Civilians targetted in bombing raid - unbelievable casualties, 220,000 men, women and children dead.

Kottke links to a New York Times piece that suggests that people adopted by higher income families will end up with a higher IQ.

If IQ indicates intelligence, as the name suggests, then this is interesting as part of the nature vs nurture debate.

On the other hand, if IQ tests are fundamentally flawed and merely represent education, then all this result says is that rich people tend to get a better education.

What is more likely? That IQ tests are accurate but that the real world is messed up or that, according to Occams Razor, nature is governed by simple laws but there is a flaw in the measurement?

One of the things that is absolutely obvious about an IQ test, is that it doesn’t really test intelligence because it asks all sorts of questions that require such things as a large vocabulary in the language of the test.

So how could this be? Clearly there are all sorts of aspects of IQ tests that test pure logic etc., these seem fairly objective tests.

The problem is that if the tests included are solely logic tests, then they would be perceived to have a scientific bias. To suggest that only scientific ability is a measure of intelligence, would have half of acedemia in uproar, so IQ tests put in things to test areas represented by other disciplines such as languages and the arts.

IQ tests try to balance different academic skills as a political compromise rather than a comprehensive measure.

To measure skills in qualitative disciplines, such as the arts, by quantitative measures is like saying that a painter and decorator is better than Vermeer because he can cover a larger area, more quickly.

The point is that a comprehensive IQ test is nowhere near there yet, and people wouldn’t be happy with a SQ or Science Quotient.

So, in the mean time, you have people getting all embarassed because ethnic minorities sometimes get lower scores in IQ tests. Instead of saying ‘OF COURSE THEY FUCKING WELL DO’ because 1. ethnic minorities often did not have the same rights as the majority and as a result are poorer on average, 2. poorer people tend to get a worse education and have to start work earlier in life.

Perhaps people who really believe in IQ tests, like the subset of people that on getting a high score, decide to join the club of mental mediocrity - MENSA, probably aren’t particularly intelligent.

The part of an IQ test that tests logic and spacial awareness is a pretty good test for an aeronautical engineer, but IQ tests do not measure IQ. QED.

“Is Iraq in civil war?…I have no more idea what is going on in Iraq from here in Baghdad, than from back in London”

Sobering, must see, Channel 4 documentary about what’s really going on in Iraq. One of the conclusions is that much of the only reporting outside the green zone is coming from bloggers:

Would you help an alcoholic by giving him $100 to buy liquor?

The US is adicted to oil, according to the president. The proposed solution… to subsidize gas.

CNN.com - Senators to push for $100 gas rebate checks - Apr 27, 2006

The Republican religious base is crawling out of its primordial slime to promote its main priorities for the mid-term elections: banning some people from using a particular word to describe their relationship when it is closer to their own ideal of a monogamous family unit and making it illegal to destroy graven idols representing a line on a map.
These are important issues after all, when the alternatives are global unrest dues to energy crises and the death of the planet due to environmental catastrophe.

The fascinating thing about the social conservative disease is that it requires a view of the world which is not based upon traditional morals or any concept of progress. To demonstrate this, let’s use the example for gay rights.

Most social conservatives, who aren’t criminals, probably agree that someone like Elton John should not be dragged into the street and pelted to a bloody death with rocks, (despite the release of ‘I’m Still Standing’). Most of these people also agree that he shouldn’t be put in jail because of his sexual preference. Yet most of these people would argue that Sir Elton shouldn’t have been able to marry his partner. The argument is ‘things have just gone too far’. This is not a political belief so much as an uncourageous disposition - cowardice in the face of progress.

The problem of social conservatism is the ‘reverse induction’ argument. I.E. the same group of people 50 years ago would have thought that outright murder of gays was probably wrong and that marriage was so inconceivable as to be not worth bothering about, but a good idea was making sure that being openly gay could get you locked up in the one place where you would definitely get laid by another guy.

In short, social conservatives are not defending traditional values (if they are they are breaking the law) or looking to a brighter future, but are an insignificant artifact representing the fleeting transience of the here and now.

