/lit/ - Literature

>>>/pol/

>>11887960
maybe The Fall by Camus, there is a quote that is something like “People hasten to judge in order not to be judged themselves.” and it has some other powerful lines that I rather not spoil for you.

>>11887963
T. Leftypol

>>11887960
Just come into contact with them. Read literature written by people of other races and nationalities. The thing about metropolitanism and why it encourages multi-racialism is that many major Western cities select for professionals with a high degree of intelligence because of how high the rent prices are. And if you end up coming into contact with smart people of other races, you tend to care more about individual intelligence than any tribal racial affiliation.

>>11887960
>Is there a book that'll teach me why it's wrong to judge people on a case by case basis and not just their nation/phenotypes/race/etc.?
You're an absolute retard if you don't see the two go together, an individual is its race and a race is nothing but individuals

>>11887989
You get a skewed picture that way, since you're only coming into contact with the elites.

>>11888016
The point is that talent and beauty are valuable in and of themselves, regardless of whether or not they're more likely to exist in one particular group. It's those specific qualities you care about, not the group they're slightly more likely to appear in.

Redwall

>>11887960
You always treat people you meet on the basis of probabilities
If someone walked up to you in muddy dungarees you may assume he's a farmer and you would treat him accordingly until new information arrises.
If you meet someone wearing glasses you may automatically assume he's more middle class because he has a constant need to read.

The sad fact is that certain races have certain STRONG probabilities of being less intelligent and behaving in ways less intelligent people behave (especially as an entire culture of low intelligence reinforces unintelligences) and you would treat the person accordingly given that information.
Its impossible to have any sort of meaningful interaction with people without operating on assumptions (which are judgements Camus faggot)

There is nothing in all this which divides a racist person from a non-racist person, all that there is here are facts which are either true or untrue

>>11888034
We live in a culture that's very economically segregated. So you're just as likely to come into contact with minorities who are closer to your average than the average of their ethnic group.

>>11888051
Its all data. The point is OP speaks to imply there's necessarily some philosophic difference going on here but there isn't necessarily at all, just disagreements on the data

Judging people you meet on a case by case basis is the correct way to do it.
That doesn't mean that you ought to import a million sandniggers to your prosperous 1st world country.

>>11888059
The disagreement relates to how the data are interpreted, not the data themselves

>>11888071
Yeah mostly whether to willingly interpret it at all

>>11888029
I don't know, I see your point but I'd rather live in a homogeneous society than one composed of deracinated, isolated, individuals with no shared culture or values. I'd happily move to a small town in Alberta if it were possible to find a decent job. Major cities are like giant hotels: nobody really lives there, nobody's really from there, they're just passing through. The moment they find a better job someplace else they'll jump ship.

>>11888029
based and redpilled

>>11888034
There's nothing wrong with this, as long as you respond accordingly when exposed to new information. In practice the racist is the hillbilly that believes he personally is superior to any nigger on the basis of his belonging to the statistically more intelligent group. Sadly such beliefs are common among those without individual merit.

>>11887960
It's reductivist and antihumanistic. It promotes bias and perpetuates hostility and rigidity. Your ideal is world peace and friendship, right?

>>11888083
Context is important though. For instance Indians have an average IQ of around 85, but because the process of immigrating to America specifically selects for the most successful Indians, Americans of Indian descent are the most successful ethnic group in the US. So if an American comes into contact with an Indian in the US it's reasonable for him to assume that that Indian has a higher-then-average level of intelligence.

>>11887975
t.Retard

>>11888130
Indians have a wide genetic variation in the first place due to their longstanding caste culture. But yeah again, context is data

>>11888102
I agree, but the problem is that we can't go backwards. It's much more reasonable to force the children of immigrants to adhere to the cultural norms of the countries their parents immigrated to than to ship every immigrant and child of immigrants back to their country of origin.

>>11888143
>but the problem is that we can't go backwards

Self fulfilling prophecy. We absolutely can set up segregated schools and segregated communities and they would thrive very well. The problem is they have to made illegal because the very existence of them displays the superiority of homogenous communities

>>11888137
Context also matters at the level where data aren't collected. The neighborhood you're in, the job you work at, the places you visit all select for specific types of people which wouldn't necessarily be identical to any national average.

>>11888143
With enough political will, anything is possible anon, even genocide.

>>11888155
Many minorities in the US exist in too small a number for segregation to be viable. Self-segregation based on economic distinctions does a good enough job of separating people who are too different to coexist.

