tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post5238837878183288057..comments2024-03-27T18:24:19.683-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: Average verbal IQ scores in Presidential elections since 1976Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger68125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-28491966428345417362009-02-06T12:21:00.000-08:002009-02-06T12:21:00.000-08:00Actually, the "bias" that you suggest limits the u...Actually, the "bias" that you suggest limits the usefulness of a vocabulary test as a measure of general intelligence, is far less that might be imagined. Vocabulary tests continue to be significant parts of the most robust modern IQ tests because they are, in fact, one of the most highly "g"-loaded task surrogates. Yes, it is true and perhaps a little counter-intuitive. Vocabulary tests, in which the test taker is asked to provide a definition for a test item word, are better measures of general intelligence than such apparently "pure reasoning" tests as matrix series (the common pictorial tests in which the next picture in a series of abstract pictures is requested), and digit span tests of short-term memory.<BR/><BR/>How could this be? Isn't vocabulary just stored knowledge that in principle could be taught to a monkey? Aren’t IQ test items that request definitions of words just so much "Trivial Pursuit"? Why would such items be in IQ tests, which are not supposed to be tests of knowledge, but of reasoning? Have we not caught the IQ testers with their hand in the figurative cookie jar, claiming to test universal reasoning while sneaking in these bits of cultural bias? <BR/><BR/>These ideas and concerns have a compelling, sort of pseudo-Occam simplicity. That’s important because, very often in science (and as you often discuss here in your blog), we apply Occam’s razor to a group of competing theories, cutting away all but the simplest theory that fully explains the phenomena. But in this case, commentators are failing to see something about vocabulary items, as a group, that is beneath the surface, yet which is critically important to the construction of valid and robust general tests of intelligence. The commentators are, in fact, falling prey to an error of reasoning; a fallacy. Occam’s razor must never be used to excise truths, no matter how subtle or inconvenient, if they explain the phenomenon under consideration.<BR/><BR/>So what is the truth about vocabulary items, and where is the fallacy? First, the fallacy. Linda Gottfredson in her beautiful paper "Logical fallacies used to dismiss the evidence on intelligence testing" (in R. Phelps (Ed.), Correcting fallacies about educational and psychological testing (pp. 11-65). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association 2009.) brought this particular fallacy to my attention. Prof. Gottfredson refers to it as the "Yardstick Mirrors Construct" fallacy. In the yardstick mirrors construct fallacy, commentators (typically those who dispute the idea that there is such a thing as general intelligence) assume that a test item (the “Yardstick”) reveals only mental faculties (the “Construct”) that directly resemble (or “Mirror”) the item itself. Accordingly, they suppose that vocabulary questions that present a word and ask for a definition merely examine the candidate’s ability to retrieve stored knowledge of words. In fact, however, something more subtle and much more significant is going on, and it accounts for why contemporary psychometrists continue to include many vocabulary questions in the most reasoning-intensive and g-loaded IQ tests. <BR/><BR/>If the vocabulary yardstick is not assumed to merely mirror the construct, as such commentators as Sternberg (1995) and Fischer (1996) would have us believe, then we must look beyond and behind to see what mental faculties are evidenced by a large vocabulary, versus a small one. <BR/><BR/>A moment's reflection on the connections between thought and language hint at the truth of the matter. It's a fundamental premise of semantics and neurolinguistics that words, with their remembered associations, and intentional and extensional meanings, are the very atoms of cognition itself. Words are not just bits of text or keys in a relational database; rather, they are branches in a fantastically intricate living computing tree of connected knowledge and reasoning about the world. <BR/><BR/>While it is true that a candidate does use his memory and stored knowledge to answer vocabulary questions, the authors of modern IQ tests are not particularly interested in that process. Rather, the interest in vocabulary is comes from the study of thousands of people of modest, average and superior intellect. In virtually every case, people with superior intellect not only have larger vocabularies (and can retrieve a large number of word definitions), they use that larger vocabulary-web as whole to create and manipulate more complex mental models of the world, and even abstract metamodels of problem solving processes. Thus a large vocabulary evidences superior reasoning ability and overall intelligence, and it is, as well, the product of superior cognition over a period of time.