This book, along with Steven Pinker's book The Blank Slate, has grey-pilled me

Care to elaborate with some arguments on this books claims?

These statements contradict already existing facts and conclusions concerning race studies.

How the fuck can the difference be so big? Your place in society (inherited form your parent's position in society) influences your development significantly more than the global "surrounding" culture. There are too many differences between social classes for culture (from which you experience only parts due to your social background) to be of such influence.

1) preference of what?
2) tell that to the huge difference in chances of a succesful life between divorced and not-divorced parents.

It's not only the personality that counts, it's the chances of producing helathy offspring that counts according to the laws of nature

Wrong. Even if given the same opportunities as Whites/Asians the average nigger is still dumber.
IQ is mainly genetics, how it is developed more depends on the access of quality education (so not fucking culture).

Pics related, some info about IQ after a quick search on my new harddrive.

All of those arrest, crime, suicide and failure in life statistic must be wrong, right? This author's conjecture clearly states the reality.

See, gorillas are worse off than blacks in the same area and STILL have a higher IQ.

Personality is pretty meaningless when compared to beliefs and behaviours.

Two Buddhists monks can have very different personalities: one gets angry easily and yells at authority figures, the other is a pushover and subs in the sack.
But both these people spend their time doing the exact same behaviours: meditating silently and unmovingly, never talking, walking in circles - in an attempt to become enlightened.

They are completely different people, but their CULTURE and SOCIETY has shaped them to be who they are outwardly.

It doesn't really matter if you're smart or dumb, or mean or kind. If you are raised in Nazi Germany you are going to heil Hitler and march for victory; if you are raised under Islam you will praise Alah and throw acid in women's faces (or whatever).

how can you parse out the effects of genetics and the effects of culture out in those statistics, though? You can't imply cause and effect with those things because there are too many variables.

I know this is bait.

but

Even if intelligence between the races could theoretically be equal contingent upon the culture. Niggers are fucking ugly, and I don't want the near me…

We don't have nannies anymore though, we have uninterested schoolteachers.

Nice ID

For how much we care about minuscule species being saved we don't care about European diversity. That alone besides the mountains of other reasons is an argument.

Tell me more about how government sponsored propoganda tries to re a firm what government says

Maybe in it's initial creation.
But once Meme Cultures (eg. religions, empires, Capitalism) have spawned, they are like software that runs on top of the human operation system.
ie. Smart humans make shit religions spread faster.

I know how much you niggers love twin studies, a lot of their arguments are made from looking at twin and adoption studies.

Beauty is a personal (although most White people agree that niggers are indeed ugly).

But also niggers have a MUCH higher chance of carrying STD's and have generally be proven to be unreliable for fatherhood except those from the higher classes (= strong minority).
Stereotypes from fatherless niggers come from somewhere.

Also they are genetically not adapted to a life on the Northern hemisphere, they are less healthy here because they are built for life in the jungle or desert.

He's correct on that. Children belong to the mother's family in most hunter-gatherer societies, men often don't even know who their children are.

The biodeterminist argument is that those outcome differences come from the parents' shitty genes, which are also what caused the homosexuality/divorce. This is partially true (there's no "gay gene", but there probably is a gay germ, and pathogen resistance is affected by genes like everything else). However, over the long term it doesn't actually matter whether the kids turn out shit because the genes are shit or because the lifestyle is shit. If you favor that lifestyle with policy, you alter the selective environment to favor those genes. This is what the biodeterminists typically don't get when arguing policy. Yes, that single mother's kids probably would have turned out shit even if she had married one of the fathers. The difference is that if we weren't subsidizing single mothers they'd have fewer kids.

Oh it's the "culture, not race" argument. Welcome to Holla Forums, Sarcuck, there's the door.
Why, tell me, have only the Caucasian and East Asian people managed to build and maintain a civilization? Are we just lucky that we have such a great culture?

some twin studies had one twin be straight and another become gay. So you are correct, it's not really genetic. Pinker attributes it to some chance event, probably during brain development.

