I previously wondered if Musk had been pulled to the extreme by a dopamine addiction from the rush of online validation from the alt rights like Jordan Peterson. But it may be that Musk has always had the political depth of a redpill troll.
One thing will ever be constant: successful people who equate success with intelligence are fools who have either missed or rationalized away the critically important fact that raw intelligence is incredibly unlikely to breed success, outside of certain narrow academic pursuits. Eugenics is unadulterated nonsense, of course.
I remember Sartre 's view that fascists weren't serious people so it was difficult to argue with them. This is doubly true when their bullshit is so vile and nauseating.
This man made his fortune off government tax breaks. He has a fortune in government contracts. And nobody says a goddamn thing about it.
It might be worth noting that in the 50s, the main promoter of Eugenics, (he constantly warned about the “coming dysgenic storm”), was designer and co-inventor of the transistor William Shockley. His idea was that liberal democracy and the welfare state had subverted evolutionary mechanisms, so that there was no longer a natural cap on the number of offspring unintelligent people, by which he generally meant black people, could have. However, it was constantly pointing out that he had no relevant scientific background. I’d say also that his understanding of evolution as it applies to humans was highly deficient.
Experts were asked anonymously, 54% of them were liberal and 24% conservative, and yet (on average) they attributed half of the black-white IQ difference to genetics with only 16% attributing it fully to environmental causes.
54% of them were liberal and 24% conservative, and yet (on average) they attributed half of the black-white IQ difference to genetics with only 16% attributing it fully to environmental causes.
This means that the topics should at least merit discussion and more research (especially because it's very relevant when forming public policy) instead of dismissing it as 'pseudoscience'.
Why isn't that happening? Because it's a sacred taboo of our society ("wrongthink"), the large majority of scientific editors and journalists are people who enforce it and have a (legitimate) fear of what would happen if racists were proven even partially right.
I previously wondered if Musk had been pulled to the extreme by a dopamine addiction from the rush of online validation from the alt rights like Jordan Peterson. But it may be that Musk has always had the political depth of a redpill troll.
One thing will ever be constant: successful people who equate success with intelligence are fools who have either missed or rationalized away the critically important fact that raw intelligence is incredibly unlikely to breed success, outside of certain narrow academic pursuits. Eugenics is unadulterated nonsense, of course.
I remember Sartre 's view that fascists weren't serious people so it was difficult to argue with them. This is doubly true when their bullshit is so vile and nauseating.
This man made his fortune off government tax breaks. He has a fortune in government contracts. And nobody says a goddamn thing about it.
Glad I gave up on that POS platform
"Greatest living essayist", for a guy that writes with a crayon.
These people have been huffing paint too long.
It might be worth noting that in the 50s, the main promoter of Eugenics, (he constantly warned about the “coming dysgenic storm”), was designer and co-inventor of the transistor William Shockley. His idea was that liberal democracy and the welfare state had subverted evolutionary mechanisms, so that there was no longer a natural cap on the number of offspring unintelligent people, by which he generally meant black people, could have. However, it was constantly pointing out that he had no relevant scientific background. I’d say also that his understanding of evolution as it applies to humans was highly deficient.
Henry Ford Syndrome.
He gives anti-wokeism and race realism a bad name, makes these ideas sound dumb. He would do much more good retweeting Steve Sailer.
Well, if you want the opinion of people with the proper scientific background, you can find it here:
https://www.hoplofobia.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/2020-Survey-of-expert-opinion-on-intelligence.pdf
Experts were asked anonymously, 54% of them were liberal and 24% conservative, and yet (on average) they attributed half of the black-white IQ difference to genetics with only 16% attributing it fully to environmental causes.
Take this as you will.
Someone needs to read the opinion of actual experts on the topics:
https://www.hoplofobia.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/2020-Survey-of-expert-opinion-on-intelligence.pdf
54% of them were liberal and 24% conservative, and yet (on average) they attributed half of the black-white IQ difference to genetics with only 16% attributing it fully to environmental causes.
This means that the topics should at least merit discussion and more research (especially because it's very relevant when forming public policy) instead of dismissing it as 'pseudoscience'.
Why isn't that happening? Because it's a sacred taboo of our society ("wrongthink"), the large majority of scientific editors and journalists are people who enforce it and have a (legitimate) fear of what would happen if racists were proven even partially right.