Channel 4’s 'Race and Intelligence' feature – why 0.1% amounts to 101%
In the run up to the impending appearance of the ultra-right honourable Nick Griffin on BBC’s ‘Question Time’, Channel 4 is getting in on the act with their John the Baptist by way of featuring two professors who believe that Black people are less intelligent than their pigmentationally-challenged sisters and brothers.
Read the full article from The Guardian without leaving this page by clicking here Show
Alright, let’s assume that one race is genetically endowed with greater intelligence than another. Now before we get into this debate, let me close it at this plane so that we can move on to the next with – if the firing pin is inferior to the rest of the gun by being less in number, does that mean that it cannot add significant value to the rest of the implement, and without which, the said implement can never attain maximal value?
So should we care if one race possesses 99.9% of human intelligence? Should not our focus be on what we are losing without the contribution of s/he who possesses that 0.1%. The value of intelligence cannot be reduced to the IQ aggregate of one population, but to the value that a singular cornerstone of foreign origins can add to an entire structure.
So now that that is settled, let’s move on to determining the conditions that we’ll have to bring about to eke out that 0.1% shall we? But, in the course of this, let’s also not forget that the most significant solution to that might lie amongst those whom possess that 0.1%, or in the very act of appreciating the significance of this point and living our lives accordingly.
according2,
ed
Read the full article from The Guardian without leaving this page by clicking here Show
Alright, let’s assume that one race is genetically endowed with greater intelligence than another. Now before we get into this debate, let me close it at this plane so that we can move on to the next with – if the firing pin is inferior to the rest of the gun by being less in number, does that mean that it cannot add significant value to the rest of the implement, and without which, the said implement can never attain maximal value?
So should we care if one race possesses 99.9% of human intelligence? Should not our focus be on what we are losing without the contribution of s/he who possesses that 0.1%. The value of intelligence cannot be reduced to the IQ aggregate of one population, but to the value that a singular cornerstone of foreign origins can add to an entire structure.
So now that that is settled, let’s move on to determining the conditions that we’ll have to bring about to eke out that 0.1% shall we? But, in the course of this, let’s also not forget that the most significant solution to that might lie amongst those whom possess that 0.1%, or in the very act of appreciating the significance of this point and living our lives accordingly.
according2,
ed
Comments
Post a Comment
The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.
Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.