Let the blogging begin!

[substitute]

It's "Murray Week" here at the substitute Building. Next up is Charles. You remember, the Bell Curve guy? He's back with an editorial in the WSJ. He doesn't say much more than "I was too right" with a lot of excess verbiage

Comments

FUCK THE SOCIAL SCIENCES.

[salome_st_john]

Do I have to stay in school?

[freshwater_pr0n]

gah. my friend's dad wrote a scathing refutation of Herrnstein and Murray's work, but a quick google search hasn't turned it up. at any rate, it was remaindered quickly despite good reviews.

our theory of mind is this century's phlogiston. anyone who delves into it is almost sure to be at least 95% wrong. wrongness in itself is a good thing - each failed hypothesis is a clue to which avenues *needn't* be explored. it's the jackasses who persist in or fondly adopt (or worse, extrapolate upon) these failed hypotheses that need to be cockpunched.

[flipzagging]

You have to wonder about fields where everything changes every few years. But have you read Jared Diamond? He's starting to unify anthropology and sociology with the harder sciences. I find his arguments a lot more convincing than this retard.

[substitute]

He's a good popular science writer, and he succeeds in convincing me of whatever his point is currently. I really have no idea if he's right about anything.

[kennfusion]

I think what annoyed me about that article is the assertion that IQ is an actual measurement of what someone can accomplish in his/her life. That affirmative action in colleges only makes it apparent the big gulf between racial IQ's? Right-NOT!.....Because my experience in teaching college freshmen at a State college was quite the opposite. Those students who I would assume to have had higher IQ's, tended to be lazier and less driven then their supposedly 'less intelligent' peers.