|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
 Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:17 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| TM wrote: | | Joker wrote: | | TM wrote: | | Joker wrote: | | bizboy1 wrote: | | There are more men that are simply intellectually superior. It's a fact. |
Unless you have some form of proof I disagree both men and women are equal intellectually. |
I put 3 sources in a post 1 or 2 pages back. It makes no logical sense for men and women to be intellectually equal given biological differences and selective breeding. You can disagree all you want, but since your posts tend to be more gut-reaction rather than researched information, I'd say you should present a few sources to support your side as well. |
I would be glad too sweet heart but most of your posts seems to always side with mostly men you never credit women for anything.
|
I credit women where they should be credited. As I've said before I love strong, ambitious women who fight and get what they want by merit rather than by affirmative action and screaming "SEXIST", "SEXIST". I credited feminism with promoting gender equality, and I criticize "modern" feminism for being misguided.
I'm much more nuanced on the issue than you, Hyperlexican or any of the self-proclaimed "pro-women" advocates on this board. It's called being objective. If my posts seem to be one-sided, that's partly to blame on the other party in the discussion as well. As I said earlier, net discussions have a tendency to bring out the extremists on every issue. |
i am not "pro-women". i am "pro-humans". does "nuanced" mean "selectively sexist", or something else?
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493 |
|
| Back to top |
|
Joker
Sinn Fein
Joined: Mar 20, 2011
Age: 24
Posts: 7593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hyperlexian wrote: | | TM wrote: | | Joker wrote: | | TM wrote: | | Joker wrote: | | bizboy1 wrote: | | There are more men that are simply intellectually superior. It's a fact. |
Unless you have some form of proof I disagree both men and women are equal intellectually. |
I put 3 sources in a post 1 or 2 pages back. It makes no logical sense for men and women to be intellectually equal given biological differences and selective breeding. You can disagree all you want, but since your posts tend to be more gut-reaction rather than researched information, I'd say you should present a few sources to support your side as well. |
I would be glad too sweet heart but most of your posts seems to always side with mostly men you never credit women for anything.
|
I credit women where they should be credited. As I've said before I love strong, ambitious women who fight and get what they want by merit rather than by affirmative action and screaming "SEXIST", "SEXIST". I credited feminism with promoting gender equality, and I criticize "modern" feminism for being misguided.
I'm much more nuanced on the issue than you, Hyperlexican or any of the self-proclaimed "pro-women" advocates on this board. It's called being objective. If my posts seem to be one-sided, that's partly to blame on the other party in the discussion as well. As I said earlier, net discussions have a tendency to bring out the extremists on every issue. |
i am not "pro-women". i am "pro-humans". does "nuanced" mean "selectively sexist", or something else? |
Since I am bigender I have a male and female persona as I have stated the female persona is the stronger one but I have never stated women where better then men I just love them more then my fellow men. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sweetleaf
Metalhead
Joined: Jan 07, 2011
Age: 23
Posts: 14828
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kurgan wrote: | | Sweetleaf wrote: |
yeah maybe that some men are better at calculus, math and physics than some women and vice versa......but I highly doubt this is true of every single women and every single man. what is with all these black and white blanket generalizations? |
In basic theory of probability, if enough tests with a high enough number of participants conclude with something, it is true even with a very strict significance level.
Likewise, it's safe to assume men are physically stronger than women, even though there are women who can bench press 300 lbs unassisted. |
Yeah I see you're point, I might have taken that the wrong way...either the wording is actually confusing or I got the wrong impression due to my lack of understanding.
_________________
It's like alice in wonderland except, my names not alice and this is the real world not a dream. |
|
| Back to top |
|
TM
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 04, 2012
Posts: 2122
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hyperlexian wrote: | you completely missed the point, TM. you can link to thousands of studies that all say the same thing, but they are still arguing the same mistaken premise.
