oppression.

>> No.10289392

Anyway, point being, the studies show that Sub-Saharan Africans are roughly on par with African-Americans, and not nearly as ludicrously low as Lynn stated, for instance, only 65 for Congoids, utterly ridiculous.
Although, I was off about the 5 IQ points. I'll admit that, but you have to admit that Sub-Saharan Africans aren't nearly as low IQ as /pol/ likes to claim.

>> No.10289418

>implying the only way to improve living standards in Africa is spoonfeeding
Investing in African businesses is an example of a way other nations can help Africa without just spoonfeeding them foreign aid.

>> No.10289427

The professor that basically introduced me to global warming at a scientific level was a registered republican here in Tx. Of course when I tell people hell bent on the liberal indoctrination college meme they just tell me he's just tricking me or he's only registered to put up the persona.

>> No.10289431

I think you've been right this whole time, but posting smug anime and revelling in your own ego makes you a colossal faggot

>> No.10289438

>African businesses
mud hut repair?

>> No.10289448

That still doesn't diminish the pleasure, mon amie.

>> No.10289463

Your definition of conservative lacks nuance and doesn't track very well with real world conservatives, and even still doesn't account for the whole "libertarians, ancaps, and minarchists" part of the OP

>> No.10289484
File: 68 KB, 473x480, 1518888052121.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.10289514

>best and most lean companies in silicon valley are almost entirely east asian and white
>b-but muh diversity must make the firm better!
No. Diversity is a dead God and the younger generation is aware of this.

>> No.10289519


the part where you view the world through the lens of a contrived media narrative and its archetypes

>> No.10289521


they get $50 for those big wooden bicycle things

>> No.10289569

younger generations are always more liberal, you think racist baby boomers are the ones embracing diversity?

>> No.10289589

Lol. It has nothing to do with racism. Just acknowledging there is no real benefit to diversity.

And yeah, Id say boomers are some of the most pozzed retards around, although a lot of millennials take it to the extreme

>> No.10289689

But I told my boss in my interview that I believe diversity in the workplace brings diversity in opinion and different angles at confronting multi-faceted problems.

>> No.10289793
File: 113 KB, 992x975, 086624856398.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>157 based and tensaipilled anon

There is no fucking way you guys are conservative and engaged in science. That just doesn't work you guys are usually binary thinkers. I know because i'm from a Conservative cesspit
>/pol/>/biz/>/diy/ [eqn]Begone\;Now[/eqn]

>> No.10289808

A couple days ago I read an article in Scientific American that was by a guy who said that diversity in his lab gives him different perceptions on things. I can't see anything bad coming from having diversity, as long as everybody speaks the same language.

>> No.10289913

>actually being willing to sacrifice group harmony for HR brownie points
I think diversity leads to more conflict than it offers in terms of 'new perspectives.'

>> No.10289916

>Why is political inclination not considered diversity in academia?
because (((they))) dont like people disagreeing with (((them)))

>> No.10289920

my interpretation is that it's a long term investment, in the sense its supposed to encourage elevating different parts of society, not short term research output. sew your seeds at your feet, and you'll have a garden. sew your seeds wide and you'll have a forest

>> No.10290021


>libertarians, ancaps, and minarchists

They aren't taken seriously in the field of economics. They are the creationists of economics.

>> No.10290114

There's a spectrum. Libertarian ideas definitely pop up a lot in economics and government, some are even orthodox or mostly orthodox I would think.

>> No.10290123

>the average white person with an average IQ contributes to science
uhhhhhh in the case of academia your "average" IQ means nothing

>> No.10290138

in my ethics class they said an asian focuses on the surroundings because of their collectivist culture and americans focus on points because of their individualistic culture. This was found by the analysis of eyes. Therefore diversity can be important because it allows people to see things from another perspective which is necessary in science. What looks hard to an american might be easy for an asian.
Of course these differences blur together when you have asians growing up in america though.

>> No.10290494

Essentially this, in recognizing the main differences of upbringing between cultures we can optimize the strengths and minimize the weaknesses each culture provides to individuals.

>> No.10290705

>libertarians, ancaps, and minarchists
>They aren't taken seriously in the field of economics. They are the creationists of economics.
No, they are the few atheists in a sea of religious fools who worship the obviously false dogma of conventional economics

>> No.10290708

If your team can't handle diversity of view point there will probably be other conflicts of communication down the road.

>> No.10290710

No there is no evidence, especially allowing non-whites of subsaharan or hispanic ancestry into STEM based on background and not merit.
no they don’t

>> No.10290778

You know what the gayest shit in this world is? Assigning yourself or others to some made up word to define your political views. Literally brainwashes you into believing in a set of core values that you only subconsciously agree with. Prove me wrong faglord.

>> No.10290796
File: 70 KB, 500x494, 1534771492347.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>No there is no evidence, especially allowing non-whites of subsaharan or hispanic ancestry into STEM based on background and not merit.

no evidence?

>> No.10290829

this is definitely a different type of diversity than we think of its more like segregationist collaboration

>> No.10290834

on average 5 points is a much mor significant amount than you think it is

>> No.10290968

pseud faggot
It hasn’t dropped at all





There’s a lot more than that

>> No.10291191

diversity does literally nothing. I'm working with a tranny on a paper and he comes up with basically the same ideas as me.
It's a libtard meme

>> No.10291202

>I'm working with a tranny on a paper
That rough. Does he smell weird? I spent a few hours with one once and I had trouble looking directly at him.

