@ShariaHeap's banner p

ShariaHeap


				

				

				

					0 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					

					
joined 2023 March 07 08:09:31 UTC
				

				

				

				

				

				

					
				

				

				
				
				

				
User ID: 2241


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
ShariaHeap


								

								

								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				

				
				
				

				

					0 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					joined 2023 March 07 08:09:31 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 2241


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					All
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
That's a wild concept, phrenology indeed, perhaps skull transplants or 'brain moulding' could be the way to go...
The link up to phrenology is indeed quite hilarious given the recent discussions..! Everything in circles perhaps


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Thanks, this is a cogent summary with plenty to explore. It was cheeky of me to prompt it because of course it's possible for me to do my own hunt. There are some things I've never come across here such as reaction norms so all well and good for learning something new.


But as you say rests on finer empirical points. I found what I read of Murray (not the bell curve but a later one that talked about gender as well) that it was already making inferences at the higher level and didn't have enough of the detail underneath. Of course at that level it's rapidly overwhelming, but it's where potentially false assumptions could be exposed.


Broadly speaking I don't think the universe is necessarily going to line up with progressive wishes but I'd need to understand more to get a view on the robustness of HBD.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Thanks, I think... I am quite agnostic about these issues. I do have a prior skepticism on HBD because I've seen the way it's used but am capable of updating priors and I'm not bad faith.


The things you are happy to leave behind seem pretty relevant to me, but I'm just at the start of rediscovering the science. I was pretty keen on evolutionary psychology about 20 years ago.


My personality is to latch on to something and think about it for a while, read a paper and slowly cycle, given the usual time constraints of daily life.


But if I gain an understanding I can explain it relativity simply and linearly to someone else, and I can point to weaknesses in the logic, science. I understand frustration with hearing the same old arguments, or bad-faith people and I know that people can get worn out on a topic but I don't know of any belief I have that I couldn't articulate the gist of in a long post.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Lots of good stuff here to think about. Among different isolated niches one can imagine different things playing off and there are always trade-off relationships.


There's plenty to check out, re nutrition requirements but I suppose not having the research base some of it feels a bit 'just so' to me, not to say that it's definitively wrong.


Some of the things you point out re brains and the hip, brain-size, plasticity trade-off could be argued either way. These are the key evolutionary advantages of humans in the first place. This is what allowed cognition, communication, cooperation and group cognition/culture. My understanding of lineage arguments is that advantages in group cooperation were key in strategic specialisation that were advantage in circumstances of resource competition and violence/warfare. The group/culture interacts then with evolutionary adaptation so that specialisation and cognitive, group niches could develop, presumably with systems of caring for young, which it should be noted for humans are universally vulnerable irrespective of intelligence.


G is a measure of cognition and at first blush should confer strategic advantages even in times of violence.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
That's a nice philosophic distinction and I actually think there is a common sense we can moor to. I don't know how people, scientists actually thought of phrenology, perhaps it was more in the not-obvious science can tell us realm. What tends to happen I would guess is that established ideas can become 'common sense' over time, even if wrong.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I am happy to profess quite a lot of ignorance, but given the scale of the subject matter I think it's something other people should be admitting to as well.


I just think when someone claims superiority based on genetics we should expect a very sophisticated evidence base with all the causal parts in place, and most importantly, acknowledgement of uncertainty and gaps in understanding.


Being wary of our history on 'science proves this about X race' is one of the very few things I align with woke anti-colonials about.


The question of how much isolation is needed is a good one, also how quickly evolutionary adaptation can take place. I take the points about evolutionary trade-offs, these seem very relevant.


I may be applying a critical lens to HBD but I'm open minded about enquiry. But jeez there's an awful lot of stuff I'd want to know about before I came down on one side or another.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Ah ha, excellent - you're very modest in your appraisal. Plenty to digest here..


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Thanks, good to have testable propositions that can be interrogated.


The other link you sent, the bottom one, is quite interesting. I'm only early in it, but the admixture technique contrasting Pygmy genetics against relative admixtures of an out group is a great idea for an experiment. I think it relies though on the contrast with a homogeneous population so you can distinguish the genes related to an attribute, eg height. Its a technique for identifying genes rather than an empirical rule that would necessarily apply if both groups were genetically more diverse, I imagine information-theoretically or statistically speaking that's a higher bar. But as I say early in the article.


I am somewhat interested in the actual science but I think HBD has a big job to demonstrate itself because of the complexity involved. I prefer to meet humans on an individual basis...