IQ tests do not measure intelligence, so it is inaccurate to state that people who score higher on the tests are more intelligent. IQ tests only measure people's performance on IQ tests, just like my bubble blowing test would measure how well people can perform compared to me on my special criteria.
and it really does not matter if someone writes a book without introducing new scientific concepts. she can still accurately criticise the neurosexism of past studies. |
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/04/what-does-iq-really-measure.html seems to at least partially disagree with you.
| Quote: |
THE IQ TEST
Despite of the existence of numerous definitions of intelligence, there is only one common method to measure intelligence which is typically known as Intelligent Quotient (IQ) test. It is also called Binet and Simon test that was published in 1905. This test has withstood the test of time even after a century. The IQ test continues to be the only universally accepted method of measuring human intelligence.
IQ tests do not measure the absolute intelligence of a person but they measure the person’s intelligence in respect of the other person. The average IQ score is taken as 100. The higher than 100 score indicates that he person is more intelligent than the average person and less than 100 score indicate below normal intelligence.
These IQ tests have become extremely popular over the years and almost universally applied for selection of the graduates and postgraduate students by the examinations like SAT or GRE tests. In most of the countries similar tests are conducted for college and university admissions. Even for selection of the candidates for jobs, often the IQ score is the most important criterion for selection.
|
As I said, you are making absolute statements of fact in an area where science is not in agreement and where in practical life schools, companies and such actively use IQ tests as a measure of intelligence, therefore you are holding a position which is not logical.
You are free to say "IQ tests only measure how well you do on IQ tests" but as they are viewed as a way to measure intelligence and as I said the only way to get into a high intelligence society such as Mensa and Prometheus, so even if you are correct, it doesn't matter. I love how that works out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Joker
Sinn Fein
Joined: Mar 20, 2011
Age: 24
Posts: 7593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: | you completely missed the point, TM. you can link to thousands of studies that all say the same thing, but they are still arguing the same mistaken premise.
IQ tests do not measure intelligence, so it is inaccurate to state that people who score higher on the tests are more intelligent. IQ tests only measure people's performance on IQ tests, just like my bubble blowing test would measure how well people can perform compared to me on my special criteria.
and it really does not matter if someone writes a book without introducing new scientific concepts. she can still accurately criticise the neurosexism of past studies. |
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/04/what-does-iq-really-measure.html seems to at least partially disagree with you.
| Quote: |
THE IQ TEST
Despite of the existence of numerous definitions of intelligence, there is only one common method to measure intelligence which is typically known as Intelligent Quotient (IQ) test. It is also called Binet and Simon test that was published in 1905. This test has withstood the test of time even after a century. The IQ test continues to be the only universally accepted method of measuring human intelligence.
IQ tests do not measure the absolute intelligence of a person but they measure the person’s intelligence in respect of the other person. The average IQ score is taken as 100. The higher than 100 score indicates that he person is more intelligent than the average person and less than 100 score indicate below normal intelligence.
These IQ tests have become extremely popular over the years and almost universally applied for selection of the graduates and postgraduate students by the examinations like SAT or GRE tests. In most of the countries similar tests are conducted for college and university admissions. Even for selection of the candidates for jobs, often the IQ score is the most important criterion for selection.
|
As I said, you are making absolute statements of fact in an area where science is not in agreement and where in practical life schools, companies and such actively use IQ tests as a measure of intelligence, therefore you are holding a position which is not logical.
You are free to say "IQ tests only measure how well you do on IQ tests" but as they are viewed as a way to measure intelligence and as I said the only way to get into a high intelligence society such as Mensa and Prometheus, so even if you are correct, it doesn't matter. I love how that works out. |
Hyperlexian is correct and it does matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
TM
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 04, 2012
Posts: 2122
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hyperlexian wrote: |
i am not "pro-women". i am "pro-humans". does "nuanced" mean "selectively sexist", or something else? |
"Pro-human" means that I consider the best approach to be the one that results in the greatest net happiness for members of both genders. It means that I don't think any gender is superior, period, but that the genders do have differences.
"Nuanced" in this case means that I think the people defending the positions that among others you defend are just as stupid as the positions people like "The Amazing Atheist" tries to defend. It means I think all of you need to have some sense slapped into you, regardless of gender. Note "sense slapped into you" is metaphorical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
TM
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 04, 2012
Posts: 2122
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joker wrote: | | TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: | you completely missed the point, TM. you can link to thousands of studies that all say the same thing, but they are still arguing the same mistaken premise.
