Jordan Peterson

cogitech

Well-Known Member
Last edited:

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
No, where did I say it? I didn't say it 3 or 4 posts up, dipshit.

Where did I say "black people are dumber than whites"?

I listened to Sam Harris and Charles Murray have a great conversation and discuss the very criticism you're talking about. I know Sam Harris to be a reasonable person with sound scientific understanding. I've read a lot of the criticisms of Charles Murray, and more specifically I read the summary of the team that was created because of the backlash when "The Bell Curve" was released.

They also came to many of the same conclusions that Murray did.

I'm not defending Murray's ideology, but it appears that a lot of his data was collected using the proper methods and care was taken to mitigate errors. This is corroborated by the APA, and other researchers and academics.

The problem people have with Murray is based on what they think Murray is trying to support or imply with his research. I don't give a fuck about his M.O. quite frankly, so long as his data is correct and has predictive power, which apparently it does.

I can't help it if you don't like facts. They exist, and they don't go away just because you don't like them or think they could be used for with bad intentions.

Keep up the great Virtue Signaling! It really seems to be working for you... lol!


View attachment 4167338
So Murray’s data is correct?

Black people are just born dumber than whites?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Aren't you the guy that brags about how smart you are? I don't equate virtue with intelligence. All souls are equal.:peace:
So you’re in agreement with beefkitty, got it

No wonder you’re so comfortable with white supremacists
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
I'm pretty agreeable with all of the honorable people in this thread.
well little wonder a white power junky like you would call a guy praising charles murray's racist pseudoscience honorable

yes or no: black people are just naturally less intelligent than white people
 

Bugeye

Well-Known Member
well little wonder a white power junky like you would call a guy praising charles murray's racist pseudoscience honorable

yes or no: black people are just naturally less intelligent than white people
I favor judging people as individuals, if you are going to judge. Is that ok? So I'll go with no to your question because it is ultimately irrelevant. We ultimately all interact as individuals.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
I favor judging people as individuals, if you are going to judge. Is that ok? So I'll go with no to your question because it is ultimately irrelevant. We ultimately all interact as individuals.
why do you think your buddy beefkitten says charles murray's work, which states that black people are naturally less intelligent than whites, is "true and predictive"?

kind of a nasty and racist belief to hold, don't ya think?
 

Bugeye

Well-Known Member
why do you think your buddy beefkitten says charles murray's work, which states that black people are naturally less intelligent than whites, is "true and predictive"?

kind of a nasty and racist belief to hold, don't ya think?
I'm not familiar enough on the topic of Charles Murray to give an opinion.

But based on your track record, I am naturally skeptical of your judgement.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
I'm not familiar enough on the topic of Charles Murray to give an opinion.
i've already told you everything you need to know. charles murray says black people are naturally not as intelligent as whites.

your buddy beefkitty says that his work, which is best described as racist pseudoscience, is "true and predictive"

don't you think that is a nasty and racist belief to hold?
 

Bugeye

Well-Known Member
i've already told you everything you need to know. charles murray says black people are naturally not as intelligent as whites.

your buddy beefkitty says that his work, which is best described as racist pseudoscience, is "true and predictive"

don't you think that is a nasty and racist belief to hold?
Within the context of his remarks I have no reason to judge beef a racist. None.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Within the context of his remarks I have no reason to judge beef a racist. None.
beefkitten says that charles murray's work, which states that black people are just less intelligent than whites, is "true and predictive"

and you see nothing racist about that

and you still wonder why everyone thinks you're a racist?
 

Bugeye

Well-Known Member
beefkitten says that charles murray's work, which states that black people are just less intelligent than whites, is "true and predictive"

and you see nothing racist about that

and you still wonder why everyone thinks you're a racist?
I don't accept your premise. Is strawman the correct fallacy?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
I don't accept your premise. Is strawman the correct fallacy?
you also don't accept the fact that you celebrated trump;'s illegitimate election alongside white supremacists even though i have screenshots of it

you like to deny reality when faced with your own racism

it's a rather childish and stupid strategy which doesn't work, hence why everyone knows you;re a racist
 

Bugeye

Well-Known Member
you also don't accept the fact that you celebrated trump;'s illegitimate election alongside white supremacists even though i have screenshots of it

you like to deny reality when faced with your own racism

it's a rather childish and stupid strategy which doesn't work, hence why everyone knows you;re a racist
Lulz
 

Buddha2525

Well-Known Member
No, where did I say it? I didn't say it 3 or 4 posts up, dipshit.