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Thanks for the clarification on 'reaction time' v 'choice time', and link to information processing capacity claim and reference. This enables me to explore and talk about something meaningful.


Black and white are broad groupings of different peoples and histories. The causal path of HBD presumably involves homogeneous lineages that develop distinctions as adaptive advantages. If you go to the top level, partly socially constructed level of race, we lose the causal lineage pathway and smear out across more diverse groups and genetics.


The point by point call and response block comment is not my thing - each individual point immediately becomes deep and layered so trying to address multiple in parallel is futile. But the choice reaction time is a good start to dig into. Thanks for an interesting HBD engagement and links.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Yep that's the level of analysis I'm thinking, and how each piece scaffolds to the broader claims around G intelligence over broad groups of lineages. I've read some Charles Murray and I'm underwhelmed by some of the aggregate data presented. I had thought by now a lot of interesting work on phylogenetic trees would be informing the conversation with some controlled natural experiments available.


But even then, 'some populations' being isolated limits representativeness and relevance for other populations.


Also there are different distributional considerations- perhaps some data is a group at the tail, ie Asian Americans. The analysis is very sensitive to what we consider our population and who were measuring etc.


People talk about Koreans being smarter but are they really genetically all that different from other Asians in the region?


I guess I want to learn from conversations on here so they have to actually have substance. I don't get that from the HBD enquiry here. Whereas a recent series of comments on the US and French revolutions gave me a lot.


The Neanderthal gene discovery is pretty fascinating. And aboriginals clearly have had time to become somewhat different. But is this a shorter term phenomenon akin to adaptation rather than a longer evolutionary time. I guess it does get into the overly complex here but I'm suspicious that any group over long enough time wouldn't select for intelligence in some form. When is G not useful in an environment. Similarly there's cultural/environmental factors that can lead to homogeneous populations but over long time the advantage is genetic mixing, so how long do homogeneous populations exist. Can we really assume that much about our current race categorisation around genetic similarity, or are we arguing that early divergence was the key differentiator.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I come from a Socratic mindset. It pays not to believe anyone unless you have travelled sufficiently on your own journey to confirm them. This is hard work mind you.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
These seem all a bit rote, and again don't really address much complexity. If I can practice and improve on a test then there is a cultural element. You mention speed reaction can't be trained for, but I'm assuming elite black athletes have superior scores on these, does this imply that blacks have superior native intelligence on aspects of intelligence?


Populations at the level of black v white v mixed are mixed of genetic lineages. This means tail genetics doesn't have to relate to median genetics.


Your genetic pot analogy seems a bit naive scientifically. To infer a causal relationship I'm going to need a bit more in terms of genetics.


My beef isn't that there's 'nothing there', just that the complexity is not engaged with, which implies a dunning-kruger potential. I am a scientist so I'm actually interested in the complexity and science. Others aren't interested in this but in making blanket statements about groups of people (with immense intragroup genetic variation), which overindexes on skin attributes.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Yes, absolutely - a range of physical talents have genetic basis. And why shouldn't different kinds of intelligence have genetic elements. Fine, it is the coarse theory I'm critiquing which ends up with some people in a Victorian hierarchy of being argument l. Human intelligence is multifaceted and overlaps with culture. Why has IQ gone up over time, why is it I can increase my IQ from practice? What is the genetics of a mixed race person in HBD, what level of mixing do different groups have, how much is adaptation to environment over shorter timescales, how well does the tail reflect mean behaviour.


Do you really believe common sense is a reliable scientific guide. Phrenology was once accepted. I'm open to inquiry in this space but I've noticed people prefer the axiomatic assumptions than thinking about it.


In reference to a previous conversation Im not race blind but I don't get the hate boner people carry, sometimes over their lifetimes, around race. If you're going to make a strong claim, you need strong evidence.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Can you point me to a name, link that does the genetic proof for HBD. Most of the content I see here already assumes this axiomatically or is low resolution. What id like is something where I can start to 'cleave the arguments at their bones'


Eg, I'm curious what interpretation people have for the Flynn effect, or what the evidence base is for isolated genetic pools over long history..


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 24, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
All doctors still have to pass the requirements don't they, regardless of how they get into medical school? Also I don't think it's necessarily linear between SAT and being a good doctor. My guess is you would want a minimum (higher than average) threshold and people at the top would probably specialise in any case. In between hard working, curious, empathetic, life-long learning could circumvent a lot- I don't know how these characteristics distribute but I don't think the average white doctor is that high a bar in the 10 min pharmaceutical dispensing slot I experience them in.  Mostly they're just passing on the received wisdom of the medical model.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 17, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I've got no problem with exploring hypotheses, just that it's a hard discipline to obtain high-quality evidence and to make attributions, and also to divide these up from the framing or epistemological assumptions. We have to delineate what we actually know, and then we can explore what we need to find out to fill the gaps, this is the scientific process and it's different from intuitive prediction, opinion-making.