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps this accounts for the surprising (to some) finding that vocabulary is more highly correlated with g (81 has been cited) than digit span memory (.52) and matrix reasoning. <BR/><BR/>In conclusion, those who cling to the Trivial Pursuit theory of vocabulary testing are committing the fallacy of “yardstick mirrors construct”. Vocabulary is an excellent surrogate and index of general intelligence, and test items related to it are among the most useful for measuring g.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-4888544751290780772008-12-27T16:51:00.000-08:002008-12-27T16:51:00.000-08:00"for once in my lifetime we're going to have leade..."for once in my lifetime we're going to have leadership from the Northeastern part of the country"<BR/><BR/>Uh, what are you going on about? The Bush family are Connecticut aristocrats, are they not?<BR/><BR/>That is so off-the-wall that it merits the lolwut pear.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-25929105830430315222008-12-26T20:58:00.000-08:002008-12-26T20:58:00.000-08:00"If we had a parlimentary system there could be mo..."If we had a parlimentary system there could be more parties that better represented subsets of the population and still matter."<BR/><BR/>Not to nitpick, but whether a system is parliamentary or not has little to do with how friendly it is to small parties. America's almost purely two-party system is a symptom of (a) the first-past-the-post election system, shared by most English-speaking countries, (b) habitual dichotomic thinking on the part of the electorate, who are reflexively uninterested in anything that "is neither here nor there" and (c) the bizarre habit third parties have of concentrating on the Presidency when they haven't won a handful of seats in Congress, county commissions, etc. Put another way: why exactly have Ross Perot and Ralph Nader not run for US House, governor, etc.?<BR/><BR/>Most English-speaking countries quash small parties due to (a), but not so much (b), and of course (c) is impossible with no President. Most European countries combine a parliamentary system with some form of proportional representation, though the two have nothing to do with each other. <BR/><BR/>Really the election system is secondary to the creepy bipartisan monolith, aided and abetted <A HREF="http://webproze.blogspot.com/2008/11/reason-478-to-either-home-school-or.html" REL="nofollow">even by civil servants who claim to be objective</A>. If schoolteachers were required to teach civics properly, say by teaching about all the candidates on the ballot and/or all the political parties running a certain number of candidates, the monolith would melt a little. It's a pipe-dream, I know, but I feel like categorical imperatives are still worth mentioning. Asking a child if he/she is "pulling for Obama or McCain" is an insult.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-6625665436002025302008-12-26T18:43:00.000-08:002008-12-26T18:43:00.000-08:00Superb comment by Kramer there!Superb comment by Kramer there!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-33144538761001537702008-12-26T17:37:00.000-08:002008-12-26T17:37:00.000-08:00" do like the fact that for once in my lifetime we..." do like the fact that for once in my lifetime we're going to have leadership from the Northeastern part of the country where almost half of America's population lives "<BR/> How old are you? 10? Or some Obama bot who feels super-White for having this great black (sort of) candidate he can hold up as a paragon of the Great Northeastern "Leader." Pardon me while I wipe tears of laughter.<BR/> For the first time in your life? Who are you talking about, because everybody who is actually going to "lead" are from previous administrations. B.O.'s campaign was written and pushed by Clintonites. All the people he owes and who will be running things are people who have been doing just that for years now. There is no change but him. He's "change" because he's "black." <BR/> Obama who thought there were 57 States? Obama who will not produce a birth certificate when everybody else running for government office jobs has to? Obama who sealed his University records? This man is one long, professional lie, aided and abetted by the best and most powerful liars on the face of the earty. Aside from that he oozes Chicago corruption, and the only thing keeping him out the scandals is the press, illegally acting as his nanny/personal agent/mommy/baby daddy/manchurian candidate programmer. The fraudulency of this man is so mind boggling I don't know where to begin. I was saying similar things about Bush 8 years ago. The rest of the world catches up with me, but by the time they do, the point is so obvious that I can't even take pleasure in the old "I told you so."