IQ tests do not measure intelligence, so it is inaccurate to state that people who score higher on the tests are more intelligent. IQ tests only measure people's performance on IQ tests, just like my bubble blowing test would measure how well people can perform compared to me on my special criteria.
and it really does not matter if someone writes a book without introducing new scientific concepts. she can still accurately criticise the neurosexism of past studies. |
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/04/what-does-iq-really-measure.html seems to at least partially disagree with you.
| Quote: |
THE IQ TEST
Despite of the existence of numerous definitions of intelligence, there is only one common method to measure intelligence which is typically known as Intelligent Quotient (IQ) test. It is also called Binet and Simon test that was published in 1905. This test has withstood the test of time even after a century. The IQ test continues to be the only universally accepted method of measuring human intelligence.
IQ tests do not measure the absolute intelligence of a person but they measure the person’s intelligence in respect of the other person. The average IQ score is taken as 100. The higher than 100 score indicates that he person is more intelligent than the average person and less than 100 score indicate below normal intelligence.
These IQ tests have become extremely popular over the years and almost universally applied for selection of the graduates and postgraduate students by the examinations like SAT or GRE tests. In most of the countries similar tests are conducted for college and university admissions. Even for selection of the candidates for jobs, often the IQ score is the most important criterion for selection.
|
As I said, you are making absolute statements of fact in an area where science is not in agreement and where in practical life schools, companies and such actively use IQ tests as a measure of intelligence, therefore you are holding a position which is not logical.
You are free to say "IQ tests only measure how well you do on IQ tests" but as they are viewed as a way to measure intelligence and as I said the only way to get into a high intelligence society such as Mensa and Prometheus, so even if you are correct, it doesn't matter. I love how that works out. |
Hyperlexian is correct and it does matter. |
Joker, I just wanted to let you know that from now on I'll ignore any reply from you on this topic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
many scholars do not view IQ tests as an effective way to measure intelligence, so your starting point is flawed.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493 |
|
| Back to top |
|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: |
i am not "pro-women". i am "pro-humans". does "nuanced" mean "selectively sexist", or something else? |
"Pro-human" means that I consider the best approach to be the one that results in the greatest net happiness for members of both genders. It means that I don't think any gender is superior, period, but that the genders do have differences.
"Nuanced" in this case means that I think the people defending the positions that among others you defend are just as stupid as the positions people like "The Amazing Atheist" tries to defend. It means I think all of you need to have some sense slapped into you, regardless of gender. Note "sense slapped into you" is metaphorical. |
except that you are usually incorrect in discussions about gender differences.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493
Last edited by hyperlexian on Tue May 01, 2012 4:35 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
TM
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 04, 2012
Posts: 2122
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hyperlexian wrote: | | many scholars do not view IQ tests as an effective way to measure intelligence, so your starting point is flawed. |
If that's the case why are they still widely used by schools (the place that employ a scholar) to decide which students to admit or not? If they do not believe in it, and faculty does have a degree of say in the admission requirements, then why is it still used? |
|
| Back to top |
|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: | | many scholars do not view IQ tests as an effective way to measure intelligence, so your starting point is flawed. |
If that's the case why are they still widely used by schools (the place that employ a scholar) to decide which students to admit or not? If they do not believe in it, and faculty does have a degree of say in the admission requirements, then why is it still used? |
they are very rarely used in schools in Canada anymore, as it is preferred that all measurements are evidence-based and culturally-unbiased.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493 |
|
| Back to top |
|
TM
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 04, 2012
Posts: 2122
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hyperlexian wrote: | | TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: |
i am not "pro-women". i am "pro-humans". does "nuanced" mean "selectively sexist", or something else? |
"Pro-human" means that I consider the best approach to be the one that results in the greatest net happiness for members of both genders. It means that I don't think any gender is superior, period, but that the genders do have differences.
"Nuanced" in this case means that I think the people defending the positions that among others you defend are just as stupid as the positions people like "The Amazing Atheist" tries to defend. It means I think all of you need to have some sense slapped into you, regardless of gender. Note "sense slapped into you" is metaphorical. |
except that you are usually incorrect in discussions about gender differences. |
From your perspective, I have data to back up every single one of my claims, you have data from bottom ranked schools in no name countries by no name grad students and data from women's studies professors, whereas I have data from top institutions, internationally recognized scholars and otherwise highly qualified people.
