 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
JohnT
|
 |
Capitalist
Mar 1999
time: 00:33
|
|
quote:
From the very beginning of my work with New Guineans, they impressed me as being on average more intelligent, more alert, more expressive and more interested in the things around them that the average European or American is. At some tasks that one might reasonable suppose to reflect aspects of brain function, such as the ability to form mental maps of unfamiliar surroundings, they appear considerable more adept than Westerners.... It’s easy to recognise two reasons why my impression that New Guineans are smarter than Westerners may be correct. First, Europeans have for thousands of years* been living in densely populated societies with central governments, police, and judiciaries.... That is, natural selection for promoting genes for intelligence has probably been far more ruthless in New Guinea than in more densely populated, politically complex societies, where natural selection for body chemistry was instead more potent.
Besides this genetic reason, there is also second reason why New Guineans may have come to be smarter than Westerners. Modern European and American children spend much of their time being passively entertained by television, radio, and movies In contrast, traditional New Guinea children have virtually no such opportunities […] This effect surely contributes a non-genetic component to the superior average mental function displayed by New Guineans.”
That is, in mental ability New Guineans are properly genetically superior to Westerners
[…]
Thus, the usual racist assumption has to be turned on its head. Why is it that Europeans, despite their likely genetic disadvantages and (in modern times) their undoubted development disadvantages, ended up with much more of the cargo? Why did New Guineans wind up technologically primitive, despite what I believe to be their superior intelligence? |
So many opinions, so little corroborating evidence.  Replace NG with European in the above passage and think about what the reaction would be - it would've been a controversy on the size of The Bell Curve.
*Huh?
Last edited by JohnT on 12-07-2005 at 22:21
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:33
|
|
And yet that passage does nothing to negate what i said.
to Quote:
quote:
That is, natural selection for promoting genes for intelligence has probably been far more ruthless in New Guinea than in more densely populated, politically complex societies, where natural selection for body chemistry was instead more potent. |
NOw, maybe that is wrong. Fine , call it supposition, but to call it "racist" is absurd. If he claims a superioriryt, it is based on a belief that endless natural selection will invariably select for those traits that support survival, and he assumes intelliegence is one of them.
In fact, I seriously doubt the writers of the bell curve this Europe is a den of disease and crime and death that culled the white ancestors so successfuly, while Africa is this placid place were the weak are left to live long and multiply.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
quote:
From the very beginning of my work with New Guineans, they impressed me as being on average more intelligent, more alert, more expressive and more interested in the things around them that the average European or American is. At some tasks that one might reasonable suppose to reflect aspects of brain function, such as the ability to form mental maps of unfamiliar surroundings, they appear considerable more adept than Westerners.... It’s easy to recognise two reasons why my impression that New Guineans are smarter than Westerners may be correct. First, Europeans have for thousands of years* been living in densely populated societies with central governments, police, and judiciaries.... That is, natural selection for promoting genes for intelligence has probably been far more ruthless in New Guinea than in more densely populated, politically complex societies, where natural selection for body chemistry was instead more potent.
Besides this genetic reason, there is also second reason why New Guineans may have come to be smarter than Westerners. Modern European and American children spend much of their time being passively entertained by television, radio, and movies In contrast, traditional New Guinea children have virtually no such opportunities […] This effect surely contributes a non-genetic component to the superior average mental function displayed by New Guineans.”
That is, in mental ability New Guineans are properly genetically superior to Westerners
[…]
Thus, the usual racist assumption has to be turned on its head. Why is it that Europeans, despite their likely genetic disadvantages and (in modern times) their undoubted development disadvantages, ended up with much more of the cargo? Why did New Guineans wind up technologically primitive, despite what I believe to be their superior intelligence? |
Population and geography, assuming of course his perception and interpretation correct. Why do we find pygmy elephants on islands? Genetic flow is reduced, so is technological flow. Traditions, often harmful to technological advances, survive longer in static and
~isolated peoples. Or maybe Diamond is just seeing a group of people adapted to their region and not recognising that westerners have been adapting to both changing regions, climates, and systems (traditions) for longer. But Diamond knows this stuff, I think he's just asking for the audience so he can answer.
Put a Bushman in NYC and see how smart he is... Put a New Yorker in the Kalahari and...you get the picture...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JohnT
|
|
Capitalist
Mar 1999
time: 00:33
|
|
quote:
I have quoted only part of what you quoted, and my bit does not include the word racist at all. So what the frak are you talking about? |
GePap, do you not even read what you write?
quote:
NOw, maybe that is wrong. Fine , call it supposition, but to call it "racist" is absurd. If he claims a superioriryt, it is based on a belief that endless natural selection will invariably select for those traits that support survival, and he assumes intelliegence is one of them. |
quote:
Plus, I believe Diamond does go into why Europe's geography made singular monolithic states difficult if not impossible, which is why you could not get a single authority like in China to control and slow society. |
However, China was just as advanced as Europe in the 1500's (probably more so) and had their sailing fleets ready to take over the world... until China stopped supporting their oceanic voyages in favor of more localized (SE Asia) trade. The fact that China was a monolithic state might have hindered it in the 15th century, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they couldn't do it because of a lack of GGS. They just didn't.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JohnT
|
|
Capitalist
Mar 1999
time: 00:33
|
|
GePap. Look at the following sentence:
quote:
NOw, maybe that is wrong. Fine , call it supposition, but to call it "racist" is absurd. |
1. The fragment "to call it racist" flat out states that I called it racist. Which I did not.
2. This is reinforced by your decision to put quotation marks around the word racist. This, by standard (American) English convention, is a quote. (That's why they're called quotation marks, see?) Especially when preceded by "to call it..."
