|
Why are Asian people good at math?
30 Jan 2006 09:38:11 -0800
misc.education
previous
Richard Fangnail...
|
Chess One...
|
Its a game. That is not inferior to being a sport, its okay to call it what
no.email...
|
Yes. And this is second time when you snipped my comments
on it WRT Lewontin. Yes, FST of ~ 0.15 estimated for global human
Jim Walsh...
|
Disagree. The word "racist" means those who believe that there are races
Jim Walsh...
(including those who use "race" as a basis for mistreating people).
BTW, one reason for limiting the word to those who believe that "a particular
race is superior to others" was to distinguish between the beliefs of some in
the dominant group (my race is better than yours) from the beliefs of those
in the disfavored group (my race is not worse than yours).
What the motives of the various uses, it is plain that a "racist" is one who
believe in the existence of races (just like a communist is one who believes
in the theory of communism).
Capitalist, Socialist, DaDaist, Maoist, etc.
|
populations is NOT especially low in comparison to many
other species that have perfectly recognized subspecies.
Therefore, claiming that H. sapiens is special based on
Chess One...
|
It is not a mathematical subject, nor is the term 'nonsense' a statement of
understanding. If I say 'branching' as a non-metaphor, how will you
appreciate its period?
Phil Innes
The Hippocampus
Vermont
|
FST is disingenuous. Besides, as I already said, there is
NO any kind of universal FST threshold that is used for
establishing subspecies. On top of that, there are arguments
that FSTs are *not*, in fact, the only or even a particularly
useful criterion in taxonomy.
|
no.email...
|
Well, only if the value for that single locus happened to coincide
with the average value.
DZ...
|
The expected value does not depend on what is actually observed. Both
single-locus Di and the average are random variables, with the same
expectations. Perhaps I didn't express this clearly: the point is, the
statistic is based on the sum of "single-locus" distances.
|
|
no.email...
|
Yes, of course. Have I ever claimed that it does?
DZ...
|
If you agree, then I hope you'd also see that for example Figure 1 in
http://www.goodrumj.com/Edwards.pdf is irrelevant as far as the amount
of divergence is concerned, because no matter how small, it can be
detected. If the actual divergence is too small, one would have to
no.email...
|
Yes, of course I agree to that too. Given enough data, the
even a difference between identical itwins can be detected
on a chromosomal level. Yes, Edwards' Fig. 1 does not deal
with the divergence. What it does is to illustrate that
there is a perfectly good tool that can be used to discriminate
between populations.
Jim Walsh...
|
Makes sense to me. It is meaningful (in biological contexts) to define a
group by genes, blood type, or any other meaningful biological items. To call
those meaningful groups "races" is incorrect historically and can be confused
as support for racism, an entirely different theory of the divisions of
humans.
The easiest way for me to demonstrate this is to use the word "pure".
A person who has the selected gene is a member of the group, others are not.
The word pure has no meaning. Saying someone has "pure O type blood" is
gibberish.
But racists talk being "pure white" and they talk about "mixed races". These
sorts of terms demonstrate that a totally different (biologically
meaningless) concept is involved.
|
I can even go further and claim this original (I think) thought:
instead of using FST or monophyletic trees for taxonomic purposes,
one can use cluster analysis with a threshold criterion:
*average* number of loci needed for a given discriminating
power (say, 99.9%). This sort of taxonomy is as good and
as practical as anything else. Further, because of strong allele
correlation in populations, I strongly suspect that it will
produce the same broad results as FST and evolutionary
trees, but will be a lot more objective.
How about that? Put this way, Fig.1 becomes more than relevant
to the "genetic or taxonomic significance", doesn't it?
DK...
|
Not necessarily. There two different classification approaches.
One is concerned primarily with evolutionary history (relies on
monophyletic trees), another with absolute divergence (FST, etc).
The two are not the same and don't have to produce the same
result. Consider this tree (please view in fixed width font;
parenthesis represent extinct populations for simplicity):
(A)--(B)--C--E
|
|______D
In evolutionist's view, there would be two races, D and C+E.
But it is entirely possible that FST for pair C/E is much higher
than the one for pair CD. In this case, based on pure divergence,
one would conclude that there are races C,D,E or even E and C+D.
As you know, there are no absolutely agreed upon taxonomic
criteria and in many case on but not another approaches are
used. The choice is frequently a matter of practicality and/or
historical background.
My proposal is different. It will only ask a question
of how reliably we can tell these populations apart.
Depending on a particular scenario, I *think* it can
produce result very similar to either of the above
approaches. In my view, this can be as practical and as
informative as anything else. But, obviously, these are
all mind games, I have a job to do and not about to retire
and assemble SNP data for making a global map just to
see how it will look like based on this criterion...
|
DK...
|
I read them. Nei is a very smart guy. He identifies the problem
right away (basically saying the same as what you were saying -
with which I, as stated before, don't disagree). He also - again,
absolutely correctly - identifies Lewontin's politics as a
real reason behind his "excessive statement".
|
DK...
|
I'd be shocked if Nei did not believe that the concept of race!
Not only he is great geneticist but he also authored paper
"Evolution of human races at the gene level." (He probably wouldn't
dare to use such title and paper's terminology in today's climate!)
While we are on the subject of Nei:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6T39-4FC449B-6-3&_cdi=4941&_user=10&_orig=search&_coverDate=02%2F14%2F2005&_qd=1&_sk=996539999&view=c&wchp=dGLzVlz-zSkzk&md5=6f33b377cb5b3113d0add66e6850e592&ie=/sdarticle.pdf
"Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and
chimpanzees".
So much for the "humans are 98-99% identical to chimps"!
|
|
question usefulness of the concept of human races, even though he'd be
able to reliably classify people into populations.
no.email...
|
Again, yes. But the difference is *not* particularly small.
juanp.contreras...
|
|
|
no.email...
|
I honestly don't think I am missing anything. The need for large N
is obvious for high disriminating power. And yes, I fully recognize
that ability to discriminate is not equal to genetic distance.
This is obvious too.
DZ...
|
But given enough n (number of loci), we can discriminate between the
two populations that almost completely overlap, i.e. it does not
matter how small the difference is. Therefore, the issue of
discrimination (and the ability of multilocus profiles to do so) is
irrelevant as far as the discussion of biological race is concerned.
|
I still don't see how any of what you are saying implies that
Lewontin was right in saying that there is no material basis
for defining substructure of human populations.
(Once again: "racial classification is now seen to be of virtually
no genetic or taxonomic significance").
DZ...
|
What I am saying is not supposed to imply whether Lewontin was right
or wrong in his interpretation. You may disagree with the
interpretation of the results, but his analysis was correct.
no.email...
|
Then we seem to be in agreement. It was the interpretation
that I thought was completely unwarranted from his results.
|
|
|
it is.
|
Chess One...
|
In Eastern Europe women comprise 40% of chess players, in US 7%. In China
40%. Therefore, avoiding the abstraction and sticking to the facts, there is
some variety in the world, which has to do with culture and polity.
|
E=mc2...
|
White kids could be good at math if they studied harder.
PeterL...
|
Russians are very good at math. So are Germans.
beernuts...
|
Russians, French, Germans, English, Americans, Irish, Scots, etc, etc.
|
|
hrubin...
|
It is not studying harder that is required. They are not
told about enough good math to study. The content of the
courses is nowhere near what it was 60 years ago.
|
beernuts...
|
White "kids" invented a lot of that math. Do you want a list? Didn't
think so.
|
|
Jim Walsh...
|
I see we totally agree that Einstein had troubles in school.
Bob LeChevalier...
|
We do not. I consider the results in 1905 to be proof of this.
J.Venning...
Robert J. Kolker...
|
Einstein did manifest an attitude problem whilst he was in school which
is why he did not get recomendations for an academic position. He did
Bob LeChevalier...
|
An "attitude problem" is not a problem, except to those who look for
trouble.
|
not get a professor job until after he had established his mojo in the
physics community by way of his publications. He made his living as a
Bob LeChevalier...
|
Which he did as soon as he got his doctorate.
