Christianity

[Alexis Jacobi]

Now we’re making progress! In this clip I offer some practical lessons as to my methods when dealing with the ethnics. YMMV.

[Gary Childress]

Now we’re making progress! In this clip I offer some practical lessons as to my methods when dealing with the ethnics. YMMV.

You're making "progress". Not sure about "we". Do continue.

[Immanuel Can]

What's the point of me debating you. You didn't answer my question after I answered yours.

Yes, I did. I said I don't believe Murray.

You don't think statistics matter or are true.

No, I merely call Murray's into question. And I wonder why you don't, too. Why are you siding with somebody who has a racist argument, without even checking his procedure? There are such things as badly done studies, you know.

It's laudable that you want the statistics to be wrong, we all do, but that doesn't appear to be the case from what I can tell, unless you have a source that corroborates the belief that the statistics are wrong.

I don't go by appeal to authority, Gary...I require proof of the quality of the study in question. So should you. So citing a different study would not answer the question properly: only full examination of Murray's methods would do that.

But let's assume that Murray's right, as you seem to accept. If he has proved that black folks have a lower IQ, then DEI is useless. DEI cannot raise IQ. It does not even pretend to. So all DEI would amount to is a forced race-to-the-bottom, where those whom you and Murray believe have low IQ are given privileges they have no way of taking any advantage of. Putting low-IQ people into colleges will not make them bright: IQ is relatively stable, and varies relatively little over time, as you can find out from just googling that. It's a measure of potential, really, not a measure of education.

So now, if you're saying something about IQ, you're implying that minorities involved don't even have the potential to get smarter. And that makes DEI ineffective, except to pull down the standards. It will never improve society, if racial IQ is the issue. So now there's no reason for DEI.

I suggest, therefore, that you examine Murray's study, and see if his methodology actually shows what he claims it shows, or whether he's constructed his study badly. That's what I'd do, before I believed him.

Can you demonstrate to me that DEI is failing? Do you have any statistics for it?

You gave me the statistic that says DEI is failing. It can’t achieve equity, because you say IQ is different between races, and IQ is not very variable…it’s pretty much fixed, as you have discovered if you did even one google search of “IQ stability". IQ is a measure of potential.

Get it? Essentially, you’re saying that blacks are less intelligent, and that that fact cannot be altered — that they don’t have the potential to be made smarter. And I guess that’s what Murray’s argument would be, and you’re agreeing with him. But if he were right, then no change to external arrangements are going to change that. You can send these minorities to college, but you can’t make them understand. You can compel employers to hire them, but they won’t do the job as well as smarter people will. That’s what you’re saying, essentially, if IQ is the issue.

And thus, you’re arguing that the only way to produce equity is to force lower-IQ people into roles for which they are permanently, inevitably unsuited. That’s all DEI would be, if IQ is race-fixed. So DEI becomes worthless, in addition to being discriminatory against other minorities.

[Gary Childress]

Yes, I did. I said I don't believe Murray.
No, I merely call Murray's into question. And I wonder why you don't, too. Why are you siding with somebody who has a racist argument, without even checking his procedure? There are such things as badly done studies, you know.

I don't go by appeal to authority, Gary...I require proof of the quality of the study in question. So should you. So citing a different study would not answer the question properly: only full examination of Murray's methods would do that.

But let's assume that Murray's right, as you seem to accept. If he has proved that black folks have a lower IQ, then DEI is useless. DEI cannot raise IQ. It does not even pretend to. So all DEI would amount to is a forced race-to-the-bottom, where those whom you and Murray believe have low IQ are given privileges they have no way of taking any advantage of. Putting low-IQ people into colleges will not make them bright: IQ is relatively stable, and varies relatively little over time, as you can find out from just googling that. It's a measure of potential, really, not a measure of education.

So now, if you're saying something about IQ, you're implying that minorities involved don't even have the potential to get smarter. And that makes DEI ineffective, except to pull down the standards. It will never improve society, if racial IQ is the issue. So now there's no reason for DEI.

I suggest, therefore, that you examine Murray's study, and see if his methodology actually shows what he claims it shows, or whether he's constructed his study badly. That's what I'd do, before I believed him.

Can you demonstrate to me that DEI is failing? Do you have any statistics for it?

You gave me the statistic that says DEI is failing. It can’t achieve equity, because you say IQ is different between races, and IQ is not very variable…it’s pretty much fixed, as you have discovered if you did even one google search of “IQ stability". IQ is a measure of potential.