As an example of the first, prompted by the blog shared by Rae I found this paper on prevalence of GD for females with CAH:


https://www.academia.edu/20952414/Increased_Cross_Gender_Identification_Independent_of_Gender_Role_Behavior_in_Girls_with_Congenital_Adrenal_Hyperplasia_Results_from_a_Standardized_Assessment_of_4_to_11_Year_Old_Children


There is support that the prevalence of GD may indeed higher with this group than the general population (one study cited 5.2% of the CAH sample had GD, of which 30% transitioned, which was a lot higher than the GD population of that time. This in turn is suggestive of a biological basis, or marker, of GD in the brain for this subset of people, who we also know have had a condition of some sort of masculinisation of the brain, which could be relevant.  Notably it isn't a measure of the prevalence of CAH within those that experience GD, or any comparison with trans identification, though the constructs have a 'gender identity' component.


We now have the usual concerns about the value of this citation. Is there selection bias? (The authors accept that, yes, there potentially could be). Is there any potential for bias in the instrument used, how valid/reliable has it been shown to be? Was the statistical method suitable - is factor analysis appropriate? They use only the first components (what proportion of the variance is explained?). Are the assumptions of normal errors on the latent factor regression upheld in the ANCOVA, have outliers/leverage points been checked, addressed, what is the control group? (There's a suggestion other studies were used in the control group, is that valid?. Etc.. etc... What do other studies say, is there any high-quality evidence with a larger sample with a transparent, non-biased selection process?


As a data point alone we are forced to conclude on the demands of evidence based medicine that it is low-quality evidence. It is suggestive for further study.


Secondly, the article also talks about GD, it says nothing about trans, or what trans is. While, particularly in more recent times, people with GD may become trans (whatever that is), and so we have association, that still leaves 'what trans is' and whether there is a causal connection from GD to trans.


How do we discern or frame this question? Is there a meaningful, essential or explanatory category that trans or (trans/CAH) exists in, such that we can postulate a causal path from some biological underpinning to an identity that tracks in an equivalent space other people would recognise within the scope of gendered identity, thus enabling it to achieve some kind of universality, OR, is trans a subjective, constructed category that is layered on phenomenological experience of gender dysphoria, which itself could be a consequence of underlying biological underpinnings, but which could be alleviated or reconciled in different ways, as social constructs can of course be adapted in many different ways.


I have no problem with looking at biological origins for dysphoria and even trying to connect these to concepts of gender, trans but my problem is the style of argumentation I see where some plausible aspect of biology in brain formation is mixed in with unclear notion of trans where implicit metaphysical assumptions are smuggled in that can then influence the reason making process, eg epistemological assumptions.


We also have to wrestle with the awful challenge of trying to parse research and scientific literature and being honest about the degree of certainty we can have based on it. I see people catapult off the smallest potential associations into somehow validating entire constructs of trans as transcendence and transhumanism, hiding the incoherence that can exist in the overall framework, eg, an essential gender reality whilst also pointing to socially constructed norms of gender (privileging another transcendent norm).


My short take is we will find all sorts of different trans, some with biological associations, making trans an incoherent concept unless we qualify it in certain ways.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 17, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Well I'm new enough that I haven't caught up with the nuances and bad-faith defectors. I'm well aware that communities can deteriorate. I followed Reddit from it's inception and witnessed various incursions from different sides, corporate interests that ruined the flavour. If there is a mechanism we can employ then I'm in favour but I ask that people be careful because i think the greatest risk is the current authoritarian move towards censorship.


Go reread the thread above, can you honestly find nothing good? By all means ban the low effort posts and keep an eye on people who hide their true motives and who are rigidly stuck in their own biases, but don't ban an entire line of thought, the community is currently mature enough to contain it. There's nothing wrong with single-issue posters in my view.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 17, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Civility is great, niceness I'm suspicious of.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 17, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I just read the comment thread generated by Cake and it was great as far as I'm concerned. I'm not a white ethno-nationalist by the way.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 17, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
There's actually a good example today, higher up. A community like this can contain up to the usual defector threshold I would guess. We don't seem to be there yet and the risk in trying to cast people out is it's not always possible to pick good v bad faith.


