would CEA have also attempted to suppress that?
Ironically the forum mods did not permit this comment to be visible for 4 (four) days until 28th Nov when the conversation had died down.
would CEA have also attempted to suppress that?
Ironically the forum mods did not permit this comment to be visible for 4 (four) days until 28th Nov when the conversation had died down.
Someone should make a prediction market on how true the core claim (that FLI offered a grant to a pro-nazi publication) will turn out to be.
Thank you for this very sensitive post Habiba.
This issue has clearly caused a lot of division in the community which is sad. I think the differences between the two sides do not have to be as great as they appear.
You mention Adam Rutherford as a good source, and I agree he has done some good work. I think it’s interesting to note that he probably actually agrees with Bostrom on many things here! Here is a quote from Adam’s book (p166);
When it comes to looking at IQ scores around the world and between different populations, the picture is far from clear, but there are some undeniable differences. The most up-to-date meta-analysis suggest that countries in sub-Saharan Africa are likely to score in the eighties,* as compared to US IQ standards, though these results are not universally accepted. This, obviously, is significantly lower. Interpreting these results is not easy at all, and while it is not possible to fully exclude genertic factors, these seem unlikely owing to the immense genetic diversity that is now well established across that continent.
Thanks for your reply. :)
For what it’s worth, if people want to see what Adam Rutherford himself thinks of this, he has been fairly forthright in his response on his twitter see:
Yes, he’s been very forthright in his opinion of Bostrom! But on the broader issue he has not been straightforward on Twitter, but rather has been intentionally vague (as many would in his position).
As far as I can see, there are three main issues:
Are their racial IQ differences?
Bostrom and Rutherford agree yes.
Are these differences caused by genes?
Bostrom thinks maybe yes, Rutherford thinks probably no (though it can’t be fully ruled out).
Whether and how it is appropriate or harmful to discuss the topic.
Clear disagreement between Nick and Adam.
They disagree about 3), and this is what Nick’s most sophisticated critics criticize him for, like you in this post.
But I think most readers don’t realize they agree on 1). If you look at the headlines, there are a bunch saying ‘racist Oxford professor thinks Blacks are less intelligent than whites/asians’. For the majority of normal people, 1) is very suprising. Rutherford is strategic in not revealing that he also aligns with 1), thus utilizing emotive language to critique Nick instead of clearly articulating what they disagree and agree with.
Rutherford says he is distributing a copy of his book to Bostrom. As far as I can see, the logical conclusion for Nick (if he reads it) is to update to increase his credence that 1) is true. After all, if even an anti-racist biologist ally thinks there are racial IQ gaps, that seems like strong evidence it is true.
The document literally says:
SHARE THIS LIST with your friends
Being able to see the document is useful to people because it proves that the perpetrator was not actually an EA.
This seems like a very bad policy. The risks posed by people with dangerous personality traits has been an EA topic for a while. And we have just had the biggest crisis in the history of EA and it seems one of the contributing factors was people not sharing red flags about the person involved’s personality. If someone had shared concerns that Sam exhibited dangerous personality disorders a month ago, would CEA have also attempted to suppress that?