CNN.com - GOP hones its core agenda - Apr 15, 2006

Victor, Parisian student, protesting the job contract that could have been in France:

“It means that when I do get a job I will basically have to work as hard as I can to keep it.”

Now that the French government has capitulated, I guess he won’t have to work hard any more.

Lets get this in perspective, this was a law that suggested, after compromise, that you could be fired within your first year on your first job, providing there was a reason. - That’s all.

This is not 19th century style worker exploitation, but stopping the contract will lead to it, because in a globalised economy the fact is that French jobs will now go somewhere where there is genuine exploitation. It was an attempt to help poor people get a start.

And think how ridiculous this all sounds if you use being in a band as an analogy as my friend Buck and I were discussing:

Imagine you start a band with some friends - an entrepreneurial activity that is not normally labelled ‘capitalist’. You take on a young bass player who seems to be ok, but its his first time in a band and it turns out that he can’t actually play anything other than what he did at audition and doesn’t want to learn how to. At your next gig people boo you off stage.

Now imagine that its illegal for you to get a replacement bassist without giving the previous guy his share of the money you get from gigs that he’s not playing at, for up to a year and a half.

Knowing this in advance, would you be more or less likely to hire a young inexperienced bass player and give him a chance?

French labour law row: Students’ reaction:

Lubos Motl (a must read blogger) points out that climate change, is the new religion.

First things first - climate change is very real and very worrying, if you look at the empirical data and spread of opinion amongst people studying it. It appears to be more truth than fiction - an idea bolstered by the amusing fact that the poster child (the inadmirable Crichton) of the ‘its fiction’ camp, is indeed noted for his science fiction. The problem is not that the truth is winning, its that its winning too easily and data is being amplified and distorted as it moves into the mainstream culture, and this does not help in the long term.

What are the reasons for this?

1. Darwinism, is being distorted and muted by the negative feedback loop of people who want religious certainty and human primacy instead of evolutionary gradualism and primate-acy. Climate change is experiencing the opposite effect, it is a viral meme that happens to be true. The idea feeds off the delusional end times hysteria that tin-foil hat Christian fundamentalists have injected into millennium time, post 911, American mainstream culture and foreign policy.

2. Even for Darwininsts and people with too much body hair, our ape-like ancestry may seem remote. But the weather - well its everywhere and it affects everyone. If you have nothing else to talk about with someone, at least you can have a conversation about the weather.

3. DIMBY - Definitely In My Back Yard. A people centric, view of the world is natural. Since the weather is everywhere, it affects everyone and people care about what happens in their back yard - like the giant mud slide that just removed their back yard.

4. Human beings don’t live very long and so natural weather fluctuations that do not show any long term trend - every single Gaian twitch from earthquakes to April showers will have people subconsciously blaming climate change.

That the truth is winning under false pretences, may not be a problem - that’s pretty much how democracy works even at its best - but there is a danger that if falsehoods are exposed they could disillusion people and create a dangerous setback for the need to really do something drastic about climate change.

After all - you can only have so much doom - its no fun, and people may start partying again instead of fixing things.

Luboš Motl’s reference frame: Climate apocalypse is the new religion

Boing Boing quotes Alan Moore (Creator of V for Vendetta) as saying that the real polar opposites in politics are not right or left but fascist vs. anarchist - i.e. how much government you have.

This clearly does make the political scale less abstract, but the problem is that Anarchy is by definition not really a political stance but an apolitical one.

As another web bubble brews, there was a definite Libertarian smell in the atmosphere at South by Southwest.

By any logical definition of anarchy, Libertarianism is just an erm ‘politically correct’ term for anarchy.

On the right Libertarianism is pretty simple - its about gun nuts. But it seems that on the left, Libertarianism is often the choice of former liberals who have made lots of money and choose a cause which allows them to support rights which don’t cost them anything.

For ‘Liberaltarians’, supporting the right to smoke pot doesn’t cost you anything, but causes such as health or education mean you have to pay taxes for hospitals or schools.

Isn’t putting your money where your mouth is, a no bullshit attitude that has much more of the swagger that Libertarians think their apolitics demonstrates?

Next time soemone says they are Libertarian, ask them what their politics are.

Posted in politics | Comments Off