Get it? Essentially, you’re saying that blacks are less intelligent, and that that fact cannot be altered — that they don’t have the potential to be made smarter. And I guess that’s what Murray’s argument would be, and you’re agreeing with him. But if he were right, then no change to external arrangements are going to change that. You can send these minorities to college, but you can’t make them understand. You can compel employers to hire them, but they won’t do the job as well as smarter people will. That’s what you’re saying, essentially, if IQ is the issue.

And thus, you’re arguing that the only way to produce equity is to force lower-IQ people into roles for which they are permanently, inevitably unsuited. That’s all DEI would be, if IQ is race-fixed. So DEI becomes worthless, in addition to being discriminatory against other minorities.

An individual's Intelligence Quotient (IQ) is relatively stable throughout life, but it is not fixed and can fluctuate due to developmental, genetic, and environmental factors. IQ is a standardized score that measures a person's cognitive abilities compared to their age group, not a definitive indicator of total intelligence.

So some progress is no progress?

[Alexis Jacobi]

But dammit we can PRAY and PRAY HARD and with sincere intensity that IQ be raised!

[Gary Childress]

Insert another nonsensical irrelevant response here.

[Immanuel Can]

Can you demonstrate to me that DEI is failing? Do you have any statistics for it?

You gave me the statistic that says DEI is failing. It can’t achieve equity, because you say IQ is different between races, and IQ is not very variable…it’s pretty much fixed, as you have discovered if you did even one google search of “IQ stability". IQ is a measure of potential.

Get it? Essentially, you’re saying that blacks are less intelligent, and that that fact cannot be altered — that they don’t have the potential to be made smarter. And I guess that’s what Murray’s argument would be, and you’re agreeing with him. But if he were right, then no change to external arrangements are going to change that. You can send these minorities to college, but you can’t make them understand. You can compel employers to hire them, but they won’t do the job as well as smarter people will. That’s what you’re saying, essentially, if IQ is the issue.

And thus, you’re arguing that the only way to produce equity is to force lower-IQ people into roles for which they are permanently, inevitably unsuited. That’s all DEI would be, if IQ is race-fixed. So DEI becomes worthless, in addition to being discriminatory against other minorities.

An individual's Intelligence Quotient (IQ) is relatively stable throughout life, but it is not fixed and can fluctuate due to developmental, genetic, and environmental factors. IQ is a standardized score that measures a person's cognitive abilities compared to their age group, not a definitive indicator of total intelligence.

So some progress is no progress?

What's your evidence that DEI makes people's IQ go up?

So there's no "progress" at all.

[seeds]

Yeah, keep reaching. I'm sure you'll actually hit something that will stick one of these days.

You can't do it, can you? It doesn't even make sense. How could something 400 years ago make people today disadvantaged,...

Gary, I hope you aren't missing the incredible irony in IC's response to you.

I just couldn't let this pass, for this isn't the first time that one of IC's random comments inadvertently negated the very foundation upon which Christianity was established.

Indeed, Christianity's need for a savior is literally founded on the premise that all humans (past and present) have been, to put it mildly, "disadvantaged"...

(as in deemed inherently "sinful" and worthy of "eternal torture")

...based on something that two clueless knuckleheads (Adam and Eve) allegedly did thousands of years ago involving that "talking snake" you've been alluding to.

Yet here we have IC clearly stating that "...It doesn't even make sense..." that something that happened a mere 400 years ago could "...make people today disadvantaged..."

The last time he put his foot in his mouth and nullified his own religion was when he implied that the passing down of "Original Sin" to subsequent generations of humans is "hogwash."

The poor guy gets so caught up in his need to win his arguments,...

(this one over what he sees as faults in the DEI system)

...that he, again, inadvertently blurts out something that negates the very premise upon which Christianity is founded.
_______

[Alexis Jacobi]

Insert another nonsensical irrelevant response here.

No Gary. You must read between the lines. I cannot help it if ny auditors are such dour specimens!

[Immanuel Can]

You can't do it, can you? It doesn't even make sense. How could something 400 years ago make people today disadvantaged,...

Gary, I hope you aren't missing the incredible irony in IC's response to you.

There are so many things wrong with seeds' characterization of theology that I'm not going to bother with them all. But I'll take the most obvious one, and very simply debunk his criticism.

He's misunderstood the difference between genetic traits and environmental ones. Genetic ones are passable from generation to generation. Environmental ones are not: when the environment changes, so to do the associated phenomena. To try to argue that because a genetic trait can be passed down, therefore an environmental disadvantage ensues is silly.

