Yep. You saw the headline. I'm not going to waste a lot of space on some racist idiot who thinks he can judge who's smart and who's not based on his own racism and his ego and arrogance that led him to the "unravelling of DNA." This nut job says that Africans are less intelligent than Westerners. Now think about it. If Watson -- who's "Western" -- found that Westerners were less intelligent, would he report it? Hell no. Not at all. Because it would mean he's less intelligent.
He's not intellectually honest enough to place himself in that position. And while I'm at it, if you follow his belief, you're dumber than he is, and need a lobotomy!
He's such a confused 79-year old twit that he would judge the intellect of a person based on perceived skin color. What a stupid. Part of me wants to go on and on, but the other part wants to stop, knowing that this guy's just plain out of his mind.
Why?
Well, you, him, or I am not capable of judging how smart someone is. Suppose that person knows only French? Does that mean he or she is not smart because they don't know English? That's nuts. Totally stupid. But that's what I've come to expect from James Watson -- acts that pander to racists, because he's a racist.
"Now think about it. If Watson -- who's "Western" -- found that Westerners were less intelligent, would he report it? Hell no. Not at all. Because it would mean he's less intelligent".
ReplyDeleteWell, I gotta agree with your statement. Studies have shown that Orientals have higher IQs/intelligence scores than Whites. Another study showed Blacks from northern USA scored higher IQ points than Whites from southern USA. Here in Britain, in exams, Indian and Chinese students regularly out perform White students. So, I guess your comments are kinda right.
But, the biggest problem Dr James Watson faces, and he should know this, is that there is no genetic basis for 'race'. Race is a social construction, having no genetic/biological basis. Rather, race is a fiction, a fantasy. But, I guess 'race' as a reality suits fantasists. Dr James Watson is a relic from a bygone age.
Let me critique your argument. As a disclaimer, and from the outset, I would like to say that I am a minority, and I am not racist. I do believe racism is a social construction, and the previous comment very much emphasizes that we can't have a basis for judging a "race's" intelligence.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, assuming you're trying to prove Watson wrong, I believe these are a few things you need to work on with your argument...
Now think about it. If Watson -- who's "Western" -- found that Westerners were less intelligent, would he report it? Hell no. Not at all. Because it would mean he's less intelligent.
This is an ad hominem attack on Watson, and you cannot refute his argument simply by attacking his person, personality, character, beliefs, or background.
He's not intellectually honest enough to place himself in that position.
This is a similar ad hominem attack, which does not help your argument similarly.
And while I'm at it, if you follow his belief, you're dumber than he is, and need a lobotomy!
This is not true. Not only is this argument unsound, but it is also invalid and based on an unreasonable assumption (i.e. if you follow his belief, then you are dumb). In other words, "following one's belief" does not imply one being dumb. And wouldn't getting a lobotomy only make someone dumber?
He's such a confused 79-year old twit that he would judge the intellect of a person based on perceived skin color. What a stupid. Part of me wants to go on and on, but the other part wants to stop, knowing that this guy's just plain out of his mind.
This guy founded the double-helical structure of DNA. There's gotta be some rationality in him. Also, just because he's old doesn't mean he's stupid or a twit.
And he's not judging anyone. His argument states, "there's no reason for geographically separated individuals to evolve differently."
Well, you, him, or I am not capable of judging how smart someone is. Suppose that person knows only French? Does that mean he or she is not smart because they don't know English? That's nuts. Totally stupid. But that's what I've come to expect from James Watson -- acts that pander to racists, because he's a racist.
I agree. We cannot say who is smarter than whom. Watson's argument only states that geographically separated individuals might evolve differently. I understand how this has very controversial, racial implications; however, if you consider evolutionary theory, then you will see that his statements follow somewhat logically and reasonably.
----
In conclusion, don't follow the media hype about this well-known and established figure being racist because he is NOT racist. I can't say for certain, but I can offer you this...
The media only stands to gain from portraying this man as a racist. It will get more ratings, views, comments, etc. In the end, it will make more money for the author, etc. Although this might not be sufficient to refute any claims against Watson, we can easily understand the self-interested motivations behind portraying Watson as a racist.
As a rule, I commonly reject annoymous comments, preferring to have someone take the time to identify themselves. After this, I'll limit responses to those registered.
ReplyDeleteWhat's interesting about the comments I got that were rejected is that none of Watson's proponents bothered to define the meaning of intellect or what it means to be intelligent.
That's the funny part. And really, it's not so funny. Because when one starts to dig into what the definition is and have that person give it, you'll find their responses to be very self-serving.
That dynamic proves my initial point.
Check out my blog for my thoughts on Dr. Watson and North American racism.
ReplyDelete