Intelligence would allow you to resist or reject ideas like that. Again shaping culture like sheltering these ideas from your kid which shapes their environment.

It's both. Even this book states that.
A White who was raised by a single mother is likely to have a high IQ, regardless of his culture, but the life-opening oportunities he would have are gone. Also, he will not have a role model to tell him how to dress well, eat well, be healthy, etc. Also, his childhood is prone to lacks and bad experiences due to absent of directions.

Similarly, a Nigger from a wealthy nuclear-family is likely to have a lower IQ than the White guy, but he will study in prestigious places, and will have doors opened in his life. His family will also provide him with financial and social support. He likely would have a happy and carefree childhood as well.

Is Mental Gymnastics going to be in the next olympic games? Because leftists would completly dominate it.

I just want to take the chance in this shill thread to dump a thought on races i habe had. What if in the future it comes to light the differences in races extends beyond hair eye color bone structure intelligence brain size and athletic ability. What if also it turns out we experience emotions diffrently? What if we don't even have the same emotions? Certain animals cannot have fun or feel love. Is it possible niggers cannot love or feel joy the way we do? Could this explain why they only try and fuck and chimp out all the time?

Intelligence would allow you to resist or reject ideas like that. Again shaping culture like sheltering these ideas from your kid which shapes their environment.

Reminds me of a museum in Norway stating that resistance to cold (like playing in a pool/lake in Arctic in sub-zero temperatures) is determined by culture according to those fucking morons.
Will not post pic since I'm too lazy to strip its exif-data. If the thread stil exists tomorrow I might upload it.

being violent is a personality trait that is heritable. they probably have a lot of genes that make them more pre-disposed to violent behavior. Not to mention nigs have naturally more testosterone.

shiggy diggy doo, an idiot is you

It seems the powers that be are he'll bent on fabricating that the reason for what everyone knows is anything but the obvious answer that way that can avoid the obvious truth. That race is real

Point I was trying to make was that in a hunter-gatherer society the family would have taken care of the child along with the mother, not the mother alone.

The book contradicts itself, you massive autist.

what? those two statements mean the same thing? am I missing something?

Pinker is right on that. He's not stupid, just evil (he's fine with genetic explanations for the Jew-goy IQ gap but not the black-white IQ gap), and he's got no reason to lie that homosexuality is genetic, though he of course uses neutral phrasing like "chance event". Greg Cochran argues pretty convincingly that some kind of infection is the only thing that makes sense.
westhunt.wordpress.com/category/homosexuality/

This happens with single mothers today, too. Grandmothers do a lot of the childcare work in American black communities.

yeah I noticed that, too. I watched his hour long talk today about IQ differences in Jews, but his book made a clear decision to avoid talking about race. That bummed me out a bit.

UH OH LOOKS LIKE OP IS FAGGOT

erectuswalksamongst.us/Chap9.html

erectuswalksamongst.us/Chap10.html

erectuswalksamongst.us/Chap14.html

erectuswalksamongst.us/Chap12.html

Yeah so it's dependent on the situation, widespread single motherhood because "it has no effect" would not be a good thing.

This book is wrong. Humans are programmable and our parents provide adaptive or maladaptive programming or the lack of constructive or destructive programming.

Faggotry can be genetics and also persuation from the environment imo.

I know a fag that has been a fag all his life and doesn't parade with it since it's normal for him.
Yet his (bourgeois) environment still does not accept him.

This (isolated case) could prove that it is indeed genetics rather than culture/environment

I played with my sister's puppets for half of my childhood and still get along better with women than men, yet I am not a fag (and don't fucking feel like one) since I have always used darwinism as my moral compass. My parents had accepted that I would turn out to be gay even before I realized what my dick could be used for.

This (isolated case) can prove that personal views/convictions/logic can triumpf over genetics (that during my childhood pointed towards me becoming a fag).