Where did I say "black people are dumber than whites"?

I listened to Sam Harris and Charles Murray have a great conversation and discuss the very criticism you're talking about. I know Sam Harris to be a reasonable person with sound scientific understanding. I've read a lot of the criticisms of Charles Murray, and more specifically I read the summary of the team that was created because of the backlash when "The Bell Curve" was released.

They also came to many of the same conclusions that Murray did.

I'm not defending Murray's ideology, but it appears that a lot of his data was collected using the proper methods and care was taken to mitigate errors. This is corroborated by the APA, and other researchers and academics.

The problem people have with Murray is based on what they think Murray is trying to support or imply with his research. I don't give a fuck about his M.O. quite frankly, so long as his data is correct and has predictive power, which apparently it does.

I can't help it if you don't like facts. They exist, and they don't go away just because you don't like them or think they could be used for with bad intentions.

Keep up the great Virtue Signaling! It really seems to be working for you... lol!


View attachment 4167338
While I admire your enthusiasm, I must object to Sam Harris. He isn't a very nice person.

It's alright to have a difference of opinion, but it's something altogether wrong to insist others amongst your "kind" adopt your ways.

He doesn't consider Buddhism real, and only like certain aspects of it. It's like calling yourself a Marxist, then saying, "we can do the same, but with capitalism, and no worker rights?" Huh? WTF? See what I mean.

Yet that's exactly what Sam Harris does. He likes the meditation done his way, but thinks of "reincarnation" or rebirth as nonsense and we must strip it from Buddhism for their own good. Because in his view that was only put there because in his time, he had to, otherwise he would've been executed or something.

That's totally hilarious. In Hindu culture it's said that there were millions of Gods, because everything is God. If you pray to a rock, you're praying to Brahma, because God created rocks.

It wasn't until Abrahamic religions like Muslims and Christians came and tried to conquer India, that such ideas of "heretics" was a thing.

You could worship Shiva, Brahma, Krishna, Rudra, Kali, Agni, etc, etc, etc, it didn't matter. You could worship nothing, like a Charvakas. No one, not even a Charvakas would call you a heretic, and say, "no you can't do this, you are wrong, you must be like me."

Nope, they left you alone, even if you're a weirdo who prays to trees or rocks.

Because to the Hindu, they realize these are what's called a Murti, or a representation of Brahma, not Brahma himself. Even if you worship Shiva, that's Brahma. Both are the same, since neither can be said to be different from Brahma. It's only how you visualize Brahma.

So Sam Harris goes against the very foundation of what Hinduism, Vedic, and Buddhist thought is all about, and brings with him baggage from western culture who must think, " you're not like me, we will bomb you, give you Democracy, and then you'll be free!"

To that I say: Fuck you Sam Harris!

Always,

Namo Amituofo!
 

cogitech

Well-Known Member
While I admire your enthusiasm, I must object to Sam Harris. He isn't a very nice person.

It's alright to have a difference of opinion, but it's something altogether wrong to insist others amongst your "kind" adopt your ways.

He doesn't consider Buddhism real, and only like certain aspects of it. It's like calling yourself a Marxist, then saying, "we can do the same, but with capitalism, and no worker rights?" Huh? WTF? See what I mean.

Yet that's exactly what Sam Harris does. He likes the meditation done his way, but thinks of "reincarnation" or rebirth as nonsense and we must strip it from Buddhism for their own good. Because in his view that was only put there because in his time, he had to, otherwise he would've been executed or something.

That's totally hilarious. In Hindu culture it's said that there were millions of Gods, because everything is God. If you pray to a rock, you're praying to Brahma, because God created rocks.

It wasn't until Abrahamic religions like Muslims and Christians came and tried to conquer India, that such ideas of "heretics" was a thing.

You could worship Shiva, Brahma, Krishna, Rudra, Kali, Agni, etc, etc, etc, it didn't matter. You could worship nothing, like a Charvakas. No one, not even a Charvakas would call you a heretic, and say, "no you can't do this, you are wrong, you must be like me."

Nope, they left you alone, even if you're a weirdo who prays to trees or rocks.

Because to the Hindu, they realize these are what's called a Murti, or a representation of Brahma, not Brahma himself. Even if you worship Shiva, that's Brahma. Both are the same, since neither can be said to be different from Brahma. It's only how you visualize Brahma.