Actually, he still had problems after that. There was this little
problem called anti-Semitism.
|
patent office official in Switzerland.
Bob LeChevalier...
|
A reasonably good paying job that allowed him time to do his research.
You seem to think that job was a "problem". I think it was a better
job than galley slave to a professor that was dumber than the student.
|
Einstein's problems were not with the subject matter. They were with
fuddy duddy teachers who didn't have a new thought in the past thirty years.
Bob LeChevalier...
|
Actually, as the cites I provided indicated, he had some of the more
brilliant professors in Europe. But the professorate has never been
prone to cater to undergraduates, these professors were working in
different areas of physics than Einstein was interested in, and the
Chess One...
|
Knowledge or experience? It can't be said of students that they have much
experience, or that it is the kind which perseveres beyond opposition. The
experience of younger people is necessarily restricted by their age. This is
the difference between Life and study of other's lives. It is worth noting.
|
Chess One...
|
It is always okay to say 'don't know' or even to reserve any comment at all!
Anything else is oppression, including having to rationalise. The oppression
is electional.
|
Chess One...
|
Belivieng would mean that you act on what you hope, rather than what you
know?
|
most important one in his life was engaged in a running feud with
another physics professor at the same institution. It takes a superb
Chess One...
|
And to multiply 1 by 0, what addition is there? And what result ;)
|
politician, not a good physicist, to be on good terms with professors
who are bitter rivals with each other.
|
Jim Walsh...
|
I am glad that we agree that Einstein had trouble in school.
I have always regarded his troubles as being evidence of defects in the
education system.
toto...
|
I am wondering here if there is any relationship between the oriental
languages that are tonal and math ability. Has anyone seen any
research that suggests that this is a factor in the discussion of
Asians and mathematics?
RichAsianKid...
|
I haven't. East Asians seem to be flooding to classical music academies
however. Probably a cultural factor. INteresting question is whether
East Asians or those populations with tonal languages have higher
incidence of perfect pitch. (I read after a search that those who are
tone deaf can still discriminate between different words in tonal
languages - but probably they use contextual cues)
|
|
|
Bob Kolker
hrubin...
|
The particular language is not genetically wired;
vocabulary is essentially arbitrary, but grammar
far less so.
Jim Walsh...
|
Nope. All languages have (roughly) the same number of grammar rules.
|
toto...
|
Comparatively speaking, Chinese has much less grammar than English. In
Chinese we have the grammatical units like characters, words or terms,
phrases and sentences. Chinese depends mainly on its characters to
realize its grammatical functions. There is no changes in affixes. In
fact, there is no affixes for Characters. But there are many changes
Chess One...
|
I have played 3 high IQ players at chess simultaneously. They each had IQ at
genius level. I squashed them and could have done so blindfold, without
sight of the board. But I also have high IQ. it is not an exact correlate.
RichAsianKid...
|
Just curious if you know what your ELO score is. Don't need to reveal
it here but I'm interested; higher than mine for sure; informally,
mine's in the lower class A category. Hey better than many, right? Not
good enough though for some college tournaments.
|
|
Chess One...
|
Very interesting point! The Dutch psychologist in the summary of his study
said that he was not able to determine if people with a combination of
excellent left brain processing skill [most of IQ study] plus this other
Chess One...
|
It is said, 'Even lawyers are human beings', though perhaps not often
enough.
|
Chess One...
|
metaphysic! who is "we" if not you? Why are personal statements taboo? They
are the most profound!
|
Chess One...
|
Thge older Newton did, the younger did not. The old man became an
established figure, and spoke from that basis, the young man was otherwise.
|
Chess One...
|
Everything is fluid which is not well seen to be its own nature. When
understood there is water AND wood.
Before illumination, carry water chop wood, after illumination carry water
chop wood.
|
right brain 'intelligence' of abstract spatial dynamics, was a cuase or an
Chess One...
|
does that mean the intelligence of animals?
culture is strictly human word, although animals have group behaviors, as do
human's too, since we are also animals - apart from that I don't understand
anything. What is the sense of the word 'determinants'? Does it have the
sense of 'hard-wired', or unelectable aspects of behavior [like breathing]?
RichAsianKid...
|
Well, out of the 3 definitions I found I use it in the first sense.
1. An influencing or determining element or factor: "Education is
the second most important determinant of recreational participation"
(John P. Robinson).
2. Mathematics. The value computed from a square matrix of numbers
by a rule of combining products of the matrix entries and that
characterizes the solvablitity of simultaneous linear equations. Its
absolute value can be interpreted as an area or volume.
3. Immunology. A localized region on the surface of an antigen
capable of eliciting an immune response and of combining with a
specific antibody to counter that response. Also called epitope.
And aren't humans anthropocentric? I should say that 'intelligence' may
Chess One...
|
I am a Celt, and have a big second toe to prove it. I suppose this must be a
genetic factor which does distinguish me from other white guys, and, as anï
fül no, this large second toe is [therefore?] responsible for my
demonstrably superior intelligence*.
Bob LeChevalier...
|
I have a big second toe and no known Celtic ancestry. (But I do have
demonstrably superior intelligence. Maybe our brains have an
auxiliary operation going on in our second toes).
Chess One...
|
So where are our research grants? So we can get together and compare toes
for a respectable period of time, possibly in Bermuda, possibly evaluating
the effect of sand-on, and if indeed the 2nd toe acts primarily on the
brain, or if its the heart, or some other aspect of our being which makes us
think ourselves superior to other people with short toe-defunctionality
syndrome [STDS]? A few hundred thousand million should cover it.
Phil
|
|
Quod erat toenstrandum!
Phil Innes
Jim Walsh...
|
He is right. You are wrong. He is not a "black chess player".
Chess One...
|
That's right! His social group was primarily a New Yorker identity and my
assumption that his would be a good opinion to hear about Jackson's chances
was wrong. Phil
|
|
*or whatever I say it is, since, the argument here is quintessentially
tautalogical; because I have superior intelligence I know more than you what
intelligence is, even its definition, therefore I am automatically more
right than you. This is only a small mockery on the subject of greater IQs
and inherent superiority.
|
be (from my limited understanding) as how well a particular organism
Chess One...
|
unfortunately using the word in its definition doesn't help to define it
|
Chess One...
|
Yes - so none of those generalities quite answer the 'hard-wired' question.
While unwilling to quite take such a range of possibilities as definitive,
shall we still say it does not, by virtue of it not being mentioned? In
other words, if it is not 'hard-wired' as a fixed behavior, it is therefore
an electable behavior?
|
Chess One...
|
No! Although some human behavior is.
|
can be adapted to its own environment. We marvel at the bat
Chess One...
|
Man! he he! You would fail an English class - adapted for what?
Even when 'scientists' for want of a better term, 'quote' Darwin, with
'fittest to survive' this is nothing he actually expressed, since he spoke
of survival-evolution as fitness to /evolve/.
Evidently all species at are a stage of their evolution, which is then
viewable as a dynamic process, and, if you are interested in the history of
scientific theory, to read Sheldrake you would also encounter the idea that
the rules governing process themselves evolve.
I am unsure if you would even encounter these ideas these days at
undergraduate level, [and this is not to say that you should agree or
disagree with them, but to observe that it is a contribution to meta~
theory, and that it deserves attention.]
|
echolocation for instance. This has human implications - IQ tests may
not be predictive of success in Iraq for example. As you said before,
the testing environment is important.
|
|
effect.