Now, a straight 40y/old male going to prison for 10 years and coming out gay afterwards prove in my eyes that surroundings CAN also determine someone's sexual preference, just due to adaptations.

This last point is why it's so fucking dangerous for fags and trannies getting praised/celebrated.
This can kill birthrates even more.

REPORT + HIDE + SAGE
REPORT + HIDE + SAGE
REPORT + HIDE + SAGE
REPORT + HIDE + SAGE
REPORT + HIDE + SAGE

hey op

did your parents divorce or were you raised by a single mom?

If not, did you have any close friends who were?

You obviously dont have the slightest knowledge of buddhism. Pretty sad tbh fam.

anecdotal evidence is useless. the data proves that divorce and single mothers has no effect on personality or life outcome.

It doesn't prove anything of the sort. It proves that homosexuality cannot be completely eliminated through social pressure, but no one believes that. The situation you describe is completely compatible with homosexuality being caused by a pathogen.

It absolutely does

PS: no dad detected

Never looked at it that way, thanks for this small dose of enlightenment.
Here are some tits

So how was it determined what the child's personality would have been with both parents or just one? How do you have a control group when there is only one person being studied? How can you say that there's no difference between a child's personality under one set of conditions and the same child's personality under a different set of conditions without testing both? How do you explain all the stats that show children of single mothers being worse off in almost all quantifiable "life outcomes"?

Hey Holla Forums I was red pilled as fugg, but then I came across a couple books that opened my eyes to EVERYTHING.

Yeah, we've been dealing with this bullshit tactic for a long time.

well how can you show their outcome ISN'T the result of shit genes? The same shit genes that makes a woman a poor judge of character and impulsive in terms of sex and the same genes that make a man apathetic towards other people?

You can show this by taking a set of twins and having one reared by a couple and one reared by a single parent. Then you compare them to other twin studies and determine if the variability between the two twins in terms of outcome is the same or different between the variability in the other studies. These other studies are the control for the experiment. It turns out the variability of their outcomes is the same as the control, meaning that parental upbringing had no effect on how they turned out, and other factors are to blame.

GTFO

So if I adopt a dolphin its genetics has only 50% bearing on its potential. So if I send the dolphin to a good school he will be able to do arithmetic, play the trumpet and draw.

Look at Africa. Now look at Detroit, Chicago, etc.
In the U.S the same Black race is under a totally different culture (free education, food stamps, housing projects)–but after 10 years the black areas always end up looking like Africa.

Culture and IQ *both* effect each other and its an exponential feed back loop.
An increase in IQ (due to mutations, evolutionary pressures: like cold winters etc) will elevate culture–the elevated culture will further increase the IQ potential of the next generations and so on (eg a culture of traditional values–stable families where intelligence is selected for in marriage/testing/rewarding etc)

You know jack-shit about human development or history outside of Africa. You're also retarded if you think that we don't need civilization. I encourage you to abandon it forthwith.

Fuck, I bumped it.

Bullshit. There was no single motherhood in hunter gatherer society, the tribe raised the children together. Even Africans know that you are full of shit judging by this African proverb "if we fail to initiate the young men into the tribe they will return to burn the village down". Do you think this proverb came out of a culture that thinks it is a good idea that the men are uninvolved with the day to day affairs of the tribe?

Try harder nigger.

Spanking causes worse behavior, outcomes, studies show

upi.com/Health_News/2016/04/26/Spanking-causes-worse-behavior-outcomes-studies-show/9311461692362/

WASHINGTON, April 26 (UPI) – Although it remains a common method of discipline, a review of 50 years of research shows spanking has overall detrimental effects on children later in life.

Researchers at the University of Texas at Austin and and the University of Michigan reviewed the literature and found the more children were spanked, the more likely they were to not listen to their parents, to act in anti-social ways, to be aggressive and have other mental health problems.

>it is 100% true whether you like it or not. The system you describe was pretty much how life was like when we were a hunter/gatherer society.

