This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
From a rough look at the numbers it seems that if we group Japanese, Chinese and Indian Americans together, they're about twice as numerous as Ashkenazis. Assuming the Ashkenazis have an average IQ 4-5 points higher than that of the "Asian" distribution, it's not particularly unlikely they'd outnumber the Asians on the extreme edges of the distribution. Jews have also lived in America in large numbers longer than the above groups; this means family wealth has accumulated (although the advantage this gives to modern-day Jews is just standard upper-class privilege, nothing to do with collectivism).
Incidentally, I don't doubt that there could be non-IQ factors that contribute to the success of Jewish Americans. I'm skeptical of the collectivism/group evolutionary strategy argument, but that's another discussion. The people who bring these things up though almost universally deny any Jewish IQ edge (and/or tend to be holocaust deniers) which tends to make me treat their arguments with skepticism.
I doubt that given test scores which are a good measure of G. Asians and Indians were selected for maximising these test scores, you have far more Asians and Indians in the highest percentiles of test scores. The collectivism only works because they are smart to begin with, but the collectivism makes the differences so dramatic in these things. I appreciate ingroup biases since that is natural human behaviour. If Jews are half a standard deviation smarter than white gentiles, then how do Asians and Indians do so much better than both in various tests?
I am not an asian supremacist, tails being fat is a real thing especially given how Asians likely have thinner ones compared to other people in the conversation.
This is like @self_made_human’s original post and earlier comment. The Indians who do so well are selected as the smartest people in a 90 average population. Their performance is going to be completely different to a population where the average is 112. For example, they might be overrepresented in some things and not in others. A 130 Indian might just seem more ‘weird’ than a 130 Ashkenazi.
I know smart Indians like to imagine they’re all from highly endogamous castes that preserved their unique intelligence through the millennia, but as you yourself have argued this is mostly cope.
Ok this is a fair point, I'm a little hesitant with matters pertaining to group differences because I'm not as well versed with stats as I should be. My main aim isn't a total denial of ashkenazis being a smart group, I have some skepticism which may be wrong.
The left and right in the mainstream simply use the word culture to avoid stating Ingroup bias or being smart whereas the truth is a combination of both which magnify results. This is the correct thing to do by all accounts, the purpose of an Ingroup is to help its people
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link