RichAsianKid...
|
Like music. Do people listen to, say, some classical music because they
are smart, or because they are smart and listen to it. I confess that I
like some classical music (confess?) Rest of the time I'm drowning in
pop if not 'worse'.
|
That is to say, he could not tell if chess developed either skill, or people
Chess One...
|
There are so few honest and disinterested studies that would provide a frame
for such discussions; a frame in terms of simply establishing what is known
from what is merely hypothetical. What interest me as a non-clinical
psychologist is that people /want/ to argue superiorities, which are mere
sociologies, and indeed, transient, as if they actually knew of what they
Chess One...
|
What is both amusing and appaling about this thread is the almost complete
absense of any sense of self motive by any writer to it. Not only are there
an almost obscene number of speculations from any actual measurement, but
people do not even understand that in order to communicate with others they
need to define their terms.
In sticking to chess there is at least a limited range of activity. What is
proposed about chess is almost entirely speculatory, actually ignoring
studies and purporting all sorts of things not found.
This, on a greater scale, is also the subject of the Math issue. In fact,
Asians are not better at math. There are simply many more of them in western
universities doing math than are represented per capita in the native
countries. From this simple statistic some people are arguing whatever they
Chess One...
like!
The advantage of staying with a study, not extrapolating it ad infitium, is
that the study can be said to be science, and so can what is found in the
study. All esle needs to be owned as specualtion, but writers here are
insufficiently honest to note their own motivation.
This sorts out who is sincere in discussing implication of education for
real human beings from all these fantastical ideas which are at least
improvident.
|
Chess One...
|
The noise in the newsgroup is also information. it means that there is other
than science motivating people's writing - and to go forward, this needs to
be identified to its cause and activity.
|
Chess One...
|
Or maybe it looks for you? Whatever modus it has, it has. A bit Zazen, no?
I have a phone call, so must go. Sorry to be so stern, but it is indicated
from the entire dialog, not just this exchange we have.
Cordially, Phil Innes
Chess One...
|
I am saying that if you /think/ you are superior in an intellectual not
physical sense to someone in a wheelchair, and talk about your superiority,
then on reserving your comment, you are not practicing anything honorable at
all - you have a mechanism in operation which need someone to be in the
wheelchair in order for you to feel okay about yourself.
It is the same with 'races'. If some people are 'less', then you can be
okay. Some people are therefore maintained as 'less' in either people's
opinions, or in fact of their liberty and prospects.
Thinking about it resolves nothing, since the origin of the need to regard
people by rank has not to do with thinking.
|
Chess One...
|
There is a difference between ad hominem, which insults the person, and
comment which contradicts the behavior. 'Psychologising' is suggestive of
the person's motive who is advancing any hypothesis. It is a substantial
difference than comment on the person themselves.
If you think that people do not have motives, or by not declaring them, have
none, then you are mistaken. All people have motives for what they do. This
is the fons et origo of the entire subject! It does not matter if you like
the idea that ideas of superiority stem from an arrogant refusal to look at
one's own attitude, the mechanism exists regarless of any likeing to note
it.
RichAsianKid...
|
I honestly had to look up 'fons et origo'. It's like that IQ test
quoted before, with words like, what, taciturn, loquacious, what else,
Chess One...
|
but we are animals! ;)
RichAsianKid...
|
Chess One...
|
This is working up to the Tonto joke.
RichAsianKid...
|
Chess One...
|
It is an interesting article, but seems to rely on a prime distinction of
human intelligence as being 'quicker', which it then fails to define:
"Some of course do, and we call them intelligent, but none are as
Jim Walsh...
|
The problem is that when John Q. Public says, "I am a member of XX race", or
when you said, "There are 5 races; and gave them names", neither of you were
talking about "fuzzy sets, clusters or extended families", were you?
Some people (for reasons of their own) have decided to use the word "race" to
mean something it never meant before just to be able to say "race is still
meaningful".
I include those scientists with those who say, "Race as that word is normally
used is meaningless".
|
quick-witted as we are."
Even T-Rex was quicker witted than human beings, having no need to reflect
on anything, it just went for it. :((
RichAsianKid...
The writer summarises their opinion by declaring "In short, I suggest that
culture promotes intelligence." and then lots of anecdote, which is all very
well.
What is missing from such an appreciation is any modesty! You see, there is
a supposition that the intelligence and learning of animals is not just
different from human beings, but its inferior - but no similar scale is used
to measure both.
RichAsianKid...
|
I say it's different, see my comment above
|
I again refer to Lorenz, but a more apposite observer might be Lyle Watson,
especially his title 'Elephantoms.'
I alwaqys write to much, too close to dinner time, so, gotta go. one more
comment below
RichAsianKid...
|
'tis a busy season for obvious reasons but may try these out when I
finish things
|
|
Chess One...
|
yes. i was spoon feeding an 18 month old child in my kitchen [son of a
guest] and supplying one little lump of cereal at a time. the child got a
bit frustrated with this rate of delivery, and used one of his words;
'many', he said.
the thing to really note about multiples is at a meta~ level, that they form
complexes, and have internal relations to each other as well as external
ones, and that they might be dynamic
this is puzzling to the researcher who finds 20 aspects to something, but
really there are only 4 changing ones, but in failing to not the overall
activity of the complex, the changes cannot be noted to be cyclical, or
observing any obvious pattern. some system are massively complex and cannot
be appreciated without a computer and 'chaos-math'
this is rather different than playing with the buzzwords de jour
anyway i forgot to mention tesselating and non-tesselating tiles...
phil
RichAsianKid...
|
Well, this is the fragmenting of modern intelligentsia isn't it? There
is a book by EO Wilson - Consilience - best seller back a few years
back. I've read many good reviews about it - seems like one that tries
to integrate this. Else you'll have the Indian or Buddist proverb where
three blind men touch the different parts of the elephant - one thinks
it a snake, one thinks it a wall, one thinks it a tree etc. Perhaps
explaining things as complexity merely implies our limited capability
of understanding....
|
|
gregarious etc? Hey. I don't disagree that people have motives, but
then again it's a two-edged sword, right? Why do people keep trumpeting
equality then? I think I understand though. As I said before it's like
Plato's Noble Lie. We 'upper middle class' or 'near-rich' 'brats' (the
two adjs defined previously in another post, very conveniently only in
$, for the middle aged, so I won't repeat them here) have been preened
to do this sort of thing, but sometimes I shun fake sincerity for
brutal honesty. ;)
|
The entire subject of racial difference and also these ideas of superiority
have nothing demonstrably to do with any proven objective outside event, and
all to to do with the proposer. I would not be honest if I did not state
this as observation of behavior, and that is not in the least speculatory.
It is not as much a measure of science as a measure of what human beings
are.
RichAsianKid...
|
Science is a measure of human beings? It's a human creation, no?
|
|
Chess One...
|
The act of observation itself changes things! This is as noted in science as
it is in psychology.
|
Chess One...
|
But this act of observation requires the full attention of the mind, not
flip intellection. This is a sort of self-science, and what is called
'interiority'.
RichAsianKid...
|
You're getting religious!! :)
|
Ultimately, it is.
RichAsianKid...
|
Ideally. Realistically, hmmmmm......you just said motives, right?
Jim Walsh...
|
We are not all one race. The word race is biologically meaningless. There is
dk...
|
LOL. When JimBob does not understand any concept, he calls
it meaningless.
Jim Walsh...
|
Well, I didn't say "race" was meaningless. I said it was "biologically
meaningless". There is a lot of difference between those two claims.
Shall I explain the differences or can you suss them out yourself?
|
|
neither one race nor two nor any other number.
We are all of the same species (that is a biologically meaningful term).
dk...
|
ROFL. You have NO IDEA how difficult it can be to define species!
Jim Walsh...
|
No. Wrong. It is easy to define species. On the other hand, there are border
line cases where it is controversial whether a particular group of animals is
divided into 2 or more species or not.
dk...
|
LOL. Sorry, pal, we've been there several times before and you
Jim Walsh...
|
I am not your pal. Do not condescend.
|
failed to absorb even a slightest hint why dividing between
species is no different than dividing between subspecies or genders
or what have you. So I don't expect anything new from you this
time - and the premise of "It is easy to define species" sounds
so utterly moronic to anyone familiar with the problem that it just
reinforces the notion that it's best to ignore you.