Last edited by TM on Tue May 01, 2012 4:42 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
hyperlexian
loves the man who typed too much and ran outta spa
Joined: Jul 22, 2010
Age: 41
Posts: 21969
Location: with bucephalus
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: | | TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: |
i am not "pro-women". i am "pro-humans". does "nuanced" mean "selectively sexist", or something else? |
"Pro-human" means that I consider the best approach to be the one that results in the greatest net happiness for members of both genders. It means that I don't think any gender is superior, period, but that the genders do have differences.
"Nuanced" in this case means that I think the people defending the positions that among others you defend are just as stupid as the positions people like "The Amazing Atheist" tries to defend. It means I think all of you need to have some sense slapped into you, regardless of gender. Note "sense slapped into you" is metaphorical. |
except that you are usually incorrect in discussions about gender differences. |
From your perspective, I have data to back up every single one of my claims, you have data from bottom ranked schools in no name countries by no name grad students and data from women's studies professors, whereas I have data from top institutions, internationally recognized scholars and otherwise highly qualified people.
My sources sh** on yours. |
oh, you mean like your Daily Mail article and the blog post you lined in this thread? 
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp5043493.html#5043493 |
|
| Back to top |
|
Joker
Sinn Fein
Joined: Mar 20, 2011
Age: 24
Posts: 7593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hyperlexian wrote: | | TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: | | TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: |
i am not "pro-women". i am "pro-humans". does "nuanced" mean "selectively sexist", or something else? |
"Pro-human" means that I consider the best approach to be the one that results in the greatest net happiness for members of both genders. It means that I don't think any gender is superior, period, but that the genders do have differences.
"Nuanced" in this case means that I think the people defending the positions that among others you defend are just as stupid as the positions people like "The Amazing Atheist" tries to defend. It means I think all of you need to have some sense slapped into you, regardless of gender. Note "sense slapped into you" is metaphorical. |
except that you are usually incorrect in discussions about gender differences. |
From your perspective, I have data to back up every single one of my claims, you have data from bottom ranked schools in no name countries by no name grad students and data from women's studies professors, whereas I have data from top institutions, internationally recognized scholars and otherwise highly qualified people.
My sources sh** on yours. |
oh, you mean like your Daily Mail article and the blog post you lined in this thread? |
His sexism is showig again |
|
| Back to top |
|
TM
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 04, 2012
Posts: 2122
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hyperlexian wrote: | | TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: | | TM wrote: | | hyperlexian wrote: |
i am not "pro-women". i am "pro-humans". does "nuanced" mean "selectively sexist", or something else? |
"Pro-human" means that I consider the best approach to be the one that results in the greatest net happiness for members of both genders. It means that I don't think any gender is superior, period, but that the genders do have differences.
"Nuanced" in this case means that I think the people defending the positions that among others you defend are just as stupid as the positions people like "The Amazing Atheist" tries to defend. It means I think all of you need to have some sense slapped into you, regardless of gender. Note "sense slapped into you" is metaphorical. |
except that you are usually incorrect in discussions about gender differences. |
From your perspective, I have data to back up every single one of my claims, you have data from bottom ranked schools in no name countries by no name grad students and data from women's studies professors, whereas I have data from top institutions, internationally recognized scholars and otherwise highly qualified people.
My sources sh** on yours. |
oh, you mean like your Daily Mail article and the blog post you lined in this thread? |
Do you mean the daily mail article written by a highly merited professor and a highly influential researcher on intelligence? Who's merits alone trump those of every one of your sources combined?
Or the blogpost which cited studies from 3 continents and about 5 different reputable research universities? How do you think I know that your sources are bad? Because I check up who wrote them and where they obtained their data.
Somehow I suspect that if I linked an article by Richard Dawkins on evolution and it was written in the daily mail, you'd dismiss it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
  |
Wrong Planet Autism Forum Index
-> Politics, Philosophy, and Religion
|
Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
