JRPC wrote:

OK so this has been a fairly maddening conversion. Ill try to do a second post to make clear my opinions about race and IQ and all that stuff. I thought they had been, but apparently I thought wrong. Firstly though, a post-mortem of Bell Curve-gate. Now this is heavily abridged to preserve peoples sanity and I’ve tried to stick to what I see as what’s been the main narrative thrust here. There was obviously more going on that just this. What I’m trying to do here is give you a sense of what it’s been like to be me during this exchange. 1. In a conversation about Noam Chomsky, Goober outs me as a Sam Harris fan. I am now tied to Harris forever more. 2. People say bad things about Sam Harris, to whom I am now tied. 3. I say I’d be quite happy to not talk about Chomski or Harris anymore. 4. I say something about not all religions being equally bad and I am labeled a racist. I am now a racist forever more. 5. There are links to a couple of what I consider to be totally trash articles defaming Harris for being a racist (note: these articles have nothing to do with The Bell Curve). 6. Hunk points out that Harris, to whom I am now tied, endorses The Bell Curve and people start talking about Harris and the Bell Curve. 7. I say that I am not going to defend The Bell Curve and post a video of Prof Pinker, who knows far more about this stuff than all of us combined, talking about race and IQ and I suggest he should be listened to. 8. I respond to a post pointing out that Pinker (and Harris for that matter) is not saying that IQ is “100% genetic” and another pointing out that IQ has been shown to strongly correlate with success. In the same post I point out that you can infer nothing at all about someone’s IQ from their race. 9. I grant that the motives of the authors of The Bell Curve may well have been the worst imaginable, but whatever ultimately turns out to be the truth about race and IQ is the truth regardless or where it comes from. 10. Hunk totally misrepresents this as me ‘buying into the rhetoric of the Bell Curve’ 11. In response to Face I make a point about it being better to face difficult truths rather than ignoring them as this leaves the bad guys to interpret them as they wish. I think this is an important point. 12. Right, then there’s a key post from Face for two reasons: a) He says “I'm taking the liberty here of assuming you and Harris are in lockstep with your thinking” when I have already said that I am not trying to defend the Bell Curve. b) He then first expresses a confused idea about genetics, that because traits like intelligence have both genetic and environmental factors then you can’t say anything definitive about them. “it seems to me clear that this isn't the sort of science you can talk about as simple true/false, Facts or not. Every step has too much subjectivity”. Does it indeed? 13. Face posts a ”mic drop” link refuting The Bell Curve, seemingly directed at me despite me saying that I wasn’t defending The Bell Curve. 14. I say that I am not defending The Bell Curve but then I do say that I believe there is a genetic element to IQ. 15. Tin downplays the usefulness of IQ and calls “any conversation about it is spurious bullshit”. I reply by pointing out a couple of hastily googled examples of some practical uses of IQ in his own field (I believe) of doctoring (I would have written a different response to this in retrospect). I again agree that IQ and race plays nicely into the hands of right-wingers and so there is a need to grapple with it honestly. I post a video that I agree with, conceding that there are some facts that could be socially harmful to know and that we must question the motives of those who want to find out. 16. Face quotes himself again (an annoying habit - if it didn’t help the first time it’s unlikely to the second or third) implying that I am ignoring linked articles that refute The Bell Curve despite me saying on multiple occasions that I am not defending The Bell Curve. 17. Face posts a wall of copied text from the same linked articles refuting the Bell Curve in response to something I’ve said. I ask him why and point out again that I have not been defending The Bell Curve. 18. Face tells me that ‘the onus is on me’ to explain the funding of The Bell Curve. 19. I tell face that I am not defending The Bell Curve. 20. Stoph tells Face that he has ‘a seamlessly endless amount of patience’ and I want to shoot myself in the head. 21. Face continues to demonstrate a clear confusion about how genetics work and in an attempt to clarify he posts his previous response verbatim, for the third time. 22. Everyone tells Face how totally awesome he is and how he has totally nailed me on this.  That is pretty much my experience of how this has gone. There’s stuff I’m not including, obviously. Towards the end I guess a made some accusations about a political/ethical bias here. I do stand by that but it’s a different point really.

Unlikely wrote:

Read that as "beard shit was going down" and am now feeling faintly disappointed.

Gremill wrote:

The problem with trying to have a Damascene moment is that there’s a high likelyhood of being blown to bits in a completely justified western drone strike.