Jim Walsh...
|
You had best ignore me. You argue that it is easy to define biologically
meaningful races (but consistently fail to delieve the definition) and now
you say that something infinitely easier (defining species) is NO DIFFERENT
than defining sub-species.
OK, two healthy fertile animals of the opposite gender who can in fact
conceive fertile young are of the same species. Two that cannot in fact do so
are not. Cases involving animals that can only do so with help (artificial
insemination) or do not usually do so in the wild, are controversial, and
decisions on whether they are the same species may be somewhat arbitrary.
Now it is your turn. Provide a biologically meaningful way to determine if
any two randomly selected people are members of the same race.
|
|
Those controversial cases cause trouble, but they don't undermine the
objective definition of species.
|
|
We are all different from each other (even identical twins are different from
each other).
dk...
|
Someone ever said we are all the same???
|
I agree that xenophobia (the fear of strangers - outsiders) will continue to
cause trouble even when racism is eliminated.
dk...
|
If eliminating racism were as easy as you seem to think it is (prohibit
a word, legislate bunch of "color-blind" laws, educate populace),
then it would have been eliminated long ago...
Jim Walsh...
|
I do not believe that any word should be prohibited. I am totally opposed to
censorship.
I do not think that convincing the majority that there are no races will
eliminate racism.
But, when virtually everyone knows that the world is a sphere, the fear of
falling off the edge is reduced to nearly zero.
Education is the solution to racism. It is not easy, but there is nothing
better.
Jim Walsh...
|
I have been working on that my whole adult life.
|
dk...
|
Yes. And the best is to start with real education, not a bunch of
wishful thinking lies that eventually make things worse due to their
glaring hypocrisy obvious to everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
Cordially, Phil
RichAsianKid...
|
Though I think that if someone is indeed on a wheelchair then one
should not deliberately point that out necessarily - I would still
respect that person; at the same time I would not pretend that he isn't
one one. And when asked whether he is indeed on a wheelchair, I'd reply
candidly and say 'yes'.
|
|
RichAsianKid...
|
I don't know. I read that 'zero' is a huge concept when it comes to
numerate thinking in history - it represents a huge step forward in
cognitive abstract & development - I have to dig up the reference
somewhere. Don't have time now.
BTW I thought about another point raised earlier about whether people
seek knowledge for a reason. Here's another one:
I've always been told that knowledge = power when I was high school. I
didn't actually see it at that time. (Strength comes from a playground
fight, right?) But now I'm starting to see it. So, knowledge is power.
Then there is this quote by Kipling.
Four things greater than all things are
Women, Horses, Power and War
Chess One...
|
I happen to live in Kipling Town! He lived here 5 years, and did much of his
best work at Naulakha, certainly the most animistic of his writing.
As for knowledge, I think I would not like to conclude that it is an
intellectual formation at all, and certainly without some soma to inform it,
and of any actual experience on which to reflect, it becomes the sort of
hypothetical material which proposes itself as knowledge but to which
Heidigger termed 'pathic', as in a pathic discourse between two people who
have no /experience/* of what they speak.
|
I know, not much of a thesis, but hey. But when you put 2 and 2
together....
I say knowledge trumps ignorance. :)
Chess One...
|
Except this is not a right comparison. The known is rightly compared with
the unknown. The influence of unknown, or Other, on human beings seems far
greater than any amount of known material in terms of motivations,
individual or collective.
Reducing all to thought, and all values to knowledge is a pathology; and
often an obsession rather driven by fear.
RichAsianKid...
|
Wouldn't the above have parallels with the important role of
sociobiology in human life? That we are biological creatures or animals
ultimately - or as you prefer the brain can be just meat - much of what
we do are driven by motives that are hidden, and even when not hidden,
cannot be parsed by words - perhaps urges, instincts (too Freudian?),
and words are only the tip of the iceberg that only scratch the
surface? Word games are a nice con game favored by the intelligent -
(Just as you enjoy chess if you win, although whatever ruthlessness
there is confined to 64 squares). Smarter people are better at playing
it, perhaps at manipulating the rules - to their own advantage. What we
say and discuss really only touches the surface of 'truth'. And this is
often done perhaps to secure an advantage - many lawyers do this all
the time debating the meaning of one word vs another. Often the idea is
not to clarify, but to obfuscate. And that's why those with a 'glib
tongue' are often dangerous. That's why people sometimes have a 'creepy
feel' on some people - and you don't just make friends based on their
verbal skills or dexterity, on what they say or do not say etc... Just
a thought.
|
These are much wider topics on general intelligence or education than anyone
is discussing here, and parenthetically, why it is good to interrogate
narrower statements, and sometimes to ask people what business they have
making them, especially if they seem to contain an implicit idea that the
range of their chosen topic is all the topic.
Cordially, Phil Innes
*experience is a performance, not a theoretical or fantasy, experience, eg.
|
|
|
spoke.
I am interested in people's creativity and also the social acceptance of
that creativity. And far, very far, from simple acceptance, there is usually
Chess One...
|
These are all ideas and admitted speculations, and as such, what are they
worth? It is not the case that we cannot state observations of our own
nature, but that we resent what we find! And can go on the grand tour of
ideas in order to circumvent the issue and any personal implication.
RichAsianKid...
|
Meaning: do we not lie to make ourselves happy? And do we not do this
all the time? In fact, it has a name: it's called hope.
Ouch, that really stings but it's that a psychological point?
Chess One...
|
I think an excellent example of compulsive mentalisation without observation
as its basis is in this very newsgroup. In another post I will confront this
hrubin...
|
Which racists? The educationist racists who believe that
all recognizable groups are genetically mentally equal, and
Bob LeChevalier...
|
Until one proves that the "recognizable" nature of the groups has a
completely genetic basis and is not a social categorization, and one
also proves that all members of those groups are genetically mentally
UNequal to the members of the other group as part of being in that
group, they are just as racist.
hrubin...
|
It is not COMPLETELY genetic, but largely. Recently, two
genes have been found, one dated as separating about 50,000
years ago, which is quite common in Europe and Asia, but
extremely rare in sub-Saharan Africa. Another is only
RichAsianKid...
|
Yes, in fact I've posted on this in soc.culture.asian.american
(amazingly, of course) a while back. To repost it here:
|
about 30,000 years old, but is even less in Africa, and
more heavily concentrated in Europe.
One point of this result is the limited mixing of Africans
from south of the Sahara and others.
Another clear race is the American Indians. Although only
about 12,000 to 15,000 years old, the isolation-forced
inbreeding has made it a separate race.
Jim Walsh...
|
Biologists know better, but let me try to explain it you.
Determining someone's races is always about what they look like (dark skin,
blue eyes, kinky hair, etc.).
dk...
|
That's yet another shameless lie. Maybe you, illiterate racists, do
that, but honest biologists don't. They know that even very
dark-skinned Indians, along as with 100% of arabs with kinky
hair are members of what is usually called Caucasoid race.
dk...
|
And another lie!!! LOL. How come that's the only thing you
good at - lying constantly?
Medline search for "Caucasoid" - 28,678 hits and roughly 20,000
of them published after 1990.
Jim Walsh...
|
I looked at 5 randomly. They use terms like "white" and "black" and their
test for racial membership is "self-identification".
They are not studying the "caucasoid race", they are using the socially
constructed races in various ways, most of which were inappropriate.
If you suppose that the authors of "Racial differences in trust and lung
cancer patients' perceptions of physician communication." Gordon HS, Street
RL Jr, Sharf BF, Kelly PA, Souchek J. [Houston Center for Quality of Care
and Utilization Studies, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center,
Houston, TX 77030, USA. hgordon@bcm.tmc.edu] to pick a random example are
experts in genetics, anthropology or evolutionary biology, you need to make
that case.
