Sorry U actually wot
Sir Woke XR Re… 03 Jun 21 02:55
Reply |

Hard agree.

You wot m4, you fooking racist aunts?

Hopefully they are now going to get absolutely rinsed for discrimination for many many many more millions than they would have had to pay before 

I must be missing something.  The tone of the article doesn’t seem shocked enough.  I can only echo Laz.

Yeah, it’s just the casual tone of it.

Oh, they were assuming black people are less clever than white people, and for years they’ve been calibrating their compensation payouts on that basis? Yeah. But hey good news - they’ve stopped now.

It is a literal “when did you stop beating your wife” issue.

Not good.

Shows how you shouldn't determine an individual's rights based on traits of a demographic group.

Proof, if it were needed, of how fooked up a country the USA is.

If you calculate compensation on loss of mental ability, you can’t really avoid such issues. Would you rather they did it based on SATS scores?

you can easily avoid such issues.  If you're not a barstool racist.

Elfffi, yes, I would rather the assessed loss of mental ability by reference to the individual rather than their race, if not possible then I would rather it was by reference to people as whole rather than using racial stereotypes of intelligence which time and time again are shown to be bullshit.

Pretty mental - shows how racist the US is (can’t imagine some local council wonk over here implementing that bollocks).

either do it on SAT results or better yet have a flat amount to all the injured - In the U.K. an arm is an arm and has a comp value, however loss of earnings obvs depends on what you were earning. 


They should just standardise compensation on the basis of an assumed average level of baseline cognitive ability for humans as a whole.

Elffi you might end up with secondary discrimination based on sat results but to be honest unless the connection is really close I view that as lesser order.

take two examples -

you use uni grades for offers, X community has lower grades due to (oppressions, cultural factors, being dirt poor, whatever) therefore X community doesn’t tend to get into oxbridge because they don’t hit the required standards - less fussed on this.

We decide to ban all head coverings to take a pop at the Muslim community - but guvnor we aren’t banning Islam just what Muslim people like to do?!? Obvious secondary racism which should be resisted.


where’s that tool who always used to post “elf and safety innit” on threads like this (he would always, always add the limit”). Can’t remember who he was, but he was a tool from tool street and this issue would be right up that street.

US is firmly racist and in the recent years, proudly so and with impunity. 

Yanks suggesting that it is just shades of that or that every other country is racist too, they don't know how close they are to 1933 Germany right now. 

Like I always say, even though races differ, everyone must be treated fairly as an individual, so these things should be based purely on their personal characteristics.

"The practice of race norming was first used decades ago by US President Jimmy Carter's administration in federal job applications, adjusting aptitude scores to account for the ethnicity of the tested candidate"

So it is OK to allocate jobs on the basis that races have different cognitive abilities, so you set a lower pass score for some races, but a higher one e.g. for people of Chinese ethnicity. And that sort of racism is terrific obviously!

What's the problem? Seems fair enough. The idea is quite anachronistic and should be dropped. 

Race norming is wrong in either context.     By all means adjust for upbringing and education so you measure true potential but agree to do so purely on grounds of race is racist even if well intentioned.

It will probably end up being individually assessed which might put an end to players faking a low baseline to avoid being substituted for concussion.

These guys are all college (university) graduates. So why not just use the Yale or Princeton or whatever IQ of graduates as the baseline and then test them now to see how far below they are. 

I think this is a well recognised thing. Black people tend to underperform on these kind of tests. I wonder whether that is because the tests have likely been developed on white people so don't take into account cultural factors, for example. 

I doubt many cognative or intellectual tests have been validated on a modern population. 

Yes that is correct Crypto. No black person has ever devised an IQ test. Nobody has validated tests against modern populations. The issue of racial differences in scores has not resulted in any effort to improve testing.

IQ tests are bollocks even leaving aside the racial angle.   When tests of this nature are practiced for and taught for scores can improve dramatically rending them entirely unfit for purpose, which is to test for "natural" intelligence.  This undeniable fact also of course is pretty much proof positive that your upbringing and education in general will massively impact any score you get on an IQ score

Guy you are right about practice improving scores. So if the result is important you make all candidates practice a couple of dummy tests, before taking the real one. This virtually eliminates the distorting effect of practice. And yes of course, education improves IQ to some degree. Nobody disputes that.

Your argument I think would also indicate that 400m race times are bollox, because practice and training improve performance.

