Are all cultures intelligently equal.

[Bartfarst]

Who are threse experts of whom you claim to know so much. I too could refer to hypothetical experts to back up my arguments.

 

You refer to everyone else as 'armchair experts' implying that you consider yourself to be a real expert. And why is that? Because you para-phrase 'experts' with no names and no references to their data.

 

Well I know some hypothetical experts too, and their doctorates are bigger than your hypothetical experts doctorates, and they say you're making it all up.

You do the Googling, I don't need to re-trace things I've already covered, start with these:

 

- Prof HJ Eynseck established US blacks 15 points lower than US whites

- Ellis, Don of Leeds University - recent paper articles

- Richard Lynne, of the University of Ulster - survey of nations included revealing that the Zimbabweans have a national average of 61.

[artisan]

Er - maybe I've wrongly understood our education system, but I really did think that GCSEs, A levels, degrees and doctorates were open to everybody - or am i wrong in that?

 

As for the last statement, it's pointless listing them becasue yuo'll decry every one simply on the basis of your inverted snobbery.

 

Feel free to answer the questions I asked you on post 96.

 

I didnt realise you required an answer.

I agree we all develop according to evolution. For instance we are all much bigger and taller now due to better food, and, in the most case, women prefering men taller than themselves.

I disagree that the education system is open to all.

How does a child in Sub Saharan Africa, or the Amazon Basin get access to school?

For that matter how does a child in England get a chance in the Rat Pack that is a post Thatcherite classroom these days?

I am Not an inverted snob, I am a total snob, and I look down upon you from on high. Stay cool, stop being offensive, and then you would not need to be so defensive

[Bartfarst]

I am Not an inverted snob, I am a total snob, and I look down upon you from on high.

Make your mind up artisan, because the following two posts you just made do sound just a tiny, weeny bit like inverted snobbery:

Is it because of years spent flattering them, that they still dont accept you.

They never will Bartfarst, you are a hireling, paid to do their dirty work.

They mock your efforts to be part of a society you cannot understand. :

It is very big hearted of the hunting fraternity to spend all these vast sums of money on horses stables, packs of dogs etc, just to help out the local chicken farmer.

I bet when he turns up at the Mansion covered in feathers and chicken **** they welcome him with open arms, when they are just sitting down to dinner with the latest popsinger or footballer that entertains them :

[discodown]

you better appreciate this! took me ages to put it together!

Go on then - seeing as you asked nicely this time:

he was smart enough to be world champion 3 times. lets see you do that

Quite how being a good boxer, having fast reflexes and physical strength equates to smart, I’d love to know.

boxing requires great emotional intelligence, a cool head, an even temper, an analytical mind and superb decision making all of which is to be done at speed. boxing like football is one of the great working class escapes and at its best is more than a sport it is an artform. a truly great boxer is an artist, almost all artists by their very description are genius'. the fact that his gift was an ability to do a fight is neither here nor there. the fact that he was recognized as the best in the world on multiple occasions makes him a genius.

he was smart enough to change and amend his religious beliefs as he grew older and his view of the world changed.

He was dim enough to be brainwashed by a bunch of Islamic activists. Read up on this – it’s interesting.

i have read up on this, from many sources. just as he was brainwashed by the nation of islam he took many positive things from them. he was black and proud at a time when you shouldn't be. he refused to duck the racists and refused to be what the white establishment wanted him to be. he was in short a cultural icon and incredibly important in the black rights movement in 60's america. as important as martin luther king or malcolm x. were they also stupid? he was politically important and an icon for black america and 4 decades later he still is. not bad for a think ignorant kid from louisville! then when he went on his hajj he realised that he had been wrong and changed his ideals. just like malcolm x. personally i have more respect for people wha can admit they're wrong and act on it than people who stick stubbournly to beliefs they know to be untrue

he was smart enough to see that the vietnam war was wrong way before most of the USA

Just as many draft-dodgers were?

ali was far more than a draft dodger. he never ran for canada he faced his punishment like a man and went to jail for his beliefs, was stripped of his world title, refused a boxing license, ran a gauntlet of hate. that puts him up there - although not on a par - with mandela in my book. he also refused to go for political, social and humanitarian reasons, he made himself bigger than boxing, bigger than sport. he was no pot smoking hippy peacenik he was a proud angry warrior standing up for himself, his race and the vietnamese whilst defying the american government

he was smart enough to be the greatest before he was the greatest

And if he’s smart enough to understand that, he’s smart.

glad you agree!

he was smart enough to to outhink outmanouver and outsmart his opponents

Who, let’s face it, were all men of towering intellect.

yes, they were boxers

he was smart enough to use psychology to win fights

See above.

see above

he was smart enough to realise the power of the media

So, he had no managers, promoters, advisers, hangers-on?

yes he did and most of the time angelo dundee tried to shut him up, they didn't understand what he was doing, noone did he pretty much invented sports psychology

sadly he wasn't smart enough to quit and sadly he has parkinsons. even the greatest are fallible

Agreed, and terrible to see. His talent was massive, he was an hugely charismatic individual and it is very sad to see the way he declined.