<BR/><BR/> Now I'm a northeasterner myself. Democrat family, Independent, third party voter. French speaker, latte drinker, that sort. I don't really identify with "cowboys" and "red necks" but I do know that they are the "essential personnel" that have to get their butts to work while the key pushers can sleep in. They are indeed infinitely more essential to the survival of this country than Obama and his ilk.<BR/> Northeastern leadership a blessing? How utterly preposterous. At least the southern corruption was honest corruption everybody admitted to.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-71024661751732154032008-12-26T12:52:00.000-08:002008-12-26T12:52:00.000-08:00The trend of whites becoming an ever increasingly ...The trend of whites becoming an ever increasingly smaller slice of the electorate will occur within the Democratic party much sooner than it will in the country as a whole. It should be quite interesting watching white liberals leap off the Democratic ship and cling to whatever idological and political floatsam is drifting by at the time. I think when smarter and more succesful liberal whites watch blacks and Latinos ascend to position of power within the Democratic party you will see a realignment. Where they go to is another story. <BR/><BR/>If we had a parlimentary system there could be more parties that better represented subsets of the population and still matter. Rather these communities end up starting comunes and living on the fringe.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-89675109194912211092008-12-26T12:11:00.000-08:002008-12-26T12:11:00.000-08:00The GOP can't be a party just for trailer trash an...<I>The GOP can't be a party just for trailer trash and Yahoo cowboys, which - though popular folk heros in the Southern/Western region - are laughed at by the rest of America.</I><BR/><BR/>Stop taking your cues from a philistine like Jon Stewart. All American artists are inspired by the cowboy myth. Stuart Rosenberg, a New York Jew, directed the great <I>Cool Hand Luke</I>. His protege, Darren Aronofsky, also a New York Jew, directed the best movie of the year, <I>The Wrester</I>, a beautiful, humane story about "trailer trash."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-43362964149884287212008-12-26T11:54:00.000-08:002008-12-26T11:54:00.000-08:00Lucius is right- Palin's sportscasts were fantasti...Lucius is right- Palin's sportscasts were fantastic esp coming from a girl....she seemed to know a lot about some of the intricacies of the sports she covered<BR/><BR/>I think I posted something like that a long time ago so I am going to take credit for that observation<BR/><BR/>I like mcCain a lot but Romney/Palin would have been a dream ticket<BR/><BR/>friend of mine used to play hoops with Obama at chicago athletic club in late 90's....said he was a complete ahole fwiwmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15560748812217517307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-79423140782727041742008-12-26T09:01:00.000-08:002008-12-26T09:01:00.000-08:00In the GOP, dimwitted slogans like "Don't mess wit...In the GOP, dimwitted slogans like "Don't mess with Texas" and "Drill baby, drill" now represent serious policy planks. Unfortunately the other 49 states (or at least the ones outside of the Southern/Western cowboy hat region) don't give a damn about Texas, and "drill baby, drill" lost its luster after oil prices plummeted.<BR/><BR/>The GOP can't be a party just for trailer trash and Yahoo cowboys, which - though popular folk heros in the Southern/Western region - are laughed at by the rest of America. In this election, even rich people voted for Democrats, probably because McCain/Palin represented such a witless, embarrassing ticket. Although I don't like the Democrat's politics, I do like the fact that for once in my lifetime we're going to have leadership from the Northeastern part of the country where almost half of America's population lives instead of Southern/Western politicians trying to loot as much for the sunbelt as possible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-31013863725422770602008-12-25T21:12:00.000-08:002008-12-25T21:12:00.000-08:00"And Steve allows it all past his censor's baton."..."And Steve allows it all past his censor's baton."<BR/><BR/>Solution: Start your own website and don't post those comments that Steve Sailer would allow.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-72190738361503449332008-12-25T09:01:00.000-08:002008-12-25T09:01:00.000-08:00SKT: If the future of the Republican party is Sout...