James Watson is a Fucking G

The man is 89, so it’s understandable that he isn’t under the impression that his statements are bellicose. Actually, scratch that. His statements aren’t provactive; they aren’t inflammatory. They are firmly rooted in science- perhaps not the science Watson became world-renowned for, but science.

From Britain’s The Independent:

Dr. Watson told The Sunday Times that he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours- whereas all the testing says not really.”

The public and particularly the mainstream media like to dismiss his comments as musings from a crazy old man with no firm grip on reality. The sad irony being that the reverse is true- and the man’s 89- and THE DATA IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE. I hesitate to write these posts because they’ve been fantastically restated by individuals far more established than me. There isn’t too much to contribute here, other than additional vocal support for the politically incorrect intellectual coalition. Meanwhile, I live on the left coast, and I’m quite sure California might just switch its stance on the death penalty lest anyone speak a little truth in this godforsaken state.

The Triggering

As of today, my political beliefs are still primarily characterized as libertarian. But as a result of my keen interest in psychometrics, many of the facts I avidly read about are widely circulated in white nationalist circles, less so in libertarian avenues. Does mean I skew more towards the alt-right than I previously did? I don’t think that’s necessarily the case. However, as my HBD enlightenment grows, so too do my perceived flaws in libertarianism arise. Take, for example, political beliefs in a nation. If it happens to be the case that political views are more heavily derived from hereditary qualities than environment or reason, and hispanics predominantly do not agree with traditional American fundamentals (particularly liberty and democracy), then it very well may be the case that closing the borders in order to maintain and foster political views that produce both economic and social well being in a nation is a tenable option.

    This biological/genomic/hereditary component to politics becomes more and more apparent the further I read. I don’t consider myself racist in any way, but it becomes easy to imagine how carefully someone might need to tread.  With a more malleable mindset, one could fall prey to racism when presented with biological facts and their sociological corollaries. And although I certainly do not consider myself a good person, I do contemplate often what could be done to remedy innate deficits of ethnic groups in an effort to close the gap between them and higher achieving ones. The most cited and distinct gap in mean intellectual capacity between groups is the 85 IQ average of African-Americans and 100 IQ mean of U.S. whites. That’s a sizable gap, and considering the associative properties of those values it does seem to explain much of the disparity in social tendencies between those groups. However, I’ve read that British blacks average around 94. In the event that African American IQ can raise that high, we would see a far more equitable arrangement in social outcomes. It’s actually a very optimistic number, and you can think of the implications! That’s around the same disparity between White Americans and Asian Americans, and while there is a conspicuous difference between the two, the social outcomes aren’t too substantial- there might be a gifted class comprised of sixty percent Asians and forty percent Whites (not taking into account other ethnic groups in this example.) However, there has long been an effort to compensate for the deficits between black americans in particular, with not much success. (Since I am saying this, I suppose I should take it upon myself to actually find these studies that claim this- instead of referencing bloggers that summarize the studies.) Nonetheless, though Black Americans score lower than whites on average, I do realize that the distributions overlap and don’t have any difficulty judging a person on an individual basis. I suppose this is what differentiates me from the alt right; they either don’t care or don’t comprehend the intersecting distributions.

       With respect to my own cognitive ability, I genuinely do not know where to place it. It does appear to me at this point in time that it’s lopsided towards verbal prowess rather than fluid intelligence. There are routes I feel could guarantee me success (politics) but I find myself interested more in science, I love reading about associations in social sciences. Even statistics, which is a firmly quantitative discipline, I enjoy. Although I cannot quantify this, I feel I have decent mathematical intuition. I’ve also yet to see my peers calculate equations in their head as opposed to working them out on paper. Conversely, I don’t feel I understand mathematics at a quicker rate than any of my peers.

Either I hate planning things out because I’m inherently unorderly, or I’m unorderly because I make existential justifications to do so. If I plan out my entire life, I’d likely be reasonably successful. But if I develop a plan for my life starting from now and stick to it, I feel there’s something missing from it existentially.

    

The Big Three

Here, I list three people that have been very influential for me, and hopefully society at large. I don’t necessarily believe that’s the case. But that’s besides the point; I want to propagate their content beyond its intellectual niche (though I suppose my own blog will fill that same cranny.)

 

Stephen Hsu: A physics professor at Michigan State Univerity that has a keen interest in genomics. Has developed algorithms for BGI (formerly Beijing Genomics Institute) and aided them in searching for genes that are associated with intelligence. Very insightful, though not quite as verbose in comparison to other Human BioDiversity bloggers. Though, he compensates with his command of mathematics; this unfortunately isn’t digested as easily. 

Razib Khan: UC Berkeley genomics student on leave, former columnist for the Unz Review. Khan’s mastery of history and the English language coupled with his genomics forte leaves a repository of content I’ve only briefly viewed, due only to  sheer riot. He is a very intriguing character due to his involvement in publications commonly associated with the alt-right (this does not reflect my own views on their work) and his stint as a columnist for the New York times followed by his firing within the same day. The concoction of quality and quantity displayed on his blog in my opinion isn’t approached by any other on this list. 

Greg Cochran: Adjunct professor of anthropology at the University of Utah, with formal training in optical physics. Greg’s brusque demeanor is intellectually attractive, as it follows with a no-bullshit approach to academic discourse. His blog’s format is clean and also reflective of this crisp approach.

Steve’s blog: infoproc.blogspot.com

Razib’s blog: razib.com/wordpress

Greg’s blog: westhunt.wordpress.com