SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
James Watson: Scientist loses titles after claims over race
Nobel Prize-winning American scientist James Watson has been stripped of his honorary titles after repeating comments about race and intelligence.
In a TV programme, the pioneer in DNA studies made a reference to a view that genes cause a difference on average between blacks and whites on IQ tests. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory said the 90-year-old scientist's remarks were "unsubstantiated and reckless". Dr Watson had made similar claims in 2007 and subsequently apologised.
He shared the Nobel in 1962 with Maurice Wilkins and Francis Crick for their 1953 discovery of the DNA's double helix structure.
Dr Watson sold his gold medal in 2014, saying he had been ostracised by the scientific community after his remarks about race. He is currently in a nursing home recovering from a car accident and is said to have "very minimal" awareness of his surroundings.
Previously: Disgraced Scientist is Selling his Nobel Prize
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 13 2019, @10:44PM (9 children)
There's nothing inherently racist about acknowledging IQ statistics, there is something inherently stupid about ignoring science or engaging in racial discrimination. [npr.org] Is Harvard "alt-right"?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 13 2019, @11:26PM (8 children)
Nope, alt-right is for white supremacists and their liter "cultural pride" supporters.
Harvard is indeed discriminating based on race along with every other affirmative action institution. Whether that is good or bad is not as clear according to your linked article.
There is nothing inherently racist with talking about IQ stats, but using them to say "white people are smarter than black people" is racist. That is not a statement supported by actual geneticists and the only supporters of such racist shit are fringe level non-experts with at-best degrees in unrelated fields.
Keep trying to spin racism as "just acknowledging the facts" if you want, anyone who bothers to read up on the topics will quickly see that the supporting evidence is riddled with factual errors and a healthy dose of "they're trying to censor us" which makes supparters think they are in some super-secret club of super-smart people willing to see "the truth".
IQ tests have gotten better for sure, have some amount of use but they say nothing about the genetics of intelligence. Know how I can say that with 100% confidence? Because geneticists don't even know how to define intelligence let alone the genes that affect it.
I think I'm done arguing around here, too much of a racist echo chamber in here. Keep lying to yourselves if you'd like, the majority of the world is moving on.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @12:07AM (6 children)
Not only racist, but racialist. That is, their theory is predicated on the idea that distinct races even exist. It's sort of like the racist version of the creationist theory of "kinds" that rejects Darwin and Wallace's conclusions while keeping DNA as window-dressing. And so too in racialist theory, DNA is relegated to window-dressing.
I think that the right-wingers are butthurt that they got routed by the more educated Soylentils from the left wing a few stories back.
These comments will be little more than right-wingers flinging poo, because they are too uneducated to understand why being so uneducated might be a problem!
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Arik on Monday January 14 2019, @01:11AM (5 children)
Yes, you have to be a racialist to be a considered racist, and racialism is btw the *false* idea that distinct human races currently exist. So it's all premised on a falsehood.
The ctrl-left just as much as the alt-right are openly and explicitly racialist. They merely invert each others hierarchies, for the most part. Both assume as self evident the idea that there are several distinct races that really exist, both are absolutely wrong on that point, and this poisons the thinking of both.
But there's something even stranger about the way the left wing radicals present this, because they do repeat the saying that races are socially constructed, which is logically inconsistent with racialism, but this doesn't stop them from consistently treating the current USA socially constructed "races" as essential categories privileged from analysis or criticism, the fundamental unalterable assumptions on which they anchor their worldview. This comes off as extraordinarily racist, and when the radicals in question identify as 'white' themselves it often assumes a patronizing tone that I could only compare to pro-slavery writings from previous centuries.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @05:27AM
Yeah, social progress is a complicated beast and there is plenty of hypocrisy from white liberals. At least they are trying instead of burying their heads in the sand and pretending that Obama becoming president meant racism is gone in the US.
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Monday January 14 2019, @05:58AM (3 children)
If the various colors of human are the same species because we interbreed then the various "species" of Orca that can interbreed should be the same species. Also giraffes. Also cheetahs.
I for one just want some consistency. Would also be nice to consider giraffes the same species again so we can keep them from going extinct.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Arik on Wednesday January 16 2019, @01:12AM (1 child)
I'm not a specialists on Orca, but yes the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_problem may come into play to some degree. Because if we're going to say that 'race' is a myth we need to be able to define what race is, and arguably the best definition of race amounts to a biological separation sub species level. But species itself is and has been used inconsistently, which is a cause of confusion.
For the most part I follow Mayr on this, but further. A species is a reproductive population at its maximum potential. If their DNA combine to create fertile offspring they're the same species.
And a subspecies, or race, is a real biological division that is less than species. That is, if the DNA is actually compatible, but for some reason it doesn't actually stand a significant chance of getting mixed without outside intervention, that would be a subspecies or race.
Do these Orca *actually* interbreed? Do say Pacific and Atlantic populations (I'm guessing that's the split) actually ever meet?
If they *could* breed but never meet outside of human captivity, you could arguably call them subspecies rather than species.
On the other hand if they do meet, yet never or virtually never mate in the wild, but their DNA is compatible in the lab, that would be a much better case for calling them subspecies, in my mind. That would indicate some sort of sexual incompatibility, not simply separate ranges, and I'd urge you to consider that since ranges can have and do change for all kinds of reasons, a momentary separation caused by distance is NOT a biological separation.
But at any rate, a real sexual incompatibility is. I don't have any idea how different populations of Orca interact, but I do have some knowledge of the sexual interactions of canines, and on that basis I can give you an example of a REAL racial or subspecies distinction. Wolves vs domesticated dogs. The DNA does work. The ranges certainly overlap. The biologically programmed behavior, however, is not compatible. Cross breeding is virtually impossible without human intervention.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday January 16 2019, @02:42AM
Thanks for the response, i think these are good distinctions.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by Arik on Wednesday January 16 2019, @01:15AM
As to canines there are more real racial splits because of size.
It is simply not possible for a great dane and a chihuahua to mate naturally, for example.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @01:18AM
Racial discrimination is racism, it is always bad since it overlooks the individual.
Caucasians are statistically less intelligent than Asians and Jews - still racist?
Sure [nih.gov] but you just keep on with your "racist echo chamber" bullshit when people discuss scientific evidence.