Comments on: Measuring the Pimpact http://hbdbooks.com/2009/11/measuring-the-pimpact/ Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:55:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Linkage is Good for You: Silicone Edition « In Mala Fide http://hbdbooks.com/2009/11/measuring-the-pimpact/comment-page-1/#comment-39020 Linkage is Good for You: Silicone Edition « In Mala Fide Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:05:45 +0000 http://hbdbooks.com/?p=1921#comment-39020 [...] Richard Hoste reviews SuperFreakonomics. [...] [...] Richard Hoste reviews SuperFreakonomics. [...]

]]> By: Garnet http://hbdbooks.com/2009/11/measuring-the-pimpact/comment-page-1/#comment-38797 Garnet Fri, 06 Nov 2009 19:03:00 +0000 http://hbdbooks.com/?p=1921#comment-38797 Should also have mentioned economic and educational success in Lebanon is abit too erratic to make many judgements upon IQ and the like. It's another one of those second world countries with alot of wealth inequality. Should also have mentioned economic and educational success in Lebanon is abit too erratic to make many judgements upon IQ and the like. It’s another one of those second world countries with alot of wealth inequality.

]]> By: Garnet http://hbdbooks.com/2009/11/measuring-the-pimpact/comment-page-1/#comment-38796 Garnet Fri, 06 Nov 2009 19:01:54 +0000 http://hbdbooks.com/?p=1921#comment-38796 I can't access the research off hand, but I question whether the economic and educational success of the lebanese terrorists is that indicative of their IQ's. While it's debatable to the actual IQ of the middle east, the economic and educational success of the terrorists is marginally better than the general populace. And as a quick note on middle eastern IQ, I sincerely doubt Iran's IQ is as low as what Lynn and the like have given (in IQ&TWON, it's given at 84) it in face of, well, this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_contemporary_Iranian_scientists,_scholars,_and_engineers Iranian expats and the diaspora in general perform quite well, but Iran is a second world country with general living standards on the level of Jamaica. Not to mention all of their immense pre-modern achievement. I can’t access the research off hand, but I question whether the economic and educational success of the lebanese terrorists is that indicative of their IQ’s. While it’s debatable to the actual IQ of the middle east, the economic and educational success of the terrorists is marginally better than the general populace.

And as a quick note on middle eastern IQ, I sincerely doubt Iran’s IQ is as low as what Lynn and the like have given (in IQ&TWON, it’s given at 84) it in face of, well, this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_contemporary_Iranian_scientists,_scholars,_and_engineers

Iranian expats and the diaspora in general perform quite well, but Iran is a second world country with general living standards on the level of Jamaica.

Not to mention all of their immense pre-modern achievement.

]]> By: Anthony http://hbdbooks.com/2009/11/measuring-the-pimpact/comment-page-1/#comment-38484 Anthony Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:25:55 +0000 http://hbdbooks.com/?p=1921#comment-38484 "It turns out that when I wrote that TV was to blame[.]" More generally, mass media is to blame. TV is the most ubiquitous kind, and relatively powerful because it is imagistic. If you don't control your own media, you are giving up control of the single biggest source of your beliefs. What is particularly funny is when people complain about certain themes or images on TV, and then ... go right back to watching it! It's like you sit down at a bar, order a drink, are halfway through finishing it, and the bartender starts pissing all over you. After standing up in shock and dismay, with a brief complaint to the person on your right, you return to your stool and ... order another drink. Whereupon which the bartender proceeds to piss all over you again. Repeat ad infinitum. I think this is because people have some level of *trust* that their media is in some way harmless or good for them. Once the trust is gone, my guess is that people would respond in a different way. “It turns out that when I wrote that TV was to blame[.]”

More generally, mass media is to blame. TV is the most ubiquitous kind, and relatively powerful because it is imagistic.

If you don’t control your own media, you are giving up control of the single biggest source of your beliefs.

What is particularly funny is when people complain about certain themes or images on TV, and then … go right back to watching it! It’s like you sit down at a bar, order a drink, are halfway through finishing it, and the bartender starts pissing all over you. After standing up in shock and dismay, with a brief complaint to the person on your right, you return to your stool and … order another drink. Whereupon which the bartender proceeds to piss all over you again. Repeat ad infinitum.

I think this is because people have some level of *trust* that their media is in some way harmless or good for them. Once the trust is gone, my guess is that people would respond in a different way.

]]> By: Garnet http://hbdbooks.com/2009/11/measuring-the-pimpact/comment-page-1/#comment-38476 Garnet Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:18:31 +0000 http://hbdbooks.com/?p=1921#comment-38476 Not to mention that Levitt wrote a paper in 2006 on the black-white test gap, with a focus on the success stories of Head Start. And was abit more open to genetic possibilities than Freakonomics, but took a middleground viewpoint. It's been ages since I read the paper, but that was much of the gist of it. Try to see if you can find something here: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=levitt+black+white+test+gap&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi= This book seems to deal only meagerly with hereditarian issues. You seem to be just drumming up anything that remotely touches upon it. Not to mention that Levitt wrote a paper in 2006 on the black-white test gap, with a focus on the success stories of Head Start. And was abit more open to genetic possibilities than Freakonomics, but took a middleground viewpoint.

It’s been ages since I read the paper, but that was much of the gist of it. Try to see if you can find something here: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=levitt+black+white+test+gap&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

This book seems to deal only meagerly with hereditarian issues. You seem to be just drumming up anything that remotely touches upon it.

]]> By: Pete http://hbdbooks.com/2009/11/measuring-the-pimpact/comment-page-1/#comment-38473 Pete Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:27:45 +0000 http://hbdbooks.com/?p=1921#comment-38473 Love your insightful writing. I must disagree, however, with your opinion that Levitt is a kindred spirit with regards to race realism. Please (re)read pages 163-165 of the original Freakonomics and see if he does not completely avoid answering the question why schools attended by blacks display "troublesome indicators" such as gang problems and loitering students. In the same breath, he concedes that these schools have favorable class size, teacher education, and computer to student ratios. He will not ascribe any genetic component to this predilection for mischief on the part of blacks in otherwise favorable circumstances. Love your insightful writing. I must disagree, however, with your opinion that Levitt is a kindred spirit with regards to race realism. Please (re)read pages 163-165 of the original Freakonomics and see if he does not completely avoid answering the question why schools attended by blacks display “troublesome indicators” such as gang problems and loitering students. In the same breath, he concedes that these schools have favorable class size, teacher education, and computer to student ratios.

He will not ascribe any genetic component to this predilection for mischief on the part of blacks in otherwise favorable circumstances.

]]>