So Sam Harris goes against the very foundation of what Hinduism, Vedic, and Buddhist thought is all about, and brings with him baggage from western culture who must think, " you're not like me, we will bomb you, give you Democracy, and then you'll be free!"

To that I say: Fuck you Sam Harris!

Always,

Namo Amituofo!
Please point me to examples where Sam Harris insists that others "adopt his ways."

Also, it seems to me that Sam would be more than willing to discuss Buddhism and Hinduism with you and would be open to adjusting his interpretation in the face of convincing arguments.

Does his current opinion really offend you so much as to illicit a "fuck you!"? This is a very uncharacteristic response from a student/proponent of Buddhism.
 

Buddha2525

Well-Known Member
Please point me to examples where Sam Harris insists that others "adopt his ways."

Also, it seems to me that Sam would be more than willing to discuss Buddhism and Hinduism with you and would be open to adjusting his interpretation in the face of convincing arguments.

Does his current opinion really offend you so much as to illicit a "fuck you!"? This is a very uncharacteristic response from a student/proponent of Buddhism.
Since you seem sincere, not like many on here I'll clue you into the real Sam Harris agenda.

https://samharris.org/killing-the-buddha/

"Given the degree to which religion still inspires human conflict, and impedes genuine inquiry, I believe that merely being a self-described “Buddhist” is to be complicit in the world’s violence and ignorance to an unacceptable degree."

Seriously? Who besides hard core totally hateful atheists says such non-sense. Anywhere you look, Buddhism is seen as one of the most peaceful religions.

"Indeed, there are ideas within Buddhism that are so incredible as to render the dogma of the virgin birth plausible by comparison. No one is served by a mode of discourse that treats such pre-literate notions as integral to our evolving discourse about the nature of the human mind."

Really? Vedic texts at the time of the Buddha are some of the oldest religious and early scientific literature.

Yes, mine could seem an uncharacteristic response form a Buddhist. But, his views are also very uncharacteristic of what Buddhists believe.

So sorry, my "Fuck you" towards Sam Harris still stands.

And look up his stance on torture. Hint he's very pro-torture. But notice how he says it's Buddhism who are the cause of violence? Odd huh?
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
so you are saying black people are just naturally less intelligent than whites

yes or no
I'm not saying anything. But apparently the data shows that on average, black people score lower on IQ tests than whites, Jews, and Asians.

Are you claiming this isn't true? If you are, demonstrate that there is no genetic component to IQ because that's what you're claiming....that there is no genetic component to intelligence and that there are no difference between races. Despite the fact that there are marked documented physical and genealogical differences between races.

I see no evidence suggesting that IQ is a learned thing/completely environmental, and tons of evidence that suggests that IQ is at least 50% determined by genetic differences.

I'm not certain that black people are on average less intelligent, but that seems to be what the data shows. At the very least this should be studied more.

Unlike you I don't believe in the supression of data that makes people feel "icky" simply to spare their feelings. In fact, fuck your feelings.

Again, these are averages not certainties. There are lots of smart black and white folks, it just happen that when you move to the right of the bell curve of 'G' you start to see less whites, blacks, and latinos and you start seeing more Jews and Asians.... C'est la vie.

How is this racist? Facts are not racist.
 

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
Since you seem sincere, not like many on here I'll clue you into the real Sam Harris agenda.

https://samharris.org/killing-the-buddha/

"Given the degree to which religion still inspires human conflict, and impedes genuine inquiry, I believe that merely being a self-described “Buddhist” is to be complicit in the world’s violence and ignorance to an unacceptable degree."

Seriously? Who besides hard core totally hateful atheists says such non-sense. Anywhere you look, Buddhism is seen as one of the most peaceful religions.

"Indeed, there are ideas within Buddhism that are so incredible as to render the dogma of the virgin birth plausible by comparison. No one is served by a mode of discourse that treats such pre-literate notions as integral to our evolving discourse about the nature of the human mind."

Really? Vedic texts at the time of the Buddha are some of the oldest religious and early scientific literature.

Yes, mine could seem an uncharacteristic response form a Buddhist. But, his views are also very uncharacteristic of what Buddhists believe.

So sorry, my "Fuck you" towards Sam Harris still stands.

And look up his stance on torture. Hint he's very pro-torture. But notice how he says it's Buddhism who are the cause of violence? Odd huh?
All religions are retarded, and Buddhists have done their share of violence.

Go tell the Rhohingya that Buddhists are peaceful.

Maybe you should pick up a book once in a while....you might learn something.

 
Top