Do you *really* believe that their research shows that race is biologically
meaningful (as distinct from socially meaningful), or that biologically
trained people think it is genetic?
dk...
|
That's irrelevant.
You said, "Virtually no one with biological training believes in the
DZ...
|
"Caucasian" is also commonly used in forensic description of genetic
profiles - in both forensic science and actual investigation
practice. The reason for this is that genetic frequencies used for
Jim Walsh...
|
Please tell what gene FREQUENCIES define ANY race. Stop saying that they
exist and tell us what they SPECIFICALLY.
|
forensic identification differ among races, however "socially
constructed" they might be. I happened to know a few things about
this - a method I coauthored, applicable to forensic DNA analysis, is
not only being used in the real world, that is, in academics, :-) but
also by law enforcement agencies: I'm aware of only those that
contacted me - US, Canadian, Australian ones. Let me make it clear - I
would personally abandon White, Black, etc. descriptions every time
there'd be a practical method that would work on a cosmopolitan
sample.
DZ...
|
Please try to focus on comprehension. I do not claim that frequencies
used for forensic identification DEFINE races. I say that frequency
differences are large enough so that separate forensic databases need
to be maintained. You were recently given a sample list of 10 markers
toto...
|
Year?
hrubin...
|
It did not state the year, but I doubt that it was later
than the 50s. I do not know Sowell's age, but I doubt
that he is THAT young.
Bob LeChevalier...
|
He served in the Korean War, so likely it was in the late 30s or maybe
the early 40s.
|
|
It is interesting to note that a friend of mine from an all black
school in Missisissippi came to Chicago in the early 60s and
was two years ahead of the public school she enrolled in.
hrubin...
|
The public schools in northern inner cities have probably
decayed more than in the south. It might also have been
the local school which was less prone to dumbing down.
Also, if she was two years ahead, she should have been
advanced those two years.
|
|
with frequencies that vary among races. There are many such DNA
markers. If you'd like a specifically forensic example, here you go:
frequencies of alleles 21 and 22 of a forensic marker D2S1338 are
0.01974 and 0.02961 in "Caucasians", while they are 0.15269 and
0.13772 in "African Americans". The sample sizes of allels were 334
(2*167 individuals), for African American, and 304, for Caucasian
samples, as reported in Forensic Science Communications 2001 3(3).
Jim Walsh...
|
Still no genetic definition of any race. Each avoidance of this question is
Bob LeChevalier...
|
If gene clines are the norm, then by the definition criteria given in
the Wikipedia article on race, human beings are a monotype species and
there are no races.
|
Bob LeChevalier...
|
Different individuals are not genetically identical, so there are
potentially 6 billion races using that definition.
Otherwise you have to come up with a formal definition of what
constitutes each of the different populations.
Sforza's map is based on one set of genes (on mitochondrial DNA).
Using different genes from the Y-chromosome, the map comes out
somewhat different.
|
Bob LeChevalier...
|
But most Americans couldn't distinguish between Japanese, Korean,
Okinawan, and possibly even Chinese.
RichAsianKid...
|
Depends on context, right? 19th century people divide people into
alpine races, nordic races etc. No one is saying (at least I'm not)
that there is not a 'classificational' element of it. I should mention
that in Asia very few people think of themselves as 'Asians', just as
Chinese, japanese, Koreans etc, like many Europeans don't think of
themselves as 'white', but rather, say, Italian, Scot, etc. This btw is
in-group out-group bonding, often moderated by geography and ancestry
in the past (people who live in proximity are more likely to
intermarry) and the bonding is recognized by even sociologists. As I've
said before, me against my brother, me and my brother against my
cousin, me and my cousin against the world. That's an Arabic proverb I
think. So context is also quite important I think.
|
|
Bob LeChevalier...
|
It is a misstatement that the opponents of racism are denying
biological diversity. Biological diversity exists and is a good
thing. What is denied is a *particular kind* of biological
NON-diversity, the claim that there are subgroupings of homo sapiens
that are so much alike genetically that they can usefully be lumped
together as a unitary population for all manner of unrelated claims
from tendency to get sickle cell disease to cranium capacity and
intelligence.
The racial lumpers tend to treat all of Africa as a unitary "race",
when for sickle cell trait and many others, Khoisians are more like
Swedes than like other Africans.
RichAsianKid...
|
I'm of course not saying what you said of some people. What I find
interesting is that with different frequency of genes found in
different populations, let's use politically correct terminology
(hehehe), outcomes will be different. Here's an interesting commentary
- arguably unifying genes with behavior and anthropology.
In Our Genes:
http://www.genome.uci.edu/News/pnas99_1_08_2002.pdf
"A survey of world frequencies
of DRD4 alleles has shown
striking differences among
populations."
The part on cad and dad cultures are especially interesting!
Also there is an interesting paper that either has come out or will
come out - Templar and Akiwara (?) spelling in Intelligence. It
correlates (i.e. does not posit causation) skin color and IQ (don't
start that debate again) and found that lighter skin color (amongst
other factors) (without mentioning race) are correlated with higher IQ
on a global scale. This bypasses this thorny issue of race which bogs
down this entire discussion. NO link though.
Differences and patterns between populations fascinate me for some
reason. Yes ideally you will want to know all 6 billion people, but
since this is not possible, some kind of a predictor, and yes no doubt,
simplification scheme may be useful to organize and conceptualize the
info. That's how I think about it.
Bob LeChevalier...
|
And I have no problem with it. But we oughta learn from the example
of the carefully worded ethics statements of the DNA geneticists that
one should watch the wording carefully, and avoid using phrasing that
will suggest things to people that one is not in fact claiming.
It is almost impossible to use "race" with regards to humans without
it being miscontrued as racism. It thus isn't "political correctness"
but good scientific practice to confine oneself to words that are
carefully and specifically defined and which do not mean anything more
than what they mean denotationally. Neutral terms that are used only
by scientists don't cause confusion.
|
|
|
dk...
|
Look it up. Subspeices, races, varieties, breeds and strains are widley
used terms in biology.
|
further evidence that even you know that races have no biological/genetic
meaning. QED.
|
|
DZ...
|
There is no "us". You are the only one who still insists the earth is
flat.
DZ...
|
You simply lack English comprehension. Nothing above has anything to
Jim Walsh...
|
I agree. Nothing you have said demonstrates a biologically meaningful
definition of races.
DZ...
|
I agree. Nothing I have said demonstrates a biologically meaningful
definition of races. Do you get it NOW?
no.email...
|
Expect JimBob to make a leap in logic and say that because
you did not demonstrate biologically meaningful definition of
races it means that races don't exist.
That you never even intended to do so would only count
as a minor detail in their deseased minds.
|
|
|
do with genetic definition of races. In fact, in what's quoted I said:
'genetic frequencies used for forensic identification differ among
races, however "socially constructed" they might be'.
Chess One...
|
This may be a logical problem in expressing oneself in English, but as put;
"the genetic frequencies ... differ among races"
is contrasted with the comment
"Nothing above has anything to
do with genetic definition of races"
But the questioner is wondering how it is possible to measure frequencies
among races, if there is no genetic identification of races to make
Jim Walsh...
definitions of.
DZ...
|
You can estimate genetic frequencies within ANY groups, including
chess-players and chess-haters, as well as groups based on
self-reported race.
Chess One...
|
I'm sorry, but you have merely become boring as a correspondent - and
although you respond, you do not answer key points.
Phil
|
There is no problem there whatsoever.
Of course a rational thinker[*] would be wondering what is the basis
of substantial differences if those are found. In the case of races
1) There is correlation of self-reported racial attribution with
ancestry.
2) There is substantial non-random, assortative mating: members of the
same self-reported-socially-constructed group preferentially mate with
each other.