You're full of shit because when we were a hunter/gatherer society the women raised the boys for example until they were old enough to follow and learn from adult men. Mothers and Fathers had different roles to play but what you describe as single motherhood never happened back in those days.

>in most hunter-gatherer societies, men often don't even know who their children are.

That's marxist bullshit.

Next time, actually read the book you are quoting before you post.

Cochran didn't like Ron Unz's rebuttal to his theory so he banned him from commenting on his website. Greg Cochran is another big headed thin skinned scientist who cherishes his pet theories.

implying the parents/family aren't a big part of a child's surrounding culture

>While the differences in IQ within a race can be attributable to genetics, the differences between races is largely due to cultural differences

Wouldn't that be 50% genetics and 50% cultural differences according to your own source?

how can we know that the spanking caused their failure and not their genes?

be more mad, please.

cognitive dissonance in the first fucking post

too easy OP, try harder next time

Stop with the lies op
We all know enough to know everything you said is bullshit
Kill yourself
With hammers

if we plant some corn in the same place, the variability we see with their heights, we can say, is due to their genetics because their environment is constant. But if we plant some of the same corn in Alabama, and some in Detroit, we can't say the variability we see in their heights is due to their genes because their environment has now changed.

I'll grant you Africans in America probably have some shit genes that lead to poorer performance, but they also have a terrible culture around them that is wholly separated from their genetics. I think Holla Forums just has too much of tendency to say genes cause 100% of Black Plight in America.

Genetics determines the extent to which you can benefit from your surrounding environment and culture.

This is a pretty good video.

This is fucking retarded dude.

The better conclusion you can come up with using these books is that inheritance and genetics plays a bigger role in behaviors and tendencies outside of intelligence. Race and IQ is still real and the weight of the arguments for this is exacerbated by the new research on behavioral genetics.

You are fucking dumb and it makes no sense why would be so aggressive in your OP when most people here have an understanding of behavioral genetics. Traditional homes/families are good for fertility if nothing else. Your scientific justification of muh single motherhood doesn't mean shit.

user….

To be fair, the South- and Centroamerican civilizations also achieved some amazing things. For example, only during 19th century did Europe achieve the efficiency of agriculture the Inka had.

I actually read the Blank Slate and it does say nothing of that sort. It's not that you're wrong - it's that you are simply lying.

Right and their societies were entirely primative, when father's started taking a more active role in child rearing and the creation of the family unit occurred real advancements were seen. So if your goal is to go back to hunter/gatherer style societies where men are in much more fierce competition for mates then sure single motherhood sounds OK. Faggot

ISHYGDDT

not saying I want to go back to that. Just saying Stefan gets way too big of a hard-on when he thinks that parental practices have a big impact on the outcomes of kids. They don't. He just likes to tell people what to do.

...

No, it's not. I think you may be misunderstanding, I wasn't saying that was a good thing. There's a reason that model is common among hunter-gatherers but unheard of among civilized societies.

The adult men they learn from are their uncles, not their fathers (yes, that makes a difference).

it makes 0-10% of a difference, actually. so not much.

If you go back and read the conversation you'll see that I'm not talking about the difference it makes within a single lifespan, I'm talking about evolutionary incentives. The more related to you the kid is, the more incentive you have to invest in him instead of spending that effort and resources on fucking more women.

well let's flip the question and wait for your answer:

how can we know that their genes caused their failure(s) and not the spanking?

There's no comparison possible so we'll never know for sure. So why even try to attribute a % for nature/nurture? It seems like intellectual masturbation to me.

And you don't seem to be aware that there's something called epigenetics, which is how the environment switches on/off certain genes in individuals.

It's more complicated than you think.

And I still think you never read any of those books and you're just trolling.

And for the sake of the debate let's forget spanking and let's talk about sexual abuse instead. You father is a pedo and he sexually abuses you for a while when you're a kid.

Do you think that's going to influence your life only between 0 and 10% because it's the parents and it's not genetic and it's not peer groups and surrounding culture?

probably my last post in this thread:

You sound like a nerd who feels like he needs to have the perfect precise explanation before he can act and make a good decision.

