[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I teach mathematics. For the purpose of creativity, I would rank the students as follows:
(1) Caucasians. My students have a ‘creative spark’ that no others have.
(2) Asians, mostly Chinese. Great ‘clockworks’, good engineers, low creativity
(3) Blacks. No focus, no creativity, thinks that proofs are ‘dumb’. I had one student in all these years that had any ability at all.
Based upon my limited observations, Asians are more efficient, Caucasians are more creative, and Blacks should only be employed above a certain level if they prove that they are an exception and not the rule.
I know this sounds terribly racist but it is not intended that way. I am merely stating facts of my experience.
Sidenote: Ashkanazim are pure gold btw. [/quote]
Outstanding !
the “facts of your experience” happens to be exactly the same as the “facts” of Arthur de Gobineau’s “experience”.
What a coincidence !
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I teach mathematics. For the purpose of creativity, I would rank the students as follows:
(1) Caucasians. My students have a ‘creative spark’ that no others have.
(2) Asians, mostly Chinese. Great ‘clockworks’, good engineers, low creativity
(3) Blacks. No focus, no creativity, thinks that proofs are ‘dumb’. I had one student in all these years that had any ability at all.
Based upon my limited observations, Asians are more efficient, Caucasians are more creative, and Blacks should only be employed above a certain level if they prove that they are an exception and not the rule.
I know this sounds terribly racist but it is not intended that way. I am merely stating facts of my experience.
Sidenote: Ashkanazim are pure gold btw. [/quote]
and they wonder why America needs Affirmative Action.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I teach mathematics. For the purpose of creativity, I would rank the students as follows:
(1) Caucasians. My students have a ‘creative spark’ that no others have.
(2) Asians, mostly Chinese. Great ‘clockworks’, good engineers, low creativity
(3) Blacks. No focus, no creativity, thinks that proofs are ‘dumb’. I had one student in all these years that had any ability at all.
Based upon my limited observations, Asians are more efficient, Caucasians are more creative, and Blacks should only be employed above a certain level if they prove that they are an exception and not the rule.
I know this sounds terribly racist but it is not intended that way. I am merely stating facts of my experience.
Sidenote: Ashkanazim are pure gold btw. [/quote]You REALLY have to come to church with me man. LOL!!!
I thought you would get this on your own, but I guess I have to point this out to you.[/quote]
I can see that your argument is breaking down.
Take 1000 children from different races, but with similar risk factors. Put them in an experiment similar to the Abecedarian Project, and categorize the results by race. Not impossible.
Does not factor race (the intent of the discussion)
So you’re telling me that there is less difference in achievement levels between poor and affluent whites? If you have a link to that one, I’d appreciate it.
Not a redistribution of wealth, we already have that. I’m advocating that parents need to work harder to provide better opportunities for their children through teaching, mentoring, and being better role models.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I teach mathematics. For the purpose of creativity, I would rank the students as follows:
(1) Caucasians. My students have a ‘creative spark’ that no others have.
(2) Asians, mostly Chinese. Great ‘clockworks’, good engineers, low creativity
(3) Blacks. No focus, no creativity, thinks that proofs are ‘dumb’. I had one student in all these years that had any ability at all.
Based upon my limited observations, Asians are more efficient, Caucasians are more creative, and Blacks should only be employed above a certain level if they prove that they are an exception and not the rule.
I know this sounds terribly racist but it is not intended that way. I am merely stating facts of my experience.
Sidenote: Ashkanazim are pure gold btw. [/quote]
Have you noticed any correlation between home life and aptitude? Surely you’ve had to deal with many parents along the way.
My dad always taught me that there were many ways to skin a cat, and the way you’re taught isn’t necessarily the best way. I can see how it would have affected me if I’d been taught to do it the way I was told and never question it. I can also see how horrible it would be if he hadn’t spent the time to teach me anything. I know a lot of parents who always tell their children to ‘just go and play’.
Interesting story, and relevant to my last post, mainly directed at HH:
During my senior year, I took Adv Math I (trig+pre-cal). One of our problems was for the teacher to give us the mid-points of a triangle, and we were to figure out the vertices. So, of course, we asked if there was an equation to do so. As soon as she said there wasn’t one, I called bullshit (out loud, unfortunately). So she challenged me; if I could come up with an equation and a proof, I’d get an automatic A. Apparently, she’d never seen anyone solve that one in her 45 years of teaching.
She stared at that proof for the entire class period. I got my A and two people passed her class because she gave a 100pt quiz on it.
Now, if my dad hadn’t taught me to think independently, I would have never even thought to question her when she said there wasn’t a solution.
Besides, I’m pretty sure more genes go into your heart shape than your eye colour. [/quote]
I was using the heart as an example.
So you’re saying that every gene carries the same weight? That doesn’t make logical sense, evidenced by your quote about a random white person being more related to me than a mixed-race cousin.[/quote]
… What? When did I say every gene carries the same weight? I don’t even know what that means. Different genes do different things. Whatever you value them at depends on what you value more.