<B>SKT:</B> <I>If the future of the Republican party is Southern/Western white trash like Sarah Palin, then I'm leaving the party.</I><BR/><BR/>Don't let the door hit you in the @$$ on your way out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-26232147246554160292008-12-25T07:33:00.000-08:002008-12-25T07:33:00.000-08:00Blode,Steve, for reasons I'm not sure of, didn't p...Blode,<BR/><BR/>Steve, for reasons I'm not sure of, didn't post my lengthy initial response to your post, rendering my follow-up apology seem odd.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-38240751094747819902008-12-25T01:32:00.000-08:002008-12-25T01:32:00.000-08:00SKT, First of all, Sarah Palin, having spent all h...SKT, <BR/><BR/>First of all, Sarah Palin, having spent all her life in Idaho or Alaska, may be Western but isn't Southern.<BR/><BR/>Secondly, what's wrong with being "Southern/Western"?<BR/><BR/>Thirdly, why do you use the racist term "white trash"?<BR/><BR/>Your threat to "leave the party" must refer to the GOP, but what kind of Republican are you, exactly? Which prominent Republicans do you approve of?Polymathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12332963337386407840noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-52327347423650317222008-12-25T01:12:00.000-08:002008-12-25T01:12:00.000-08:00Blode,Well put. In 2004, the GSS queried responden...Blode,<BR/><BR/>Well put. In 2004, the GSS queried respondents on whether they felt genes or the environment was the major influencer of personality. Meta-analyses of the big five show the personality traits to be 50% heritable in aggregate. Technically, that puts heritability right on the cusp of being a major determinant. But since it is unlikely that any other single cause constitues the remaining 50% of determination, in a vernacular sense it does constitute a major part. In any case, granting 50% heritability, at worst an even split among respondents should be expected.<BR/><BR/>Yet only a quarter of respondents <A HREF="http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2008/12/gss-on-personality-formation-genes-or.html" REL="nofollow">answered with genes</A>, and they were on average less intelligent than those who said environment.Audacious Epigonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07495507254628580077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-62285266818891547092008-12-24T20:08:00.000-08:002008-12-24T20:08:00.000-08:00If the future of the Republican party is Southern/...<I>If the future of the Republican party is Southern/Western white trash like Sarah Palin, then I'm leaving the party.</I><BR/><BR/>To join forces with people who hate you?<BR/><BR/>Sounds like quite the cunning plan.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-57421720438578160462008-12-24T19:54:00.000-08:002008-12-24T19:54:00.000-08:00Appealing to low-IQ voters only workss well as a S...<I>Appealing to low-IQ voters only workss well as a SHORT-TERM strategy.<BR/><BR/>In the long term, we see the destruction of the Republican Part as smart voters are turned away by the new strategy. Once you lose a smart voter, it's a lot harder to get him back.</I><BR/><BR/>The fate of smart whites is tied to the future of stupid whites, and those who try to disconnect them do so for their own ethnopolitical reasons.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-22265284287262686452008-12-24T15:24:00.000-08:002008-12-24T15:24:00.000-08:00Well, I was going to say that you guys who think t...Well, I was going to say that you guys who think there is anything wrong with Sarah Palin's gray matter are just nuts - that you obviously haven't seen one of her sportscasts from back in the day [which I am sure she wrote by hand] and heard the subtlety of the sarcasm in her delivery.<BR/><BR/>But sadly, the leftists at KTUU have claimed copyright infringment, and their brothers-in-arms at Google were only to happy to yank the video off of Youtube:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bza63nnqiKA" REL="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bza63nnqiKA</A><BR/><BR/>So you will just have to trust me when I assure you that Sarah Palin is very, very bright.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-77135050151780770512008-12-24T13:30:00.000-08:002008-12-24T13:30:00.000-08:00"I count three of them on this thread, attacking J..."I count three of them on this thread, attacking Jews in a stupid manner on a thread not related to Jews."<BR/><BR/>I don't. I suppose if you counted the anti-Jewish comment(s) as sincere, and the pro-Jewish comment(s) as sarcastic, and the neutral comment(s) about Jews as negative, you could get to three, but no would do that.<BR/><BR/>NO ONE WOULD DO THAT, RIGHT?