Presumably there's better, more satisfying places for recruitment. My sense is that people here are open to the challenge of defending their ideas... But I also tend to skip a lot of content...


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 17, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I am with you, I fail to understand what white identity even means, what could this group of people possibly have in common culturally.


The reality of the modern world is that it's cut a lot of people adrift from feeling rooted, although with history this was often the case also. Religion, nationality filled the void and created a sense of identity, but they too have fallen away. Modernism together with liberalism created a secular kind of identity that reached its zenith with neoliberalism and the end of history ideas, but that too has fallen by the wayside. We forgot that the conditions of a liberal society are downstream of culture and so fell into the current strand of progressive authoritarianism or neo-Marxism.


The question, if you have not already committed to some ethno-nationalist tribalism, is what next. Here are the parameters as I see it:


We have lost religion but secularism could never take its place so we have religiosity appearing as cult like ideologies.


We have philosophical relativism combined with postmodernism expressed as a superficial liberalism run amok. No, not everyone's thinking is equal - we can privilege good thinking over poor thinking and we desperately need to.


We need to reintroduce economics into discourse so we can agree across racial lines and make race less salient. Aren't a lot of poor whites just victims of changing economics and policy?


We need to stop believing simplistic narratives while at the same time being able to talk freely about things without being projected on for taboo topics. We should be able to critique aspects of different cultures without race necessarily coming into it.


We're actually in an exciting time, on the cusp of changes. It's no surprise religion is being talked about as part of the solution, even as less people profess belief in traditional religions. The secular, materialist, modernist frame has been too flat, it has run its course. This of course doesn't mean we abandon it's best elements and turn ourselves into a postmodern mush, we desperately need a scientific mindset, but it does mean we need to look beyond.


Also, I think there is a growing appreciation for elements of conservatism and self-sovereignty. Culture exists for a reason and we can't just cut it out of whole cloth - there are actually things worth preserving. We need to challenge decadent thinking and reorient to families and child development rather than how to construct a world that entertains rootless adults.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 17, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I agree with this angle. I think the stance of moral relativism is a performative contradiction -as soon as we have an 'other' we have to reckon with a non-relativist morality. I think morality gets mixed in with the locus of care where we apply it. Humans are very good at shifting this boundary and there are different solutions to scaling morality across different groups. Some cultures favour family, tribe over all else, but this is different from moral relativity.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 17, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I've always been taken by Godel's theorem's as it really cuts us down to size. But if I'm understanding it properly, it doesn't preclude the idea of a proof itself from a series of other proofs, just we can't prove a system of them all lining up together on the same axiom base. But that's not quite the same as having an ambivalent confusion about everything in mathematics...?


These days I like Iain Mcgilchrist's left-brain, right-brain algorithmic vs gestalt brain thing. A lot of our thinking and limitations are because we mistake the left-brain view of the world for reality. The key scientific insights of the 20th century, Godel, quantum physics, relativity and, yes, postmodernism are all pointing us to somewhere else...


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 17, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
This is a really weird mix of stuff that has hints to my intuition of potential quackery while also linking to a wide variety of studies that seem real enough but aren't particularly related. I note from a quick scan of the internet that there's some criticism of Dr Will Powers as being a quack and with this in mind the references to 'anecdotal' research strike me as quite odd for a researcher. There's very little to support your claims and little opportunity to review the relevant primary sources with regard to overlap of GD with CAH. There's also a lot of unsupported claims and hypotheses. The suspicion I have is that the numerous citations are meant to give credence to the unsupported commentary. It has the hint of grift, a la Robert Malone to me.


If you could point to just the original articles you find persuasive for a particular claim it would mean we can both endure effort to interrogate the truth claims in a more concise zone. I mean I don't implicitly rule out that some biological conditions could overlap with GD, but I don't see the evidence here. The closest link for your claims, looking at CAH and GD is a review behind a paywall and I can't see the original sources. Reviews are only as good as the sources.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of July 17, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'm happy for this kind of meta discussion if that's your take but I view this place as more like a party with different rooms, I just ignore content I'm not interested in (with the - toggle). As for this particular content I'm not always on to see X thing and so I'm happy to have repetition - I even reserve the right to repeat points myself as while I try to evolve my posts and mix them up, I also repeat myself, but who cares, were all free to ignore content or complain about it.


What I detect sometimes, and this is likely my own conspiratorial projection, is a kind of distaste for me wanting to continue to talk about it. The reality is this trans thing is an ongoing culture war, and I think I'm losing, so I'm motivated to try to share my perspective.