Besides, I’m pretty sure more genes go into your heart shape than your eye colour. [/quote]
I was using the heart as an example.
So you’re saying that every gene carries the same weight? That doesn’t make logical sense, evidenced by your quote about a random white person being more related to me than a mixed-race cousin.[/quote]
… What? When did I say every gene carries the same weight? I don’t even know what that means. Different genes do different things. Whatever you value them at depends on what you value more. [/quote]
Then your argument of relation by number of differing genes is invalid.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:<<< I know a lot of parents who always tell their children to ‘just go and play’.[/quote]I know a lot of parents in this very black city that wouldn’t notice for a week if their kids were gone at all. Not because they’re black. But because a couple generations of nanny state socialism, which they have been the very specific targets of, has utterly destroyed any sense of social or family accountability or responsibility.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I teach mathematics. For the purpose of creativity, I would rank the students as follows:
(1) Caucasians. My students have a ‘creative spark’ that no others have.
(2) Asians, mostly Chinese. Great ‘clockworks’, good engineers, low creativity
(3) Blacks. No focus, no creativity, thinks that proofs are ‘dumb’. I had one student in all these years that had any ability at all.
Based upon my limited observations, Asians are more efficient, Caucasians are more creative, and Blacks should only be employed above a certain level if they prove that they are an exception and not the rule.
I know this sounds terribly racist but it is not intended that way. I am merely stating facts of my experience.
Sidenote: Ashkanazim are pure gold btw. [/quote]
Outstanding !
the “facts of your experience” happens to be exactly the same as the “facts” of Arthur de Gobineau’s “experience”.
What a coincidence ![/quote]
If we don’t base our judgments on our experiences, then whose experiences should we use to form our judgments?
[quote]JayPierce wrote:<<< I know a lot of parents who always tell their children to ‘just go and play’.[/quote]I know a lot of parents in this very black city that wouldn’t notice for a week if their kids were gone at all. Not because they’re black. But because a couple generations of nanny state socialism, which they have been the very specific targets of, has utterly destroyed any sense of social or family accountability or responsibility.
[/quote]
Chicken-Egg argument.
If your circumstances determine who you are more than does your intellect, if you are incapable of rising above circumstances, then you are ‘driftwood’ and get what you deserve. This is much more true in a society like the United States vis a vis most other places.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I teach mathematics. For the purpose of creativity, I would rank the students as follows:
(1) Caucasians. My students have a ‘creative spark’ that no others have.
(2) Asians, mostly Chinese. Great ‘clockworks’, good engineers, low creativity
(3) Blacks. No focus, no creativity, thinks that proofs are ‘dumb’. I had one student in all these years that had any ability at all.
Based upon my limited observations, Asians are more efficient, Caucasians are more creative, and Blacks should only be employed above a certain level if they prove that they are an exception and not the rule.
I know this sounds terribly racist but it is not intended that way. I am merely stating facts of my experience.
Sidenote: Ashkanazim are pure gold btw. [/quote]
Outstanding !
the “facts of your experience” happens to be exactly the same as the “facts” of Arthur de Gobineau’s “experience”.
What a coincidence ![/quote]
If we don’t base our judgments on our experiences, then whose experiences should we use to form our judgments?
[/quote]
Some people are so deeply affected by confirmation biases that they shouldn’t form judgments at all.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:<<< I know a lot of parents who always tell their children to ‘just go and play’.[/quote]I know a lot of parents in this very black city that wouldn’t notice for a week if their kids were gone at all. Not because they’re black. But because a couple generations of nanny state socialism, which they have been the very specific targets of, has utterly destroyed any sense of social or family accountability or responsibility.
[/quote]
Chicken-Egg argument.
If your circumstances determine who you are more than does your intellect, if you are incapable of rising above circumstances, then you are ‘driftwood’ and get what you deserve. This is much more true in a society like the United States vis a vis most other places.
[/quote]Intellect has much less to do with this than character. The remaining whites in this town are pretty much the same as the blacks only… white. It is NOT a black and white thing. You hand ANYBODY even a piddling subsistence for free and show that you will take care of them if they do not take of themselves and they will let you do it. Convince them that past grievances more than justify their being given these resources and that makes it even easier. Once the deleterious effects roll down generationally and you have what we have. I will always believe that if everybody in the history of the world that was white had been black and vice versa? We’d have exactly the same thing we have now except with people’s color’s being reversed.
Black people are not in any way less innately capable or inclined to a good and godly life than white people. We have paid them to destroy themselves and it would have been the same if they were all white. You disagree. Too bad. You’re wrong. I can prove it to you.
I thought you would get this on your own, but I guess I have to point this out to you.[/quote]
I can see that your argument is breaking down.
Take 1000 children from different races, but with similar risk factors. Put them in an experiment similar to the Abecedarian Project, and categorize the results by race. Not impossible.