 

He did, however, have the low IQ that you quoted earlier.

never denied he had a low IQ indeed thats the point of all this! a man with a low IQ is a cultural, political icon. an inspiration to many and generally a superb human being

[Bartfarst]

never denied he had a low IQ indeed thats the point of all this! a man with a low IQ is a cultural, political icon. an inspiration to many and generally a superb human being

And I never denied that he was a great man with huge talent, but his determination, will to succeed, and physical prowess don't make him bright, or a genius.

 

There are many 'not too bright' but hard-working successful captains if industry, and there are lots of under-achieving brainboxes without the drive to push themselves.

 

Usually though, the two go hand in hand.

 

btw- I did appreciate it, and I think we share admiration for Ali as much as passion for the sport

[discodown]

And I never denied that he was a great man with huge talent, but his determination, will to succeed, and physical prowess don't make him bright, or a genius.

 

There are many 'not too bright' but hard-working successful captains if industry, and there are lots of under-achieving brainboxes without the drive to push themselves.

 

Usually though, the two go hand in hand.

 

btw- I did appreciate it, and I think we share admiration for Ali as much as passion for the sport

i would hope so, i love boxing. shame the heavyweight division is so poor these days, i can't think of a time when quality heavyweights were this thin on the ground

[purdyamos]

boxing requires great emotional intelligence, a cool head, an even temper, an analytical mind and superb decision making all of which is to be done at speed.

 

When I read this I immediately thought of Naz and his notorious driving habits. I know it's the wrong thread and all, but somehow it just didn't ring true for me...

[Bago]

Is it racist to say that black men make better sprint athletes and heavyweight boxers ?

Well, then u have to consider who the fastest runners are in the world. Is it a black person, or is it a white person ? If this is non-conclusive, then you have to think why the world record holders can and do come from different races ? Say what you mean, and mean what you say.

 

I had always thought that racism comes when there is ill intent, or when somebody prejudices against somebody else due to there ethnicity. Surely accepting that there are differences cannot be racist. We have problems between the races because we refuse to accept, and make allowances for, the fact that we are different.

But are these so called scientific researches pointing out intrinsic and definitive differences ? I don't think so.

 

You have to ask yourself whether talking of 'race' this way is being prejudiced or not. Even though there are researches out there. Do the conclusion generalise the same way that you have ? To me, they don't. Neither do I doubt that the Professors would publically claim so either. They can only claim what is factual. Which is to truly represent exactly how the experiments are done. They are not a 'template' for societal ills, or justifications. Oh no... that's too simplistic for your average joe blogg to pick up, interpret and then sprout rubbish with loaded connoctations. Their conclusions are based on their experimental conditions. That is it. They do not say, race A, and race B blah blah blah. That is just you. Please at least acknowledge this slight difference.

 

People do not have to be a scientist or have numerous letters after their name to read something in English, and to understand it. Researches take place all of the time. How representative, and whether the scientific community take the research into consideration or even remotely as representative for further research is another matter. Anyone and everyone can make a name for themselves within the science community across the world. The ones that do make a name for themselves are more ethical in nature, and is not controversial for the sake of controversy.

 

Do I know that evolution changes humans in terms of weight, height, and biological factors ? Yes. I recall it was GCSE science that taught me the differences of how people living in different areas of the world affect their biology over generations.

 

The idea and theory is that, if I place u in Antartica, and left u to procreate for a few generations. Yes, your kids may increase their weight too in order to survive the cold harshness of the environment that they're in. They may also grow a little taller, a little wider. To retain the heat loss. Yet, how will your race come into play ? It doesn't.

[Cyclone]

Much as it pains me, I have to agree in principle with some of what bartfast says. It is possible that different races will differ in intelligence.

What I don't agree with is measuring that intelligence using western biased approaches (the IQ test is notoriously not accepted amongst all academics of being indicative of intelligence) and then making a declaration about which races are more/less intelligent.

 

Before you can measure something, you have to understand it, and intelligence is not well understood, nor even well defined, so how we can claim to accurately measure it I don't know.

[Tony]

I have to say that I'm right with Cyclone all the way there. I'm perfectly happy to accept that some races have different.. shall we say mental capacities as a global term?... than other races if somebody can reliably demonstrate it.

 

Sadly, 'intelligence' is such an empirically distorted and ephemeral concept that I suspect it's difficult to 'prove'.

 

One thing is for certain though - we aren't all the same