[*] as opposed to those
(a) irrational;
(b) those who'd rather close their eyes, put fingers in their ears and
deny reality if it doesn't serve their social convictions;
(c) simply lacking comprehension;
(d) easily distracted by unimportant details.
|
|
Socially constructed. Get it now? So, if forensic science needs to
Jim Walsh...
|
Agree.
And therefore biologically (as distinct from socially) meaningful races do
not exist.
|
Chess One...
|
This is a red herring, and also a subject not know to social science. If you
cannot adequate filter what is socially constructed from other factors, then
how do you differentiate one thing from another?
|
account for genetic differences between social constructs, then I'd
say, more power to genetics.
Chess One...
|
This sounds rather like the 'Polish chess-gene' I wrote about.
Phil Innes
|
|
|
|
existence of the Caucasoid race".
I showed you that ~ 20,000 papers with multiple authors over the
past ~ 15 years do believe in the concept well enough to use
it in research.
Jim Walsh...
|
No, they did not use it in research. They "self-defined" it and studied the
social construct.
|
And now you are trying to weasel out by qualifying your statement
with bunch of "but they are using it as social construct", "but they
are not experts", or sidetracking the issue with "but it's not
biologically meaningful".
Fact is, you made a mistake. And you don't have guts to admit it.
Jim Walsh...
|
I have made more mistakes than you have hairs, and I have admitted everyone
that I concluded was a mistake (literally tens of thousands). Admitting
mistakes is a normal part of the learning process (i.e., replace error with
knowledge).
While at law school, writing a paper about whether the US Constitution
required the US government to be "color-blind" (to use Justice Harlan's
memorable phrase), I discovered that there were no races.
For nearly 30 years, I mistakenly thought that race was a biologically
meaningful term. When I learn the truth, I admitted my mistake.
|
|
|
|
|
I spent 2 years living inside the Suquamish Indian reservation, in the the
late 1960s.
I have been living in Taiwan since 1987.
Very frequently as I walk down the street I see a person (Taiwanese in
nationality) who would be accepted (by appearance) as a member of the
Suqamish tribe.
There were so many people coming from Asia to North America, over such a long
period of time, in several waves, the genes available to the Native Americans
is virtually all of the genes.
Let us take blood type as an example.
http://anthro.palomar.edu/vary/vary_3.htm
Excerpt from the above URL:
These patterns of ABO and Diego blood type distributions are not similar to
those for skin color or other so-called "racial" traits. The implication is
that the specific causes responsible for the distribution of human blood
types have been different than those for other traits that have been commonly
employed to categorize people into "races." Since it would be possible to
divide up humanity into radically different groupings using blood typing
instead of other genetically inherited traits such as skin color, we have
more conclusive evidence that the commonly used typological model for
understanding human variation is scientifically unsound.
The more we study the precise details of human variation, the more we
understand how complex are the patterns. They cannot be easily summarized or
understood. Yet, this hard-earned scientific knowledge is generally ignored
in most countries because of more demanding social and political concerns.
As a result, discrimination based on presumed "racial" groups still
continues. It is important to keep in mind that this "racial" classification
often has more to do with cultural and historical distinctions than it does
with biology. In a very real sense, "race" is a distinction that is created
by culture not biology.
|
|
If they merely claim that there is a genetic basis for intellect, and
that those with higher potential deserve higher priority, then that is
elitism and not racism.
hrubin...
|
Which is what I have always claimed, and I do not consider
it to be elitism that they be educated differently. I have
stated that just taking them out of the classroom and letting
them learn on their own is far better than allowing their
mental abilities to decline, or even for their knowledge to
be less than it should.
|
|
that if one group does better academically than another, it
MUST be due to preferential treatment? The ones who consider
all cultures equal, and teach more "multiculturalism" than
Bob LeChevalier...
|
Until one proves that the difference was 100% innate, then there is
some environmental component, which can be labeled "preferential
treatment".
hrubin...
|
If the environmental component was the family culture, is
that "preferential treatment"? If it was the presence of
books, and the use of better language by the parents, or
the parents teaching them, is that "preferential treatment"?
It is better treatment, but not preferential.
|
|
Bob LeChevalier...
|
They are, by definition.
hrubin...
|
This is sheer idiocy. A good culture will adopt what it
wants from other cultures, but one which isolates, or
rejects the important parts of humanity, is a bad one.
|
|
the science needed to understand the world?
Bob LeChevalier...
|
I am a scientist, but even I realize that understanding science and
not understanding people will lead to heartache.
hrubin...
|
Science must be used in order to understand what is "good
behavior". One criterion is that it must lead to good
results if everyone does it.
|
|
The ones who place children by age, and try to teach all the
same, are this type of racist. I do not know the distribution
Bob LeChevalier...
|
No. That would properly be called "ageism" It is not "racism"
because one is not born into an age category and remain there all
one's life.
|
of the various abilities, but we have plenty of evidence to
show that the genetic makeups of the various groups differ.
Bob LeChevalier...
|
Which is utterly irrelevant if the group divisions are arbitrary and
the abilities focused on are arbitrary.
|
We need to teach each child as an individual to the best of
that child's ability, and not turn away a white child from
Bob LeChevalier...
|
We may need to, but few want to pay the cost.
hrubin...
|
The cost is far less than you think. Any attempt to
educate "all" is doomed to failure; it only results
in poor education for event he best.
|
|
a magnet school with lots of openings because there are not
enough non-whites there; that is the bad kind of racism.
|
race-to-a-conclusion material on race, with a rather stubborn objection
which I will draw from real life. It is almost certain that the message will
be ingored by advocates of significant racial determination, but it should
be noted that this is why scientific specualtion is kept at at great
distance from social polity.
|
|
Certainly this was Lorenz's criticism of Freud who demonised various
instincts and behaviors as 'bad'. Lorenz stated the opposite, these behviors
were not only good but absolutely necessary.
RichAsianKid...
|
Again, depends on whether you view the glass as half full or half
empty. Maybe it's about perspective?
Chess One...
|
No. It did not depend on point of view, or perspective. It was an
observation of what happens in nature. It is not dependent on if you
personally like it or not, or what glass it is you would half fill or half
empty, it happens anyway! Its imply notes the role of aggression by studying
it!
|
|
|
Chess One...
|
Really? In any of the senses above I do not see any intelligence, only a
very superficial cleverness and nervous mental reaction to stimulus.
|
Chess One...
|
Is it to their advantage to so manipulate? And what does 'smarter' mean?
Those people more disposed to mental illness, since they try to contend with
the world only with ideas, and by avoiding both cultural and natural rules;
and in 'rules' I would include their process which may be nothing like as
brittle as ratiocination. That's not smart, its the opposite - its actually
cowardice.
RichAsianKid...
|
But neither is following rules. What is mental illness? How is sanity
defined? Is it defined by society and societal norms? Is it defined by
percentiles? Once you are outside a certain percentile, then you are
deviant, by definition, you deviate away from the mean.
|
When the only goal or value is winning a personal advantage in some short
term by cheating, then the real nature of things eventually emerges, and the
individual realises that time and real process can't be averted, and they
merely distorted their own perception of what is happening. This is
sometimes called 'karma', but is as natural a law as any other. That we
would think to cheat or be personally exempt is an improbable definition of
"intelligence".
RichAsianKid...
|
Hahaha, you can call this 'social intelligence', like 'emotional
intelligence' or the like. Besides you're really assuming that
eventually people will find out. What if they find out after you're
dead? Do you think that this 'karma' is created for the explicit
purpose of, maybe, like, Plato's Noble Lie, to dupe the masses into
submission, to believe in a falsehood so that the elite is easier to
govern? :)
|
|
resistance by group to acts of individual manifested genius. What is the
motive for this resistance? Is it as simple as envy? Or is it that something
new has been introduced that will need to be re-apportioned in the social
pantheon, and that society resists having to make any effort at all?
|
with the right brain skill were drawn to chess as a means to deploy and
exercise the skill.
This has the strange implication of suggesting that not all people are even
capable of playing chess at master level, no matter what they do or support
they receive. Interesting, no?