Does not factor race (the intent of the discussion)
So you’re telling me that there is less difference in achievement levels between poor and affluent whites? If you have a link to that one, I’d appreciate it.
Not a redistribution of wealth, we already have that. I’m advocating that parents need to work harder to provide better opportunities for their children through teaching, mentoring, and being better role models.[/quote]
There is no break down here and no one is arguing against hard work, but the 1000 person test you want is unnecessary because the hypothesis has been proven in other ways. Regardless of income bracket, the IQ gap remains the same, and since we all go through the same school system, that is also controlled for. To debunk the possibility of the school system being biased, the same gaps are seen internationally. For the sake of convenience, the most commonly agreed upon numbers are as follows:
Ashkenazi Jew (the “white” Jews): 112-115
North-East Asian Mongoloid (what most people think of as “Asian”): 104-106
Caucasian: 100-103
Hispanic (not a race, but this is the label most people go with): 89-93
North-American Blacks (of whom are typically 12-22% “White”): 85 (arguably 80)
African Blacks: 70 (55-80)
[ Race and intelligence - Wikipedia ]
Unless everywhere in the world is equally as discriminatory (does everyone secretly like Jews now?), then these numbers are mostly genetic.
As for your requestion for information on the gap between poor whites vs. successful whites, you’d have to look at the average IQ’s of a given profession. For example, the average IQ of doctors is around 120. This is 20 points higher than the average white IQ (within the second standard deviation), but 35-40 points above the average black IQ (within the third standard deviation). This means for a black man to become a doctor, he must be a full order of magnitude (in terms of SD) smarter than his white peers have to be in order to become a doctor. ( Modern IQ ranges for various occupations )
Since it’s more common for a person to be two SD’s above the norm than to be three, you see more white doctors. Programs like affirmative action try to shrink the gap by lowering the bar for blacks, so the actual gap isn’t as big as the predicted gap, but the bar still isn’t lowered enough to actually equalize the frequency of black doctors with white/asian/jewish doctors so typically yes, the gap between affluent whites and poor whites is smaller than the gap between affluent blacks and poor blacks if you hold blacks to the same standards for affluence as whites…
Besides, I’m pretty sure more genes go into your heart shape than your eye colour. [/quote]
I was using the heart as an example.
So you’re saying that every gene carries the same weight? That doesn’t make logical sense, evidenced by your quote about a random white person being more related to me than a mixed-race cousin.[/quote]
… What? When did I say every gene carries the same weight? I don’t even know what that means. Different genes do different things. Whatever you value them at depends on what you value more. [/quote]
Then your argument of relation by number of differing genes is invalid. [/quote]
If it’s invalid with a species, then it’s invalid between species too. Is that the road you want to take?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I teach mathematics. For the purpose of creativity, I would rank the students as follows:
(1) Caucasians. My students have a ‘creative spark’ that no others have.
(2) Asians, mostly Chinese. Great ‘clockworks’, good engineers, low creativity
(3) Blacks. No focus, no creativity, thinks that proofs are ‘dumb’. I had one student in all these years that had any ability at all.
Based upon my limited observations, Asians are more efficient, Caucasians are more creative, and Blacks should only be employed above a certain level if they prove that they are an exception and not the rule.
I know this sounds terribly racist but it is not intended that way. I am merely stating facts of my experience.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I teach mathematics. For the purpose of creativity, I would rank the students as follows:
(1) Caucasians. My students have a ‘creative spark’ that no others have.
(2) Asians, mostly Chinese. Great ‘clockworks’, good engineers, low creativity
(3) Blacks. No focus, no creativity, thinks that proofs are ‘dumb’. I had one student in all these years that had any ability at all.
Based upon my limited observations, Asians are more efficient, Caucasians are more creative, and Blacks should only be employed above a certain level if they prove that they are an exception and not the rule.
I know this sounds terribly racist but it is not intended that way. I am merely stating facts of my experience.
Sidenote: Ashkanazim are pure gold btw. [/quote]
What mathematics do you teach?[/quote]
AP Calculus and Honors Precalculus. I have been for more than 30 years. My conclusions are totally subjective and are based on my observations of my students.
Besides, I’m pretty sure more genes go into your heart shape than your eye colour. [/quote]
I was using the heart as an example.
So you’re saying that every gene carries the same weight? That doesn’t make logical sense, evidenced by your quote about a random white person being more related to me than a mixed-race cousin.[/quote]
… What? When did I say every gene carries the same weight? I don’t even know what that means. Different genes do different things. Whatever you value them at depends on what you value more. [/quote]
Then your argument of relation by number of differing genes is invalid. [/quote]
If it’s invalid with a species, then it’s invalid between species too. Is that the road you want to take?[/quote]
A species is defined by the ability to interbreed. There’s a definite divide that is distinct from the number of different genes.
[/quote]