Let me offer a pet theory of mine, that, I think, flies in the face of all this standard-lowering-to-compensate lunacy. The Tuskegee Airmen, it is ostensibly well-known, never lost a bomber they were escorting. This is celebrated and a point of pride, I believe. One might ask, "Why?" The answer is simple, assuming I have my history correct. They were, in fact, better pilots that others! If one asks why to that, the answer is also relatively simple. They were challenged more in training, maybe even unfairly. There was a time, in my distant childhood, when Black people celebrated "doing more" and "being better" because we were, frankly, "up to it." Now, we have begun to accept pats on the head in the place of kicking ass, and that makes me sad. (Please feel free to correct my historical understanding, if necessary!)
Blacks these days aren't even accomplished marksmen in their spray & pray gang shootouts with the non-stereotypical sideways hold. If they were better shots, fewer innocent bystanders would be killed and BLM might accomplish strategic criminal-thinning (unwittingly).
Readers here may know that BLM, supposedly about saving lives, has gotten more blacks killed by crippling cops' ability to arrest their primary enemies. In other words, cops save far more black lives than they take during tough arrests. Many woke folk refuse to follow that math.
I have often wondered what happens to those students after their first year. That is, how well does a student do when they were perhaps not as well prepared at the commencement of their studies as they should have been? Are their failure rate significantly higher than the candidates that were well prepared when they started out? Perhaps the first year smooths thing out? Or perhaps it turns out that those that were allowed in, but now fail disastrously were the one's that were ill prepared; which would lead me to believe that the issue is perhaps that there exists a somewhat cynical scheme on the side of the administration to earn extra income for the university. What does the data say?
Right, now flip it. How many come in and do better?
Rather than imagine the worst, and see greed, maybe look at the data first? As Glenn conveniently ignores the fact that racism has a biology just as violence does. People who look different will generate higher action potentials between neurons in the lateral amygdala kind of thing. In the most simplest terms for Glenn to get, maybe Chinese do better as they aren’t as dark skinned as blacks, not treated the same, includes Jews? Ever study that one, Glenn? Anyone’s guess, but Asians all going through hell right now because of Trump and his Chinese virus, while Glenn foolishly blamed Obama for the open rejection of multi racial democracy that occurred on January 6, by mostly racist white religious folks, and Glenn can still blame the left for racism. Bravo, Glenn! There’s a reason why Trump supporters love to quote Glenn’s Pseudo logic.
What sort of tech do you think could have ever come out of Africa, with or without the outside interference which supposedly froze their ability to invent things centuries ago? This includes parts of the continent that never dealt with white men.
The Chinese now build most of their modern buildings, which tend to fall into disrepair. Africa also doesn't invent its own cars and electronic gizmos. There are glaring reasons for these things that can't be pinned on racism. Just not a generally tech-oriented people (exceptions can always be cherry-picked).
Racism has a Biochemistry that no one can control. It starts 50 ms after you see someone and only when skin color is different do both the fear center and disgust centers of the brain respond simultaneously before any conscious awareness.
That’s all neuroscience, and it’s the Neurosciences that say further to the right lower the IQ.
Trump called Covid the Chinese virus if that is it racist what is?
Haven’t posted on Glenn Lowery‘s website in over a year. What is this about?
As I said: "Perhaps the first year smooths thing out?", and "What does the data say?" In other words I am here to learn from Glenn, and John; my comment isn't meant to argue a particular point of view.
By "... smooths things out?" I simply meant to ask whether its the case that high entry requirements, in previous academic achievement, to a course turns out to be a good predictor of future success in that particular course, or does the new environment encourage the previously less successful students to raise their own level of achievement and thus becomes moot after about the first year.
That's why I wondered if there are data that perhaps illuminates the whole discussion.
On the other hand, lack of reliable data often indicate a marked discomfort with reality. That is, the subject has become so politicized that career academics are loathe to study it. I can imagine that funding might also be a problem, if the funding agencies regard a topic of investigation to be politically sensitive. Though not being an academic myself, I simply don't know if that hypothesis is even remotely true.
Understand your points, agree with them - good to wonder, never know unless u look.
Usually lack of reliable data means either it hasn’t been looked at enough, or if the data is mixed that the results are resulting from nuances that haven’t been pulled apart yet.
See this with judges giving out sentences before vs after lunch, it was because the frontal lobe of our brain doesn’t work well when nutrition levels are low, but that kind of nuance made the difference in understanding the data.
Then there’s fatigue issues you site, but that’s why “time” is the most important factor in scrutinizing any results, no knowledge is final, always updates.
Have to first understand that there is a biology to everything, including love, racism and violence. Free will is myth. No one controls how their brain works unless they can control nuclear physics. Again this is where Glenn flies off the mark, inspires racist thinking. Suggest reading “the big picture,” by Sean Carroll. Or “Behave” by Robert Sapolsky
If you want to understand how economics socially drives gang violence, or why eastern Kentucky, full of conservative white people, is starting to look like the Black ghettos of New York in the 70s, read the book, “when work disappears, the world of the new urban poor,”” by William Julius Wilson
Glenn worth listening to, sometimes not bad, most the time inspires ignorance. He’s Never asked to look at the families from January 6, white families, white Christian values, Glenn instead blamed Obama
Excellent
Let me offer a pet theory of mine, that, I think, flies in the face of all this standard-lowering-to-compensate lunacy. The Tuskegee Airmen, it is ostensibly well-known, never lost a bomber they were escorting. This is celebrated and a point of pride, I believe. One might ask, "Why?" The answer is simple, assuming I have my history correct. They were, in fact, better pilots that others! If one asks why to that, the answer is also relatively simple. They were challenged more in training, maybe even unfairly. There was a time, in my distant childhood, when Black people celebrated "doing more" and "being better" because we were, frankly, "up to it." Now, we have begun to accept pats on the head in the place of kicking ass, and that makes me sad. (Please feel free to correct my historical understanding, if necessary!)