Slavery was not a genetic condition, and is not congentially passed from one generation to the other. When the kid's family moved to the suburbs and his dad took a job as a teacher, his environment changed; so to does any perceived after-effect of his ancestors' past. He has the same start in life as the white kid next door, and a better one than the Chinese kid whose father works in the laundromat or the Indian whose father works construction. He's privileged, in fact, relative to them.

But you're talking about IQ. IQ, experts insist, is pretty much fixed: one may attain more or less of it over one's life, but can't markedly improve the IQ itself. There's still a lid on intellectual potential. That's what IQ purports to measure.

So how is DEI, an environmental change, going to improve IQ, a genetic trait? You'll have to explain that one to me, because it sure looks like an obvious category error.

[Alexis Jacobi]

But you're talking about IQ. IQ, experts insist, is pretty much fixed: one may attain more or less of it over one's life, but can't markedly improve the IQ itself. There's still a lid on intellectual potential. That's what IQ purports to measure.

1) And so what if in fact actual and verifiable general differences exist between race groups? Why, may I ask, would such a fact, if true, be so difficult to accept?

2) On what basis, and according to what research, have you determined (as you seem to have determined) that there are no race differences in general IQ? (I am aware of the controversy but I have no way to determine what the real truth is).

3) It seems to me that if there were verifiable racial differences that it would be nearly impossible to acknowledge them ‘publicly’. Hence the extreme controversy as it pertains to the topic.

4) How then do you explain general African American under-performance? I have read numerous papers, by well-meaning researchers, who say that no matter what quantity of resources are provided to address the problem, little significant changes occur.

[Belinda]

Oh? So now you insist that Murray's claim is a "fact"? So you believe that blacks are lower in IQ? Very interesting conclusion on your part. If so, that would certainly explain the reasons for your thinking on DEI: you think they need it because they are less bright, according to you and Murray.

But I think you should question Murray's cited statistic. I think you should check his evidence for it before you agree with him. Because if it turns out to be right, then it's the death of the prospect of DEI doing any good. It would just suggest you're forcing lower-IQ people into situations that demand a higher IQ.

And if you imagine the cause is social, then again, you're going to have to explain why a black kid from Chicago's affluent suburbs deserves a lower bar than the son of a Korean migrant or the daughter of an Indian shopkeeper... and why both of the latter deserve to be set an even higher bar than is set for whites. But I notice you're not even trying to answer that one.

That's because you know as well as anybody: it doesn't make a lick of sense.

Checkmate, Gary. He’s got you by the balls!

If you agree with the premise that the African nations in the New World inevitably perform in a third class behind Asians and Whites, and never seem to be able to rise out of the conditions that have molded them historically, then you hypocritical rat, you overstuffed blubbering White DEI advocate, you must admit that you are a dreaded racist mutherfuquer.

You see, Gary? You see how the ultimate moral manipulation works? When you cannot notice and describe the world as it really is, you have to lie to yourself, and once invested in the lie you remain trapped in the lie, and susceptible to arch-hypocrisy at the hand of an arch moral manipulator.

Oh this is delicious! It is like gooey moral taffy heated up in a DEI microwave.

Are you going to dye your hair bright pink too?

Immanuel, the very ghost of Jesus flutters around your overblown chessboard righteousness! God bless all the Earth’s wee children, all gloriously equal in His sight, and you : Truth Defender hater of Democrats the KKK and all ad hominems that ever infected the muck in the lower spheres, you deserve not one but TWO Holy pretzels!

Well done truly faithful servant & God’s own righteous child! Master pontificator and supreme forward-thinking apologist!

Gary, you have been very very naughty but though busted you CAN redeem yourself. ThinkOfOne has arrived and is primed to lay out the medicinal sacrificial truths encoded scripturally. Boom! The hammer drops. Even Sr Semillas will lend a helping holy hand as you squirm out from under your False Doctrines. I suspect even Promethean will intone in Ebonics some Marxism hymn to push you to a better POV …

Belinda is knitting you Muslim-luvin’ socks!

That's because you know as well as anybody: it doesn't make a lick of sense.

Let’s get down to genuine moral business!

But a racist believes that individuals of African race are genetically less intelligent. We are not racists who claim national economy is the cause of African nations performing badly.

It is bad for global prosperity that a nation with struggling economy is not given financial help in the form of foreign aid.This is not so much matter of morality as matter for economics. It just so happens that Christian morality prescribes similar measures as do economists.

[Alexis Jacobi]

But a racist believes that individuals of African race are genetically less intelligent.

