"68" the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africa say researchers - thread 2

Speeders R Murderers, in that last thread you said that you wanted to prove to the world that sub-Saharan Africans and black people in general were genetically inferior to white people and other races in the area of intelligence in order to justify the complete elimination of all forms of Affirmative Action.
You claimed that Affirmative Action would be indefensible if it were found that black people were less intelligent on average,
and yet you acknowledged that there are some blacks who are more intelligent than some whites and other races.

So, if you truly believe that individual blacks have the capacity and potential to become as smart/intelligent/useful as white people, or even more-so,
then wouldn't you also have to at least acknowledge that certain forms of Affirmative Action may be defensible on the grounds
that they provide such black individuals with certain opportunities to realize their potential that these individuals most
likely would not have gotten otherwise? That's not to say there might not be negatives to some types of
Affirmative Action, but as long as it can be claimed that some blacks have the potential to become
smarter than some whites if given the chance, what exactly is the rationale
against Affirmative Action as it relates to any race (or sex)
that has been discriminated against??

Also, what is (or was) 'the rationale' for Affirmative Action as you see or saw it?
And specifically what specific type of Affirmative Action are you in favor of getting rid of,
or do you believe all forms of Affirmative Action, regardless of their particular implementation, are useless?

How is Affirmative Action's usefulness dependent upon the average intelligence of any group?
And finally, if you were an employer and had a choice, would you hire a black person of 100 IQ
over a 99 IQ white person with otherwise identical credentials and qualifications?
And who would you choose if you were deciding who to give an education?

Thanks,

-Meta

 

So is that a yes? See, this is why I asked you what exactly you thought the rationale for Affirmative Action was.
It seems to me that you think it has something to do with intelligence levels, or average intelligence levels.

Is it possible in your view for certain forms of Affirmative Action to be defended on the grounds
that they provide individuals from certain groups with certain opportunities to realize their potential that these individuals most
likely would not have gotten otherwise due to past or current discrimination?

What exactly is the rationale against Affirmative Action as it relates to any race (or sex) that has been discriminated against??

What is/was 'the rationale' for Affirmative Action as you see/saw it?
Specifically what specific type of Affirmative Action are you in favor of getting rid of,
or do you believe all forms of Affirmative Action, regardless of their particular implementation, are useless?

How is Affirmative Action's usefulness dependent upon the average intelligence of any group?
And finally, if you were an employer and had a choice, would you hire a black person of 100 IQ
over a 99 IQ white person with otherwise identical credentials and qualifications?
And who would you choose if you were deciding who to give an education?

Thanks.

-Meta

 

I actually raised that question multiple times in the last topic, and eventually,
Speeders R Murderers finally acknowledged near the end of the thread that some blacks are more intelligent than some whites.
But so far he hasn't been willing to explain exactly why he opposes seemingly all forms of Affirmative Action after making that statement,
which I should point out appears to be his only reason for wanting to prove to the world that blacks are genetically inferior to everyone else.
One would think that if it really had anything to do with intelligence that he would base it on the idea that blacks no matter what can never reach the level of whites;
if he basis his premises only on average intelligence, then I do not see how he is tying that into the justification for or against Affirmative action,
he hasn't explained that either, and as far as I can tell, its true justification has nothing to with average intelligence.
But I'll await his answering of my last set of questions. Perhaps he will be able to shed some light on this conundrum.

-Meta

 

Speeders R Murderers, when are you going to stop evading the issue and answer my questions?
Also, I believe you may have misinterpreted the definition of persecution, or maybe it was the idea of Affirmative Action as it exists today that you didn't understand,
or perhaps it was both? Please clear this up by answering what it is you believe current Affirmative Action to be and what you believe to be its alleged rationale, thanks.

-Meta

 

This is hyperbole, right?

persecute:
"1. to pursue with harassing or oppressive treatment, especially because of religion, race, or beliefs; harass persistently."

Can you point to a specific federal or state Affirmative Action law that mandates persecution against white people?
Can you point towards a current implementation of Affirmative Action that involves the persecution of white people?

So then you believe that the rationale for Affirmative action has nothing to do with intelligence??
Then why were you trying to disprove its rationale by comparing relative average intelligence of different groups?

Though I should add that I believe you got the rationale for Affirmative Action only part right;
The way I interpret it, it is something meant to right the negative affects of slavery as you mentioned,
but not just that, it is meant to address all discrimination of any group, past or present,
which is why groups that were never enslaved can benefit from Affirmative Action as well.
You agree right, that African American slaves are not the only people who have been discriminated against?

In short, Affirmative Action is meant to prevent or minimize
the negative affects of past and or present discrimination against minorities or otherwise under-represented groups.
It was never intended to harm white males, and as it is implemented today I do not believe it harms them at all
other than removing from the group as a whole what would have been unfair advantages.

Current Affirmative Action is almost exclusively limited to entities that directly receive government funds,
not private organizations, so it is not a mandate in the traditional sense.

Also, the most common type of Affirmative Action today, is simply nothing more than a ban on discrimination practices.
At its most 'extreme' an Affirmative Action implementation may involve recruitment efforts in areas where
under-represented minorities reside, but even then, applicants generally must be qualified for any position or admission into a school just as everyone else.
http://www.pcc.edu/about/affirmative-action/faq.html

-Meta

 

Where exactly in Affirmative Action law is it mandated that less qualified blacks be given more preference over more qualified people of other races?
As I mentioned in my last post, the vast majority of Affirmative Action only involves anti-discrimination, and the most extreme
forms go no further than race-based regional recruitment and recommendations to sure up proportional representation,
but even here the candidates are not held to lower standards, they must be just as qualified for a particular position
or university seat as any other person would have to be.

Can you point to any documented cases in recent times where an unqualified black person
was given a job or admitted to a university because of an Affirmative Action policy?

Last time I checked, racial quotas were illegal!
Can you point us to any specific institutions that are involved in implementing such quota systems?

Do you have a link to this case so that we may see all the details?
What was the name of the case and when did it occur?

Also, do you agree with Speeders R Murderers' view that the rational for Affirmative Action has nothing to do with relative average intelligence??
Thanks.

-Meta

 

Wow, that does not answer my question, it doesn't even seem to have anything to do with it.
But for your information, not only have I already taken a logic class, I happen to have made a perfect score in the class.
(only class I've been able to do that in, other than sports)

If you yourself are familiar and well-versed with formal logic, why not present your argument against Affirmative Action using a formal syllogism?

-Meta