>>11888160
Thats the role of your intuition to decide the extent to which any individual case conforms to any particular conditions. Thats part of being alive but doesn't in any sense discard the data when its shown to have high predictive ability regardless of context

Anthropology and Modern Life by Franz Boas

>>11888168
I'm talking about whites, I don't give a shit about shitskins
They can go fuck off to shitskin countries if they need help

>>11888155
Idk man, gypsies here in Europe self-segregate and they're as much of a menace as ever. Maybe it's their intrinsically defiant culture.

>>11888175
Yeah of course. Bad races will lead to bad communities when isolated and good races lead to good communities.
The problem is today we have the good mixed with the shit leading to sort of shit and mediocre communities

>>11888173
Everybody peep the whiteboi

>>11888171
That's what everyone does. The thing is, like aside from some very low-IQ black people, people of most races are perfectly fine when they're raised here and acclimated to our culture. The average IQ spread between hispanics and Asians is only about 10 points, with whites in the middle. Hardly the a big enough genetic distinction to be constantly on guard about who you're coming into contact with.

>>11888185
Unfortunately, we have nowhere to send them back to, as they've been here for almost a thousand years.

>>11888125
well uhh

>>11888197
*Hardly that big enough of a genetic distinction

I'm on my phone

>>11888197
>The thing is, like aside from some very low-IQ black people, people of most races are perfectly fine when they're raised here and acclimated to our culture.

Totally disagree and this is exactly the problem today.
Putting on a suit and smiling for a stock photo and parroting some Liberal middle class sloganeering doesn't make you a viable Western subject. All it does is make you economically exploitable which is a very different thing.
No matter how much you fool yourself and reinforce the socially promoted vision of them they've been shown to be deeply mediocre human beings capable of very little of grand work and drag everything down to their genetic floor.
I also don't have a clue where you're getting your data from but Hispanics have an entire 20 IQ difference below Asians which is larger than an entire standard deviation for whites

>>11887960
But you can judge people by their looks and only an idiot wouldn't.

>>11888197
On the concept of collective identity, do not think that race is "just" skin color or such seemingly superficial things as outside appearance and ancestry, things that can be discarded as meaningless with rational analysis actually find themselves surprisingly meaningful in the enigma that is the human mind, even if a person does his all to deny this and is grown and educated to deny this i believe that he will still unconsciously act like it is true, meaningful.

>>11888252
Average Hispanic IQ is 93 as far as I'm aware. Most hispanics are mixed indigenous and white, and have an IQ that reflects that.

>>11888312
Everybody peep the whiteboi

>>11888312
Hispanics are a mixed bag. Many of them have significant African admixture too especially in parts of Mexico, Greater Colombia and Brazil
I see a lot of results that put them in the mid-high 80s

>>11888143
There are so many of them that that is going to be difficult.

>>11888320
I'm Puerto Rican

>>11888325
My grandfather was blonde and I have black cousins. I'm sure the ethnic variety in Latin America makes for a much flatter distribution curve

OP here, most people read my post wrong but that's my fault, I kinda wrote the first statement how it would usually be written if someone were to ask the opposite.

I.e. "Is there a book that'll teach me why it's wrong to judge people on their nation/phenotypes/race/etc. and not just on a case by case basis?" is how most people seem to have read it. I want a book that justifies discrimination of people based on their race.

>>11888522
Just read the bell curve

>>11887960
The Brothers Karamozov goes over it pretty thoroughly
>>11888032
lol
>>11888034
there is little to no correlation between intelligence and moral behavior. read Bros K because you sound socially retarded.
>Major cities are like giant hotels: nobody really lives there, nobody's really from there
>nobody really lives in big cities
>nobody is really from big cities
you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about. I've been to NY, LA, OC, Prague, Manilla, Budapest, Portland, San Fran, and other places and you have to be a goddamn idiot to think that "people dont really live there". people tattoo those places to their fucking bodies, they live and die for their cities. especially LA and NY.

>>11887960
>>11888522
statistically the end result will be similar either way

>>11888558
>there is little to no correlation between intelligence and moral behavior

When it comes to violent crime especially there is a HIGH correlation with low IQ.
There are criminals at every IQ level but when it comes to basic self preservation and convincing people to act according to reasonable principles intelligence is a strong factor

>>11888522
>I want a book that justifies discrimination of people based on their race.
doesn't exist outside of propoganda
>>11888547
>Over two decades after its publication, one set of scholarly authors stated that The Bell Curve contained ". . . very little information that has since come into question by mainstream scholars. . . . The Bell Curve is not as controversial as its reputation would lead one to believe (and most of the book is not about race at all)."
>Interviewer: Let me go back to Gould's four points. Is there any one of those that you think is not a fair and accurate statement of what you said?
>Murray: All four of them.[21]
>Interviewer: You are not a determinist. You are not saying everything is in the genes. You think free will is a meaningful concept.
>Murray: Yes, and so did Dick Herrnstein ...[21]
>Murray said he does not reduce intelligence to a single number but is sympathetic to Howard Gardner's idea of multiple intelligences.
>Interviewer: So you are not saying intelligence is a single number?
>Murray: No.