RichAsianKid...
|
It's not strange; I think some people are not capable of, say, quantum
physics. You reach your ceiling sooner or later.
|
But I think it is a corrolary with a kinesthetic activity, that few people
could play basketball to sufficient skill, since they lack a kinesthetic
'intelligence'.
This seems like an innocent commnet, but you had better be a /very/ rich
Asian kid if you wish to investigate it - these are only the surface
points.
RichAsianKid...
|
Usenet's free. Meaning: cost-effective.
|
|
Chess One...
|
Not to hand. It is easier to map GMs. US for example has produced only 12
Chess One...
|
Metaphorica rhetoric is useful when you are avoiding comparison of women to
men.
|
native born GMs since 1970. A Polish friend just wrote to say that his
country has produced 20 GMs in the past 15 years, though his population is
less than 40 million.
I think these statistics are therefore volatile and radical movements occur
in places. Certainly China and India are producing greater numbers of chess
Chess One...
|
So how many women doctors were there then? Either as physicians or as
surgeons?
Chess One...
|
Yes - during the civil war females were admitted to medicine in as nurses.
It has been said that this saved more lives than the enemy took.
|
Chess One...
|
I think not.
But the point is that an event [US Civil War] precipitated the entry of
women to medicine, and eventually to an equity position in it after 100+
years. As with chess in Poland, the event of the Wall coming down
precipitated massive generation of grandmasters.
The question of a predominance of better Asian performance in mathematics is
ocassioned by a complexity, of (a) Western student's perceived declining
need to do what computers can, and (b) Socio-economic successes in the East
over the past 40 years allowing Asian students to enter the Western
University systems.
Math may or may not be taught as well in Beijing as in Cambridge, Mass, but
the combination of math and English language acquisition [English is
langauge of science] and well as a Western enculturation, are all relatively
straightforward sociological factors, in fact sufficient to explain success
of Asian students, and even be predictive that in 10 years people will be
writing here, "Why are BRIC-country students better at math AND English?"
Phil Innes
|
Phil Innes
|
players, and this almost always turns into strong GMs - then some fixed
proportion of IMs, Masters and A players.
RichAsianKid...
|
Standardizing top players against the % of the population that plays
chess may yield some answers I suspect.
|
|
Chess One...
|
It is interesting to note that there is a /cultural/ difference which seems
to radically effeect woman's performance at chess. Proportion of players of
rated chess in US is for example, just 7%, Whereas in Ukraine and Russia it
is 35%+, and maybe higher in China.
|
Chess One...
|
A mathematician told me that chess is technically not an infinite game, but
it would take more time on the fastest current computer than there is time
left in the universe to claim even potentially sovling it.
Chess One...
|
Its English English, which contains about 500-1000 words in French, German,
Spanish and Italian plus Latin tags.
|
Chess One...
|
That might be a completely different issue to do with social factors - you
know, if you are paid less because of some group which you are identified
with. Even though you produce the same amount. Capability is another issue.
I am drawing attention not only to that capability and performance, but who
/is able/ to comment on it. This is science! Without a conscious methadology
then how could anyone objectify anything, except by unprovable assertion?
|
Chess One...
|
When you take over the family business/empire you will chose brutal honesty
in your management every time ;) Otherwise you will know nothing.
|
The difficulty with computers is that they cheat! At the begininng of the
game hey look-up opening books developed by human players [GM level play]
and may not make 'their own' move for 30 moves! Not only would this be
illegal according to chess rules, this resource is also denied the human
player.
It cannot therefore be an honest comparsion, and as far as I can tell, also
has no impact on player's motivation.
RichAsianKid...
|
Reason I'm asking is that some say that Go (a game I know very little
about) has way more variations, permutations, combinations etc, so
theoretically all its lines are less likely to be exhausted.
|
|
Chess One...
|
More moves in chess than there are atoms in the universe, and insufficient
time left in the universe to calculate a forced win.
RichAsianKid...
|
Hate to see chess go. (ha ha, 'chess' and 'go'?)
Let's hope so.
|
Cordially, Phil Innes
|
with the terms or words which are formed with characters. All the
grammatical changes depend on characters or terms, e.g. we use
auxiliaries to show the tenses, voices, moods, cases, etc. In one
word, Chinese grammar depends mainly on different parts of speech to
realize its syntax.
On the contrary, English grammar depends mainly on the changes
of the words themselves to show different grammatical elements. For
example, the tenses are realized through the changes of verbs; the
numbers of nouns are realized by adding -s to the end of nouns or
through the changes of the nouns themselves, etc.
***************
Japanese grammar (compared to English grammar) is extremely regular.
In fact, while there are over 250 "verb classes" in English (verbs
that conjugate mostly the same way), there are only two such classes
in Japanese, plus two irregular verbs. This regularity actually makes
Japanese easier to learn than many other languages.
The verb always comes at the end of the sentence, and does not change
for person, gender, or number. Also, there are only two irregular
verbs in the entire language, and even these conjugate predictably.
Furthermore, there are only two basic tenses: past and present. The
present tense is used to express future intent, and so it is also
Chess One...
|
I also say it is different. But is different = better? And better for what?
Robert J. Kolker...
|
It made theoretical physics possible which in turn produced advanced
technology. In short, you can thank the Greeks for your transistors.
Jim Walsh...
|
Well, you certainly love your Greeks.
How did you like my Big Fat Greek Wedding, with the father who said every
word came from the Greek.
|
Bob Kolker
|
|
known as the "non-past".
Rather than using auxiliaries or linking verbs, as English does
("will", "want", "can", "would", "should", etc), Japanese concentrates
these functions into the verb ending. For example, "tabemasu"
corresponds to "eat", "taberaremasu" corresponds to "can eat", and
"tabetai" corresponds to "want to eat". Sometimes more than one ending
can be applied to the same verb simultaneously, which can be somewhat
confusing.
**********************
We learn grammar unconsciously at a very young age, but we are not
born with some *imprint* for grammar or all languages would have
similar grammar structures and they don't.
|
Languages evolved, and there are many different
versions of language which are roughly equal, just
as there are many quite different ways of setting
up mathematical notation. Why are powers superscripts?
|
Reef Fish...
|
Bob,
Did you realize that if there is ANY merit in your logic about the
"first
humans", then genes and genetics wouldn't play ANY roll in anything,
would it, where there's diversity?
Evolution existed in languages just as evolution existed in everything
that existed, even before the first "human being" existed, which is
less than a minute in the earth's evolutionary clock of 24 hours.
Robert J. Kolker...
|
Evolution is change taken as a generic term. I am talking about
genetically based evolution, the kind that Darwin studied.
Reef Fish...
|
So? But I was using the absurdity of your analogy about the
first human being did not have anyone from whom to inherit the
genes, and then illogically related that to the existence of 6000
languages.
|
The human race has undergone very little (if any) genetic evolution in
the last 50,000 years. The overwhelming engine of change is cultural,
Reef Fish...
|
50,000 years constitue only a few seconds in the evolutionary
clock of 24 hours.
|
not genetic. Cultural change has made much more difference to us than
genetic changes in recent (last 50,000) years.
Jim Walsh...
|
I guess you are right, but it may be difficult to quantify.
Chess One...
|
Yes. To a mathematician in a mechanical world, quantification is a complex
task. But it is not at all difficult to qualify, as in those other sciences,
the social ones, which actually study these things.
|
Using appearance as a proxy for genes (yeah, I know, that is sloppy),
American Indians and Modern Chinese have the same ancestors, roughly.
if you took 100 Native Americans and 100 Chinese and dressed them similarly,
and did not allow them to talk, virtually no one could sort them out.
|
Or Koreans, Japanese and Chinese.
To most external observers, they look the same.
|
But, if you examine them "culturally": attitude toward formal education,
rates of alcoholism, rates of saving, rates of divorce, and so on, they would
fall into two different groups.