Actually, the most benevolent, tolerant, even-keeled, forgiving and generous person who has no race-based prejudice of any sort, could be convinced, if evidence suggested it, that subtle or not-so-subtle differences exist between race-groups.

You have chosen to believe that only a ‘racist’ would believe such a thing. But a rational scientist might conclude such a thing and without having ‘racist’ intentions.

[popeye1945]

But a racist believes that individuals of African race are genetically less intelligent.

Actually, the most benevolent, tolerant, even-keeled, forgiving and generous person who has no race-based prejudice of any sort, could be convinced, if evidence suggested it, that subtle or not-so-subtle differences exist between race-groups.

You have chosen to believe that only a ‘racist’ would believe such a thing. But a rational scientist might conclude such a thing and without having ‘racist’ intentions.

Funny how the historically enslaved through violent colonialism, kept in dire poverty, and treated less than an animal at times, should be considered inferior to their past masters. The West is feeling the awakening of the African continent. We will see how the robber barons fare now that they cannot steal from Africa.

[ThinkOfOne]

Oh? So now you insist that Murray's claim is a "fact"? So you believe that blacks are lower in IQ? Very interesting conclusion on your part. If so, that would certainly explain the reasons for your thinking on DEI: you think they need it because they are less bright, according to you and Murray.

But I think you should question Murray's cited statistic. I think you should check his evidence for it before you agree with him. Because if it turns out to be right, then it's the death of the prospect of DEI doing any good. It would just suggest you're forcing lower-IQ people into situations that demand a higher IQ.

And if you imagine the cause is social, then again, you're going to have to explain why a black kid from Chicago's affluent suburbs deserves a lower bar than the son of a Korean migrant or the daughter of an Indian shopkeeper... and why both of the latter deserve to be set an even higher bar than is set for whites. But I notice you're not even trying to answer that one.

That's because you know as well as anybody: it doesn't make a lick of sense.

Checkmate, Gary. He’s got you by the balls!

If you agree with the premise that the African nations in the New World inevitably perform in a third class behind Asians and Whites, and never seem to be able to rise out of the conditions that have molded them historically, then you hypocritical rat, you overstuffed blubbering White DEI advocate, you must admit that you are a dreaded racist mutherfuquer.

You see, Gary? You see how the ultimate moral manipulation works? When you cannot notice and describe the world as it really is, you have to lie to yourself, and once invested in the lie you remain trapped in the lie, and susceptible to arch-hypocrisy at the hand of an arch moral manipulator.

Oh this is delicious! It is like gooey moral taffy heated up in a DEI microwave.

Are you going to dye your hair bright pink too?

Immanuel, the very ghost of Jesus flutters around your overblown chessboard righteousness! God bless all the Earth’s wee children, all gloriously equal in His sight, and you : Truth Defender hater of Democrats the KKK and all ad hominems that ever infected the muck in the lower spheres, you deserve not one but TWO Holy pretzels!

Well done truly faithful servant & God’s own righteous child! Master pontificator and supreme forward-thinking apologist!

Gary, you have been very very naughty but though busted you CAN redeem yourself. ThinkOfOne has arrived and is primed to lay out the medicinal sacrificial truths encoded scripturally. Boom! The hammer drops. Even Sr Semillas will lend a helping holy hand as you squirm out from under your False Doctrines. I suspect even Promethean will intone in Ebonics some Marxism hymn to push you to a better POV …

Belinda is knitting you Muslim-luvin’ socks!

That's because you know as well as anybody: it doesn't make a lick of sense.

Let’s get down to genuine moral business!

But a racist believes that individuals of African race are genetically less intelligent. We are not racists who claim national economy is the cause of African nations performing badly.

It is bad for global prosperity that a nation with struggling economy is not given financial help in the form of foreign aid.This is not so much matter of morality as matter for economics. It just so happens that Christian morality prescribes similar measures as do economists.

It is bad for global prosperity that a nation with struggling economy is not given financial help in the form of foreign aid.This is not so much matter of morality as matter for economics. It just so happens that Christian morality prescribes similar measures as do economists.


Not sure if I understand you correctly, but it seems that you are of the mind that "Christian morality" prescribes actually loving and helping one's neighbor. Nothing could be further from the truth.

While there are some Christians who actually believe in doing that, there seem to be many more who are either apathetic or dead set against it, especially Evangelical Christians. There's a distinction that needs to be made between the morality espoused by Jesus while He walked the Earth and "Christian morality". There's a wide gulf between the two.