>When several prominent critics turned this into an "assumption" that the authors had attributed most or all of the racial differences in IQ to genes, co-author Charles Murray responded by quoting two passages from the book:
>If the reader is now convinced that either the genetic or environmental explanation has won out to the exclusion of the other, we have not done a sufficiently good job of presenting one side or the other. It seems highly likely to us that both genes and the environment have something to do with racial differences. What might the mix be? We are resolutely agnostic on that issue; as far as we can determine, the evidence does not justify an estimate. (p. 311)[34]
...
>If tomorrow you knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that all the cognitive differences between races were 100 percent genetic in origin, nothing of any significance should change. The knowledge would give you no reason to treat individuals differently than if ethnic differences were 100 percent environmental ...

take your own advice because you obviously haven't

>>11888547
I only know a bit about that one but it's not about how things should be run is it? Seems like a text book about research and not argumentation but I don't know if that's true.

I want argumentation, obviously it should be based in fact, however.

>>11888589
I don't know, read Celine then who cares
Arguments are for cucks to pretend as if they hadn't already made up their mind

>>11888584
individuals and people are very different
race can correlate very highly with meaningful traits and therefore discrimination by race can be a very valid strategy.

>>11888560
Not necessarily, you might cross the street if you see a black man in a business suit if you think he's violent because he's black. You might not do the same if you judge on a case by case basis. The results of either choice can vary wildly and your life could take drastically different turns depending on how you judge people.

It wouldn't be unreasonable to avoid seeing Black Panther or Get Out 2 Electric Boogaloo, avoid going to big cities, to start carrying a gun etc. if you thought black people were dangerous.

>>11888660
>It wouldn't be unreasonable to avoid seeing Black Panther or Get Out 2 Electric Boogaloo, avoid going to big cities, to start carrying a gun etc. if you thought black people were dangerous.

A lot of people who had to live around blacks did exactly this and hence the history of white flight. People forget this shit because they're comfortable just being around the niggers in suits
Unfortunately another consequence of statistics is the return to the genetic mean which means children of even intelligent black couples will sink back to the genetic average and the crime rates of rich blacks ends up being little different than their poor compatriots
This among many other features of population dynamics is a reason to not want to have to associate with them

>>11888680
>Unfortunately another consequence of statistics is the return to the genetic mean which means children of even intelligent black couples will sink back to the genetic average
From what I understand, if the intelligent black couple both inherited their intelligence and aren't exceptions within their family tree then their child is more likely to be intelligent as well than regress to the population mean. Can you explain why this isn't the case or why it may be irrelevant?

>>11888698
Because it turns out it doesn't actually work that way. There are very few truly intelligent families, for the vast majority there are families with smart members and dumb members relative to the general stock of their race because the complexity of the brain and all the different potential combinations of genes necessary to produce a mind that deviates significantly from the norm makes the carrying on of it from generation to generation statistically negligible.
Hence why family dynasties once founded by great and impressive men usually are very quickly followed by disappointing mediocre successors.

The difference is indeed when they have an entire family line to fall back on but the more deviation from the genetic background you're asking for makes it far and far less likely for such a pairing to exist in reality.
Which means that while we may have smart (or not dumb) individuals on offer from the third world to immigrate here they will end up dirtying the water with their genetic consequence

>>11888727
>>11888698
It is a bit of both in reality. Obviously smart people are more likely to produce smart children, but regression to the mean is a real thing.

>>11888735
>Obviously smart people are more likely to produce smart children

I've seen so little evidence for this. There must be some individual transmission but the heritability of IQ seems to be extremely weak compared to other factors like height

>>11888760
The heritability of IQ is well established in psychology, and has been for some time now. It's a fairly strong correlation

Height is in fact a good example of the same thing, theyre both highly polygenic

>>11888029
How does your society handle the way racial groups vote in blocks or how in more diverse places there is less civic engagement?