It doesn't matter what the causes of black criminality are, it's an observable phenomenon, it's undeniable. And even if it's somehow entirely because of their environment, that doesn't change the fact that we should be prudent and protect ourselves against black criminality. That means mandatory or voluntary racial integration is a risk that rational white people shouldn't be taking.

i think the most prudent thing to do is to stop black criminality, which means figuring out why it's happening.

or race war, w.e.

The Nurture Assumption points out that normal parenting has no effect on a child. If there is actual abuse in the family, the child is impacted by it. But any abuse aside, the parenting style of parents leads to no appreciable change in a kids behavior when they grow up.

It's not masturbation, you can calculate the percentages easily with twin studies. Lastly, I don't see how you can accuse me of trolling if you don't know for yourself what the books say. I provided a link to one of them in my OP and I can buy the other one for you on Audible if you want.

...

Idk, maybe the guy who helped discover the DNA double helix structure?

independent.co.uk/news/science/fury-at-dna-pioneers-theory-africans-are-less-intelligent-than-westerners-394898.html

Wikipedia says she has ankylosing spondylitis

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/266593

Every single time

...

what the fuck mods, this is blatant leftist shilling. Remove this and ban op already.

OP and his fallacious book BTFO

What I find revealing is how you can uncritically accept the author's conclusion about parenting not having any effect on children and also uncritically accept her conclusion about racial differences in IQ:

While the differences in IQ within a race can be attributable to genetics, the differences between races is largely due to cultural differences

That sure sounds like Lewontin's fallacy.

Coming up with a theory and then trying to prove it by selecting the right studies isn't something new.

Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study is a pretty compelling case for race-IQ connection. It certainly suggests that blacks have a heritable lower IQ and no amount of parenting or white schooling can fix that.

The only critiques I would give to it (and they aren't very strong) would be the following:
1. Sample size seems a bit low, it looks like only 21 black/black adoptees were included. I haven't come across any studies that are very similar, so if you have them I would appreciate reading them.
2. This study takes into account multiple important factors that determine IQ: race, income, and parents. You might also include 'white culture' as one of those factors (since the black/black adoptees were probably subjected to it) but I wouldn't make that assumption so quickly. Does the study point out what kind of kids the black/black group tended to associate with? According to the two books in the OP, they suggest that peer groups have a big influence, and it would be interesting to know if the black/black group felt more compelled to associate with degenerates instead of normal white kids. If that was the case, the black/black group would be less inclined to do well in school and instead, hang out with the degenerates.

I am fully aware that IQ becomes more heritable as a child ages into an adult. The black/black group got pretty dumb by the end. I think a good common ground conclusion might be: blacks have a lower IQ on average (although I wouldn't pin it an entire standard deviation away) but their shitty culture pushes it down even more. Is there a feedback loop that features their lower IQ generating a worse culture? Maybe, I would love to see a study done about that.

Those are my two cents on Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. I honestly want to believe nigs are dumber but I think it's an interesting exercise to try to disprove it. Usually holds up pretty well though.

U fuking wot m8

this is completely true
for the 99.8% of chidren raised by parents who didn't know or couldn't educate themselves their children to awaken them to rational thinking and to the joys of the rewards from deferred gratification

for the remaining 0.2%, upbringing marks the main part of their success as members of the elite, but the (((author))) prefered not to disclose this fact to mundane readers

phucque, I meant to sage
sorreee, pic unrelated

Isn't Steven Pinker on "PC suicide watch" now?
Last time I checked he discontinued researching evolutionary psychology, and stop teaching about the psychological differences between the sexes at universities.

In fact if I remember correctly, when I read The Blank Slate he dedicated several pages praising feminists in what struggles they've overcome and how he doesn't mean offense by citing results, nor does he mean wrong.

Go figure, Pinker is a coward to the pc age.

I think he doesn't like Kevin MacDonald, for obvious reasons.