Outside Northern Ireland and the US, evolution is generally accepted as proven. 

ROF seems to have some other sceptics. 

Some races are taller, some are shorter. Some can breathe better at high altitudes. Given that intelligence is generally taken as a differentiator for Homo sapiens from other species, it would be kind of odd if it didn’t differ between races. However you care to measure it.

That review makes the interesting point... "IQ tests are biased against minorities."

How odd that the disadvantaged minorities have so far failed to produce IQ tests biased in their own favour. Can anyone explain the failure to do that? Prizes would be showered on anyone who cracked it. US police forces tried to develop "unbiased" tests where all races would score the same on average, but in the end gave it up, as all tests produced similar results. I wonder why they failed?

But Jews and Chinese ethnic origin people are minorities (in Europe). So but for the biased tests they would no longer outperform gentile Europeans by 10 and 15 points respectively, but their performance would be even better!

This is very interesting and ought to be more widely known.

Sorry wrong way round. In Europe Jews score 15 points above average, and Chinese 10 points.

Silly me mark 2.

I read that review properly, and it says...

"IQ tests are biased against minorities. .... Western understandings of intelligence are inappropriate for other cultures. These are some of the statements about intelligence that are common in the media and in popular culture. But none of them are true."

Unfortunately, IQ tests reliably measure what they are supposed to. That is why you can train for one particular IQ test by taking it repeatedly, but the training will not transfer to a different test.

Also, there is no support for the claim that standard IQ tests are biased against any particular set of people. Different results do not imply test bias, but differences in performance. If you go by nationality, the groups that excel at IQ tests are not the ones who devised the standard tests.

Pretty dismal, but here's the thing: None of this makes it okay to refer to group traits when dealing with an individual.

It's an odd kind of white supremacy that sees Ashkenazi Jews and North East Asians consistently outperforming whites.  

There may be cultural or environmental impacts on performance but I believe a genetic difference between races is debunked by black kids being raised by a white family doing just as well as white kids in it tests in the us until teenage years when environmental and cultural factors may come into play again

Quite right Unwalt.

At the same time when a minority group has a problem it is silly automatically to blame white people. 

How do you explain the genetic component increasing as people reach adulthood, Guy?  You got it the wrong way round. Basically genetic component is ~20% in early childhood rising to ~80% by adulthood. 

Blue,  the thinking is because as people grow up they get impacted by cultural social and economic factors impacting their own race whereas when they are young they are mostly influenced by their own families even if a different race to them.

Guy, that is not what research has found. For a baby environmental factors predominate, e.g.

- were they premature?

- have they had a recent illness?

- are they well fed and cared for?

But over time things like this tend to average out, and your own innate abilities tend to determine what you become.

Guy, you might want to google the Minnesota twin study. It found black kids adopted by white parents tended to under-perform on IQ tests relative to mixed race kids, who in turn under-performed relative to white kids adopted in the same study. The difference was marked at age 7, but greater at age 17. I know this is sad, and not what anyone would want, but facts are facts. It is hard to square these results, and hundreds of other similar ones, with the religious doctrine that all races are identical. As others have pointed out, it would be very odd if that were so, but one should accept the evidence, whether it matches your prejudices or not I think.

A bit of a minefield this, but for years the NFL teams wouldn't hire black quarterbacks (too complicated a position) then Michael Vick changed all that. Loads of others since.

KG, the diversity deniers will forever claim that:

- diversity is valued and important

- diversity should be maintained

- diversity doesn’t exist

- diversity should be eliminated so that everyone is equal

I do wish they’d make their minds up (see even there I recognise that there are multiple minds at work - each with their own view)

A bit of a minefield this, but for years the NFL teams wouldn't hire black quarterbacks (too complicated a position) then Michael Vick changed all that. Loads of others since.

Michael Vick thought dog-fighting was a good thing.  

“As well as admitting they had operated the fighting ring with Vick, Phillips and Peace both testified that he had helped execute - by methods including hanging and drowning - at least eight underperforming pit bull terriers.”



Unfortunately, IQ tests reliably measure what they are supposed to. That is why you can train for one particular IQ test by taking it repeatedly, but the training will not transfer to a different test.

can confirm

My parents lived abroad when me and my brother were little, and the local international schools required IQ tests for year 1 admissions process

I did fine but when it was his turn my brother failed, but the admissions director suggested that my brother get tutoring and do some more practice tests, and come back the next month. 

He did, and absolutely fooking aced it.