>>11888768
>It's a fairly strong correlation
Strong is relative. Its about 0.5 heritable in most sources I check which is very much weaker than height which is about 0.8 if I recall correctly.
Both are polygenic but that's also a relative phrase, its much more well understood what genes go into height than intelligence

>>11888794
0.5 is not weak though, that's substantial. More to the point how could intellgience not be inherited, it could never have undergone selection otherwise, or rather the various things that contribute to intelligence couldn't have undergone selection

>>11887960
You can if you get good at racism. It's 100% a skill but you have to spend time constantly refining stereotypes. And certain groups like "black" just aren't good enough for anything but broad generalizations b/c it is a diverse category. You can say for example, that an average black person is likely to be more violent and dumber than an average white person, but you can't rule out coming across a highly intelligent black person because again, it's a group with large standard deviations on many things. On the opposite spectrum, you can say with relative certainty for example, that you will not come across a creative chinese person, or an indio hispanic math professor because these things just don't happen statistically to any realistic degree.

>>11888815
>you will not come across a creative chinese person
bit of a meme dude. I feel like this is cope for pseudo-WNs who don't like that the East Asians have the highest average iq

>>11888803
>0.5 is not weak though, that's substantial.

Not when you're dealing explicitly with exceptional people at which that point five is heading firmly in one direction. Intelligence is softly heritable is more my point. For the most part it simply did not evolve in all creatures on Earth and it takes significant selection pressures in order to cultivate it over entire populations. There is some heritability as with pretty much anything but it definately appears hard to sustain and the fact that there are very few large differences in intelligences between human groups outside the phenotype scale is a testament to that

>>11888822
>t. person who has never gone to university with chinese classmates
The IQ meme is laughable and 100% the result of systematic cheating. A realistic guess for their actual national score would be in the 90's

>>11887960
Any introductory statistics book will explain why generalisations exist.

Also, Darwin was a race realist essentially. "Why would anyone assume after being isolated from each other for so long that all races are equal?" (To paraphrase). Ask yourself what you think equal means. Literally the same object? Indiscernible? Similar? Equal in worth but not appearance? Are Africans better runners? If so, is that the extent of our macroscopic genetic differences, or are there others? If not, why are the best runners of African origin?

If we're not actually "equal" in the proper sense, then it raises the question of ranking best to worst. This is of course subjective based on what you're ranking against. I'd put money on the African runner over the Jewish runner, but I'd have more faith in the Jewish mathematician than the African.

>>11888831
Not him but I never seen real evidence for this. The fact they only are proposed to have 105 IQ makes the difference insignificant either way.

>>11888830
Group differences aside, the entire human species is highly selected for intelligence, probably mostly to do with our social interactions and language use, but also tool creation and use

>>11888831
>A realistic guess for their actual national score would be in the 90's
You've already discarded all IQ tests taken by East Asians so what are you basing this on? East Asian countries are leaders in GDP and technological development.

>>11888846
Assuming the out-of-Africa theory, people were very much selected for intelligence when they moved north into the snow.

>>11887960
>no brain
"I don't judge!"
>some brain
Judging people after you meet them
>more brain activation
Judging people on the basis of race
>full capacity
Judging on what clothes people where
>brain bulging out of skull
Judging on phrenological features, proportions, and facial characteristics and manner of speech.

>>11888853
>East Asian countries are leaders in GDP and technological development.

What, no they're not. Even Japan is pretty lackluster these days

>>11888856
yeah but Africans are already hugely selected for intelligence compared to other species. Their brains are barely different in size to Eurasians, when compared to a Chimpanzee the dfifference is negligible.

Again I think the majority of it is language and tool creation which are common to all humans but virtually nonexistent outside us. The fact that some Eurasians are even more highly adapted to these things, and to abstract thinking in general, is just a stronger variation on the same theme. I think a great deal of the 'civilized' nature of Eurasians is less about intelligence and more about time preference in any case

alle neger stinken
by immanuel kant

>>11888888
holy......

Do you think race will make its way into politics at some point in the future or are we just discussing dead ideas?

>>11888888

>>11888897
>at some point in the future
have you been living in a cave in the wilderness anon

>>11888888
Mein fuhrer...

>>11888910
It might be due to my location, but I have never heard in person the media discussing this. It's too risky.

>>11888915
It will have to be addressed eventually. As long as leftists keep insisting any low performance by blacks and women are a product of oppression a counter pressure will be necessary

>>11888915
no but the never-ceasing blare of discussion of racism is in fact just a massive cogdis about the fact that certain races refuse to behave and we have to invent a bogeyman of invisible structural racism to account for their behavior

>>11888882
Pic related, also, new robot comes out of Japan every day. Anyways, answer the question.

>>11888936
youd be better off looking at gdp per capita and adjusting for obvious things like having oil. Ireland is a real outlier and I have tried to figure out what is going on there and I think it mostly has to do with their business laws or taxes allowing foreign, mostly US, companies to operate there.

Not that the Irish are stupid but their placement at around number 4 is bizarre