Blacks these days aren't even accomplished marksmen in their spray & pray gang shootouts with the non-stereotypical sideways hold. If they were better shots, fewer innocent bystanders would be killed and BLM might accomplish strategic criminal-thinning (unwittingly).
Readers here may know that BLM, supposedly about saving lives, has gotten more blacks killed by crippling cops' ability to arrest their primary enemies. In other words, cops save far more black lives than they take during tough arrests. Many woke folk refuse to follow that math.
Like Justice Clarence Thomas grandfather.
I have often wondered what happens to those students after their first year. That is, how well does a student do when they were perhaps not as well prepared at the commencement of their studies as they should have been? Are their failure rate significantly higher than the candidates that were well prepared when they started out? Perhaps the first year smooths thing out? Or perhaps it turns out that those that were allowed in, but now fail disastrously were the one's that were ill prepared; which would lead me to believe that the issue is perhaps that there exists a somewhat cynical scheme on the side of the administration to earn extra income for the university. What does the data say?
Right, now flip it. How many come in and do better?
Rather than imagine the worst, and see greed, maybe look at the data first? As Glenn conveniently ignores the fact that racism has a biology just as violence does. People who look different will generate higher action potentials between neurons in the lateral amygdala kind of thing. In the most simplest terms for Glenn to get, maybe Chinese do better as they aren’t as dark skinned as blacks, not treated the same, includes Jews? Ever study that one, Glenn? Anyone’s guess, but Asians all going through hell right now because of Trump and his Chinese virus, while Glenn foolishly blamed Obama for the open rejection of multi racial democracy that occurred on January 6, by mostly racist white religious folks, and Glenn can still blame the left for racism. Bravo, Glenn! There’s a reason why Trump supporters love to quote Glenn’s Pseudo logic.
You won't ever touch the I.Q. topic, probably.
What sort of tech do you think could have ever come out of Africa, with or without the outside interference which supposedly froze their ability to invent things centuries ago? This includes parts of the continent that never dealt with white men.
The Chinese now build most of their modern buildings, which tend to fall into disrepair. Africa also doesn't invent its own cars and electronic gizmos. There are glaring reasons for these things that can't be pinned on racism. Just not a generally tech-oriented people (exceptions can always be cherry-picked).
Racism has a Biochemistry that no one can control. It starts 50 ms after you see someone and only when skin color is different do both the fear center and disgust centers of the brain respond simultaneously before any conscious awareness.
That’s all neuroscience, and it’s the Neurosciences that say further to the right lower the IQ.
Trump called Covid the Chinese virus if that is it racist what is?
Haven’t posted on Glenn Lowery‘s website in over a year. What is this about?
Joking?
As I said: "Perhaps the first year smooths thing out?", and "What does the data say?" In other words I am here to learn from Glenn, and John; my comment isn't meant to argue a particular point of view.
By "... smooths things out?" I simply meant to ask whether its the case that high entry requirements, in previous academic achievement, to a course turns out to be a good predictor of future success in that particular course, or does the new environment encourage the previously less successful students to raise their own level of achievement and thus becomes moot after about the first year.
That's why I wondered if there are data that perhaps illuminates the whole discussion.
On the other hand, lack of reliable data often indicate a marked discomfort with reality. That is, the subject has become so politicized that career academics are loathe to study it. I can imagine that funding might also be a problem, if the funding agencies regard a topic of investigation to be politically sensitive. Though not being an academic myself, I simply don't know if that hypothesis is even remotely true.
Understand your points, agree with them - good to wonder, never know unless u look.
Usually lack of reliable data means either it hasn’t been looked at enough, or if the data is mixed that the results are resulting from nuances that haven’t been pulled apart yet.
See this with judges giving out sentences before vs after lunch, it was because the frontal lobe of our brain doesn’t work well when nutrition levels are low, but that kind of nuance made the difference in understanding the data.
Then there’s fatigue issues you site, but that’s why “time” is the most important factor in scrutinizing any results, no knowledge is final, always updates.
Have to first understand that there is a biology to everything, including love, racism and violence. Free will is myth. No one controls how their brain works unless they can control nuclear physics. Again this is where Glenn flies off the mark, inspires racist thinking. Suggest reading “the big picture,” by Sean Carroll. Or “Behave” by Robert Sapolsky
If you want to understand how economics socially drives gang violence, or why eastern Kentucky, full of conservative white people, is starting to look like the Black ghettos of New York in the 70s, read the book, “when work disappears, the world of the new urban poor,”” by William Julius Wilson
Glenn worth listening to, sometimes not bad, most the time inspires ignorance. He’s Never asked to look at the families from January 6, white families, white Christian values, Glenn instead blamed Obama
Thanks James. I'll take a look at the readings that you suggested.