Well, a previous thread has been closed. I will not protest this as I do believe it was for best intentions. I do consider that a warning (although I wasn’t offically punished) so I should proceed this prudence. Mixing IQ, race, genetics, heredity, and ambitious parents who want their children to succeed creates a rather ugly amalgam.
However, I do think my probity has been thoroughly eroded by participating in those discussions because I did not address any data; rather, one could only discern shrill vituperation. Yes, tdgesq was correct; I was operating under an agenda: I did not find the public policy implications of this of research and I want this research suppressed because I see no potential benefit to society, but rather grievous harm. Such thoughts permeated through the soporific realm with profanity directed towards Linda Gottfredson, an intelligence researcher (along with a nasty caricature of her yielding The Bell Curve as a weapon). Is saying that I had “nightmares” an example of Machiavellian mendacity that tdgesq insinuated against me? No! Hyperbole? Yes! I would describe them as “bad dreams” instead of “nightmares” and I have been losing sleep (about 5-6 hoursa night) because of this issue. I do not think “mendacity” is an apt word for my actions; instead “obscurantism” aptly describes my behavior on this message board and on the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.
Another example of my obscurantism and obfuscation regarding this topic is highlighted in this IIDB thread (iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=197764&page=2):
“I do not think we need more crimes against humanity. I hope Rushton and Jensen would stop promulgating their theories of race-based inferiority.”
“Look, if Gottfredson is correct, then eugenics is the only answer!!!
How are we going to improve intelligence unless we invoke drastic measures to change the allele frequency of a population? Genetic engineering would be the ideal way to accomplish this…
Oh well, if Gottfredson is correct, blacks aren’t lazy and whites aren’t racist; blacks are just inferior.
But the scientific racists aren’t correct; blacks are not inferior.”
“Well I believe lying is the best option… it most certainly is better than acknowledge one group of humans are inherently superior than another. That idea can lead to genocide”
“Well, if we acknowledge the fact that some humans are inherently superior, that usually leads to genocide and eugenics. We cannot allow another Holocaust.
I detest any attempt to say that one group is inherently superior than another. Human inequality is the greatest malady of the human species.”
I posted here that I might lose my compassion, and I do feel this is a reason for genuine concern. For example, Charles Murray predicted:
The topic of race and genes is like the topic of sex in Victorian England. The intellectual elites are horrified if anyone talks about it, but behind the scenes they are fascinated. I will say it more baldly than [Richard Herrnstein] and I did in the book: In their heart of hearts, intellectual elites, especially liberal ones, have two nasty secrets regarding IQ. First, they really believe that IQ is the be-all and end-all of human excellence and that someone with a low IQ is inferior. Second, they are already sure that the black -white IQ difference is predominantly genetic and that this is a calamity – such a calamity indeed that it must not be spoken about, even to oneself. To raise these issues holds a mirror up to the elites’ most desperately denied inner thoughts…
But when people say one thing and believe another, as intellectual elites have been doing about race, ** sooner or later the cognitive dissonance must be resolved. It usually happens with a bang. When the wall of denial gives way, not only will the received wisdom on race and IQ change, the change will happen very rapidly and probably go much too far. The fervor of the newly converted is going to be a problem. ** I fully expect, if I live another twenty years, to be in a situation where I am standing on the ramparts shouting: "Genetic differences weren’t a big deal when we wrote The Bell Curve and they still aren’t a big deal.’
I do, however, fear that I might be among the “newly converted” and metamorphize into a virulent racist or eugenicist. The latter is what happened to Richard Lynn. I do fear that my “wall of denial” is crumbling.
Instead of denial and * ad hominem * attacks on Richard Lynn, Linda Gottfredson, Arthur Jensen, J.P. Rushton, Richard Herrnstein, and Charles Murray how should I deal with this without turning into a monster such as Singer and Lynn?