>> No.10291216

He's fairly tame and just dresses in girlish cloths. Nothing overtly odd about the guy

>> No.10291219
File: 56 KB, 497x750, coolfrog.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Because anyone who isn't a blind follower of authority would never want a job in academia in the first place, it's always been an inefficient bureaucracy from it's inception, and has only gotten worse which is obvious as day from the sheer number of unreproducable papers. Gifted people always prefer to work as independently as possible, like Tesla. 'Peer review' as it exists presently for quality control is a joke.

>> No.10291231

tesla only died unfulfilled because of his poverty

>> No.10291233
File: 374 KB, 828x1403, 0985-RquH0Rt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Conservatives are more conscientious and so should be able to do better during undergrad, at least, since it is just rote learning.

Liberals are, on average, slightly more open to ideas which should mean they are more innovative, and so seeing them dominate research would be unsurprising.

These differences, however, are around 10%, so seeing differences of up to 9:1 left:right in academia in certain fields, and about 4:1 (being generous) overall is not aligned with your hypothesis or views.

To use your own logic against you, lefties would thus be more inclined to change the status quo, regardless of its scientific (in)validity to the same degree that righties would do the same to protect it. That's why science needs to be a bipartisan endeavour - change the shit, keep the good - same goes for politics.

>> No.10291241

>To a realist they are. Realist.
t. ex-"left leaner" before I realized sides are illusionary.

>> No.10291260

>Is there any evidence that increasing diversity in an academic institution (women, blacks, hispanics, gays) leads to better scientific output?

Is there ANY indication that ANY academic discipline is improved by "diversity".

How quantum computing is going to be made better by increasing the percentage of vaginas, sexually non-traditional individuals, and darker skin researchers is a mystery.

>> No.10291300

>posts Lynn data
>the same data that says 2/3 of the world have below average IQ
>the same data that says that the average african has less IQ than a Down Syndrome kid or a literal retard

I don't know how much layers of racism or ignorance you have to have in order to think an average african has less IQ than a retard.
>"lol but their retards cuz thei're undeveloped"
Fuck, if you say that you clearly have never knew a literal retard. Having less than 80 IQ is not just "I can't math" level of stupidity, it's "stare a wall and laugh for no fucking reason" level. And if you even knew about the syndromes and mutations that normally those retards have an underdeveloped brain or some malformation in it.
The fact that someone can talk normally, socialize normally, have a normal job, etc; which many africans do, shows that they aren't retarded.

It's just fucking common sense Jesus Christ.

>> No.10291366

>can't build a functioning civilization
>not retarded

>> No.10291370

Here's your (You), faggot

>> No.10291396
File: 2.47 MB, 640x360, 1455222021479.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.10291406
File: 37 KB, 500x281, African_Hut.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>I don't know how much layers of racism or ignorance you have to have in order to think an average african has less IQ than a retard.

If you had a population of low IQ people they would end up in a society exactly like the traditional African tribes

>> No.10291420

I'm gonna need citations for that claim. The 9:1 would be in things like gender studies which would be heavily self selecting. Averages I heard were like 40% liberal, 45% moderate and 15% conservative.

>> No.10291601

>thread devolves first into archetypal political name-calling, followed by a battle of 4chan culture and apex vocabulary term "cuck"

Fantastic job lads

>> No.10292200

Discounting Lynns data set there are plenty of studies that show IQ differences between races.


>> No.10292211

>However, the humanities requires you to have a critical and open perspective of society

What happens when the critical and open perspective of society leads you to a conservative conclusion? We often, I'd say regularly, see liberal/progressive dogmatism refuse to accept a more conservative viewpoint. You're also a jackass with
>status quo because they think everything is currently fine the way it is.
Conservatism runs the gamut from reactionary (retograde) to conservative (freeze status quo) to cautious or restrainers of liberalism ("Change is necessary, but it should be challenged and not allowed to happen via hubristic unilateral fiat").

I've come to my conservative conclusions on immigration and multiculturalism by reading unpartisan historical accounts. I detest blatant propagandists with some screedy Fox-news-bullshit. I can look at the inevitability of sectarianism among states without a strong enough over-arching identity (not needing to be racial, as the case in the later Roman Empire), how incessantly large ethnic minorities were used as justification for foreign interference (By Christians in the Ottoman Empire, by the British with their citizenry in the Boer republics, by the Germans, by the Russians both ethnically and religiously) and come to a conclusion that conservatism with regards to migration and multiculturalism is correct.

And in doing so I will be labeled a racist.

You'd do much better to use a decent source than that horseshit in the future. I found his patent on rutgers university's website but citing that kind of horse shit is like a nordicist citing "AryanAtlanteanscreatedcivilization.com" - it's liable to make most people throw your argument out the window.

>> No.10292212


And by horseshit I mean 'blackisbeautiful.com'. Cite the name, the patent and a more credible source next time. https://edison.rutgers.edu/latimer/latpats.htm

>> No.10293792 [DELETED] 


That's literally the dictionary definition of conservatism. Look it up.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.