Murray is sort of giving the game away here, no? He doesn’t (openly)
think that people are inherently worse if their IQ is low, but he does
think that they should be deprived of opportunities to develop and
shunted into the lowest rung on the economic ladder if they’re part of a
group whose IQ he thinks is low. The only way to reconcile these ideas
is to argue that humans don’t deserve any fundamental dignity, that
morality can’t and shouldn’t be rewarded, and that the existence of a
hierarchy is more important than the morality or amorality of that
hierarchy.
> The only way to reconcile these ideas is to argue that humans don't deserve any fundamental dignity, that morality can't and shouldn't be rewarded, and that the existence of a hierarchy is more important than the morality or amorality of that hierarchy.
now you might think that was literally the point
> but he does think that they should be deprived of opportunities to develop and shunted into the lowest rung on the economic ladder if they're part of a group whose IQ he thinks is low.
Hmm are you talking about what he advocates in general or in this thread somewhere?
I critiqued a piece he wrote on (I think) college admission in America. Probably for TakiMag. He took great offence.
I am no feminist, but he is simply objectionable about women. He is either doing shtick to build a writing career or genuinely obnoxious.
I don’t think it is decisive, it prob is more like this:
When attacking ‘IQ is real and we shouldn’t ignore IQ when making policy decisions’
When defending ‘IQ isn’t linked to your moral worth’
If only there was a term for this switcharoo.
‘Moral worth is heritable’ Yiiiikes.
Murray is sort of giving the game away here, no? He doesn’t (openly) think that people are inherently worse if their IQ is low, but he does think that they should be deprived of opportunities to develop and shunted into the lowest rung on the economic ladder if they’re part of a group whose IQ he thinks is low. The only way to reconcile these ideas is to argue that humans don’t deserve any fundamental dignity, that morality can’t and shouldn’t be rewarded, and that the existence of a hierarchy is more important than the morality or amorality of that hierarchy.
So I’ve been wondering: is Emil Kirkegaard at all related to Søren Kierkegaard? Is it a particularly common last name?
Tell me more about this new Upper Class that has both left and right-wingers. Are we talking ‘coastal elites’ - are they ‘upper class’ now?
I knew DeGroot. Horrible to deal with.
Kirkegaard’s Kaliper Krew