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-54737726502241315662008-12-24T10:47:00.000-08:002008-12-24T10:47:00.000-08:00If the future of the Republican party is Southern/...If the future of the Republican party is Southern/Western white trash like Sarah Palin, then I'm leaving the party.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-30868549192755393842008-12-24T10:25:00.000-08:002008-12-24T10:25:00.000-08:00testing99 saidNielsen ratings have been declining ...testing99 said<BR/><BR/><I>Nielsen ratings have been declining for decades, consider that in 1968's America with about 200 million Americans, the "Beverly Hillbillies" with a bunch of hicks making fun of the pretentious Beverly Hills rich folk, pulled in regularly 60 million viewers. Now, the top rated American Idol is lucky to pull in 25 million viewers, in a nation of 300 million plus.</I><BR/><BR/>In 1968, there were basically 3 channels. So every show got a far greater percentage of the viewing audience than most shows could get today. Today there are basically 300 channels (conservative estimate).<BR/><BR/>That's 300 equal possibilities of where a viewer could choose to spend his TV-watching time today, as opposed to 3 equal possibilities in '68. You do the math, but I believe your premises essentially are mistaken by a factor of 100.<BR/><BR/>(And it isn't like there's more variety now - just more channels. For cultural war purposes, the content presented remains rather uniform.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-39535098800182675572008-12-24T10:07:00.000-08:002008-12-24T10:07:00.000-08:00Anonymous saidWhat's with the Stormfront-type comm...Anonymous said<BR/><BR/><I>What's with the Stormfront-type comments[...]? I count three of them on this thread, attacking Jews in a stupid manner</I><BR/><BR/>It's called irony. Jews come in for their share of criticism here (and boy, they don't like it!) usually in the comments section - and some comments in this thread are referencing that well-known fact in a good-natured, tweaking way. What are you, anyway? The junior thought police, patrolling the net for any unflattering mention of Jews, regardless of its context? A rather obsessive, paranoid, holier-than-thou, totalitarian thing to do - in other words, perfectly Southern Baptist!<BR/><BR/>Merry Christmas and lighten up.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-53922225791210128612008-12-24T10:03:00.000-08:002008-12-24T10:03:00.000-08:00"A nine year-old girl in India named M. Lavinashre..."A nine year-old girl in India named M. Lavinashree has passed the Microsoft Certified Professional Exam"<BR/><BR/>I always knew this MS Certified rubbish was just another Micro$oft money-making scam. Basically avg-talented technicians can learn all that shit off by heart and make themselves feel better by having all these certificates hanging on the wall. Gates off course just laughs once more. I wonder who paid for her exam. Can't imagine Indians being stupid enough to fork out money for Micro$oft nonsense.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-54378222249035944512008-12-24T09:58:00.000-08:002008-12-24T09:58:00.000-08:00"I count three of them on this thread, attacking J..."I count three of them on this thread, attacking Jews in a stupid manner on a thread not related to Jews."<BR/><BR/>I wasn't me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-57577014842219651442008-12-24T08:10:00.001-08:002008-12-24T08:10:00.001-08:00Howard Stern broadcast a cruel segment right after...Howard Stern broadcast a cruel segment right after the election in which he played interviews with black voters in Harlem. Having ascertained that they were Obama supporters, the interviewer proceeded to attribute McCain's well-known positions to Obama and asked them if they agreed with those positions; i.e., he said things like, "Obama says America has to stay in Iraq until we win, however long it takes, how do you feel about that?" or, "Do you agree with the strong pro-life stance Obama has taken?" The respondents said, yes, they supported his position on those issues. The interviewer also asked the Obama supporters how they felt about Obama's choice of Sarah Palin as his VP, and ws she qualified? Respondents said it was a good choice and she was well qualified. Obviously, the point was to pick out only the stupidest respondents, but those people are out there.<BR/><BR/>It's on YouTube:<BR/>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyvqhdllXgU&feature=relatedAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-51366660252867446312008-12-24T08:10:00.000-08:002008-12-24T08:10:00.000-08:00Now we've got guys responding to a lame attempt at...Now we've got guys responding to a lame attempt at satire on philo-semitism as if the post were serious. Pathetic. The original poster even quotes himself in order to respond to himself. Weird. And Steve allows it all past his censor's baton.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com