3. Since the only use of the word "racist" occurs in Diamonds writings, I can only assume you are ascribing to me what he said, but somehow twisting it around so that I am calling Diamond a racist. Or something. I'm not at all sure what you meant.
The point about China is to show that culture, people, and societies do matter when discussing long-term historical trends. Diamond's thesis removes the effect of humans on human societal development... and quite wrongly too.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
|
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
quote:
There is a difference there thought- unless the Bushman runs out into the street, while he may seem like an idiot at first, it is unlike the Bushman whould die so rapidly as to be unable to get a handle on the basics of life in NYC, quite apart form whether he likes it or not.
The New Yorker in the middle of the Khalahari on the other chance has a VERY good chance of dying because of his inability to find water, or adequaste food, or shelter from the environment. |
That's true, but how long would it take for either man to adapt to the new system if they didn't die in the first few days or weeks? The Bushman would get by with help, so why not give the New Yorker help in his new region? He'd adapt to the Bushman's system and the Bushman would adapt to ours. Who would adapt faster? The New Yorker. Is that intelligence? I doubt it, the systems aren't equally complicated. Hence, a poor determinant for intelligence.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnT
3. Since the only use of the word "racist" occurs in Diamonds writings, I can only assume you are ascribing to me what he said, but somehow twisting it around so that I am calling Diamond a racist. Or something. I'm not at all sure what you meant. |
Yes. from your first statement, which you end on a  you state that Diamond supposedly hates theories based on race, yet calls the people in New Guinea more intelligent. From the way you wrote it, it seems easy to assume you are saying that Diamond was hypocratical by saying one must ignore race and then he makes a 'racist' statement. Then you describe a long bit from his work to writings in the Bell Curve and said there would be controversy if you substituted the word white for the Papuans, which again leads one to think you are saying his statements are similar to those in the Bell Curve, which I at least consider a racist tome.
quote:
The point about China is to show that culture, people, and societies do matter when discussing long-term historical trends. Diamond's thesis removes the effect of humans on human societal development... and quite wrongly too. |
Not really. China is a relatively flat- a conqueror can, with sufficient power, easily come to control the entire land of China. Many people have done so. NO State has ever had complete control over the area of Europe- its terrain (lost of natural barriers) has made it difficult for any single government to take over the whole.
So again, NATURE plays a decisive role, if not the only role.
After all, what cultural difference would make it so China comes up with those inventions, yet does not sue them to the extent Europeans did, and wht cultural traits allowed the Europeans to make use of things they did not invent?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
That's true, but how long would it take for either man to adapt to the new system if they didn't die in the first few days or weeks? The Bushman would get by with help, so why not give the New Yorker help in his new region? He'd adapt to the Bushman's system and the Bushman would adapt to ours. Who would adapt faster? The New Yorker. Is that intelligence? I doubt it, the systems aren't equally complicated. Hence, a poor determinant for intelligence. |
I seriously doubt the New Yorker could adapt to the Bushman environment faster than the Bushman to New York.
In fact, the fact millions of people from everywhere in the world can come and live in New York, while the Bushmentare one of the very few people who live in the Khalahari (if not the only) I think is great evidence that quite the opposite would be true.
Even without help the Bushman through simple observations could come to understand enough in New York not to die. The same can;t be said of the New Yorker, since he might miss very minor differences that lead to life or death.
The fact is New york may be socially conplex, but when it comes to the basic of human life, figuring out New York is a utter piece of cake compared to the Khalahari, and if you can;t get the basics of human life down, what chance do you have to even get the time to master the social complexities?
Besides, the very fact there are so many systems to help people in NY vs. few is any in the Khalahari is a great part of Diamond's point. Only once you remove for a great number of people the need to toil for life can you build something like NY. But, from a natural selection point of view, you also lessen the pressures. NOw, Diamondf may not have given enough thought to the other pressure on evolution, sexual selection, but hs is correct about wich environment is easy and which is hard.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
VetLegion
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnT
Whatever happened to the GGS forum that used to be here? And, btw, what was that all about? |
It was about Yet Another Alternative Civ Project. Name was chosen some time into it and wasn't authorised by Jared Diamond. The development of the game stopped and the forum has been closed (but the threads are archived).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnT
quote:
From the very beginning of my work with Europeans, they impressed me as being on average more intelligent, more alert, more expressive and more interested in the things around them that the average New Guinean is. At some tasks that one might reasonable suppose to reflect aspects of brain function, such as the ability to form mental maps of unfamiliar surroundings, they appear considerable more adept than Guineans.... It’s easy to recognise two reasons why my impression that Europeans are smarter than New Guineans may be correct.
... Besides this genetic reason, there is also second reason why Europeans may have come to be smarter than New Guineans. |
You're right. That wouldn't cause a bit of controversy.
Regardless, GePap, I didn't say that Diamond was racist and my comparison was to the Bell Curve controversy not the book itself. I know English isn't your first language, but please: try to be more careful next time. |
Cause the controversy with the Bell Curve had nothing to do with race, nope, never.
 To intellectual dishonesty, yours.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-07-2005 06:40
) 
|