Culture is more important that genes.
mark-t2...
|
Studies on identical twins, raised separately, prove otherwise.
Jim Walsh...
|
Well, none of the studies I am aware of involve raising the separated twins
in different cultures.
Indeed, raised "separately" rarely even means "in a different economic
class".
|
|
|
Bob Kolker
Reef Fish...
|
That is, of course, your unsubstantiated conjecture, unsupported
by any factual evidence.
If you think there's not much genetic evolution in the last 50,000
years, then you know very little about the genetic changes in
some areas of the USA in the past 200 years alone.
Have you not heard of the modern day Darwin, from Atlanta,
by the name of Jeff Foxworthy? He has written books about
"You may be a Redneck if ..."
and one of the lines is "your family tree has only a single trunk".
Generations of inbreeding by folks in what's known as the
Redneck country (AL, GA, TN, KY, to name a few) you can
easily find generations of the same family living within the
same county, marrying each other, and soon ran out of
"outside breeds" and started marrying cousins, and other
relatives. :-) You can bet your bottom ... dollar that their
GENES have undergone irreparable evoluntionary changes
within just the short span.
But the meaning of evolution is certainly not limited to
genetic evolution.
In fact the study of the evolution of languages has gone from
the lexicographic studies of various language groups to a
more recent "lexicostatistical" classification of languages by
reconstructing evolutionary language trees by statistical
methods in "numerical taxonomy".
|
|
|
J.Venning...
|
Billy Graham was 86 years old with Parkinson's disease. In January
2000, leaders in Charlotte, North Carolina, invited their favourite son,
Billy Graham, to a luncheon in his honour. Billy initially hesitated to
accept the invitation because he struggles with Parkinson's disease. But =
RichAsianKid...
|
That's an appealing element in chess - it's all or nothing - a whole
game or match can be wrecked by just one wrong move. Quite
competitive...besides it's so bottled up - you can't physically release
tension like, say, boxing. You just have to sit there with your jacket
& tie (in GM matches etc) and pretend that you're cool....I think many
people miss that point. As you well know the pressure is often crushing
especially when there are spectators around. I think it's worse than
taking final exams (if that's stress, haha). AFterall, you can always
go back on previously questions when you think of the right answers. In
chess, the past is history.
|
the
Charlotte leaders said, "We don't expect a major address. Just come and =
let
us honour you." So he agreed. After wonderful things were said about =
him,=20
J.Venning...
|
He always writes that because he doesn't want to admit that he is a =
half-cast with Negro blood.
J.
|
J.Venning...
|
Oh. What other types of lies do you teach then? Incidentally, you =
RichAsianKid...
|
Maybe as you get older the bibliophile aspect becomes more appealing.
Still with your rating I'm not playing you any time soon!
|
RichAsianKid...
|
Classical Music/Bach = expresso
Trance/pop = 18 year old malt scotch
Highs & lows are relative....
Depends on time of day, mood, many things
|
are not posting from China, but from Berkeley, CA.
J.
|
J.Venning...
|
For the record, would you please quote your source for that =
Chess One...
|
I would say that common experience of all people account for almost all
their behaviors - whether of a specific enculturation or otherwise, and even
RichAsianKid...
|
This point can be argued but I won't do so here. I'll just say that
different people are good at different things....
|
transpositionally.
But before general culture there is family, the first group encountered!
Parental relationships probably directly imprint more behaviors than general
culture on any child.
If, of course, one is concerned with the world of surface phenomenology,
this is of no interest, and from what I read here, the would-be measurements
of any differentials are only concerned with surfaces, and these used as
differentials for which racial distinctions are asserted to ability.
I do not know how such specualtion has been sustained so long - nor
understand why anyone thinks they are adequate to even tackle this subject
with such meagre stuff.
Phil Innes
|
information? Thank you.
J.
|
he stepped to the rostrum, looked at the crowd, and said, "I'm reminded
today of Albert Einstein, the great physicist who this month has been
honoured by Time magazine as the Man of the Century. Einstein was once
travelling from Princeton on a train when the conductor came down the =
aisle,
punching the tickets of every passenger. When he came to Einstein, =
Einstein
reached in his vest pocket. He couldn't find his ticket, so he reached =
in
his trouser pockets. It wasn't there, so he looked in his briefcase but
couldn't find it. Then he looked in the seat beside him. He still =
couldn't
find it. The conductor said, "Dr. Einstein, I know who you are. We all =
Chess One...
|
Who is it that speaks? Are you part, or apart from nature? What is nature?
Does science measure nature or something else? But the first question is the
Jim Walsh...
|
Is this intended to mean that you agree that putting *some people* in race A
rather than race B is arbitrary?
EKurtz99...
If so, let me say, Yippee. We agree, sort of. The difference is that I think
the evidence shows that placing ANY person in ANY race is arbitrary.
EKurtz99...
|
I couldn't care less what you "think".
|
Now, I am going to ask you again: For what % of the human race is their
racial classification (ACCORDING to YOU) arbitrary.
For example, is the decision to put many (most/all?) African-Americans in the
"African" race rather than the "European" race arbitrary?
We are making progress here. Do not lapse.
EKurtz99...
|
The only progress you could make is to stop lying.
|
|
critical one, as if you would speculate on something alien, or if you see
that there is one nature to everything, including you.
[This is a difficult subject]
Chess One...
|
their trouble is no trouble defining intelligences, the trouble is that no
one wants to hear about it
RichAsianKid...
|
That which you cannot express will oppress that type of an issue?
Chess One...
|
Not quite, it is not that it oppresses who says it, but there is no one to
hear it, and does their ignornace oppress them?
RichAsianKid...
|
Some people (e.g. Mormons) derive great pleasure in proselytizing
others or even discussing scientific findings with peers.... we touched
on this before, genius can be lonely because (1) it's lonely when there
is no one to talk to and (2) it's lonely at the top (and to be fair, at
the bottom)
|
|
|
|
Chess One...
|
Morris Berman
RichAsianKid...
|
Just dug this one up - Berman wrote the twilight of American culture? I
thought Popular Politician Paleoconservative Palaver Pat
(Buchanan...can't Pile on more alliterations) wrote something similar
Chess One...
- I think this is very old-aged. People say this all the time. It's all
about the golden past and the tarnished present. Since time flows in
one direction, I'd like to hear why it's so good to reminisce on the
past. Is it because it's fabled? Is it because it's etched in human
Chess One...
|
This is nothing Berman would convey. Though Buchanan, sure, and atavist
looking for a golden past that never existed.
|
psyche or history that therefore it is of higher intrinsic value? Again
I don't mean to be argumentative, but....see my point above? That which
Chess One...
|
I am a chess player. All other ches splayers argue ove the board. its why we
do it ;)
And as Lorenz has pointed out, ritual conflict is not only good, it
is absolutely natural, and if not, then we go nuts.
RichAsianKid...
|
Would you consider say football to be 'ritual conflict'? What about
war? I think conflict is neither good or bad, it is just part of
(human) nature - and it can be modulated or moderated. To the winner,
conflicts are good; to the loser, conflicts are bad.
|
|
you cannot express etc.
Chess One...
|
It is only necessary to express it to yourself, rather than stive for effect
on others. A conundrum! But if you can express it sufficently to your Self,
then other Selves get it. Maybe thye don't like it, but they do get it, and
attribute it as 'real'.
RichAsianKid...
|
Except in politics or religion, where willful ignorance can play a
role. Not all subjects fall into this category.
|
|
All this meaning that biology trumps all: time washes away everything,
heals all wounds and wounds all heels as Bob here on this NG says....
|
|
Chess One...
|
None of these are observations of self or of nature, they are ideas. They
are neither right nor wrong, but they are not ideas based on observation,
and they are therefore 'pathic'.
They are interesting questions! Most people opt for being an aline on earth,
do not admit that there are any rules which govern them, and nature and god
and anything else
In other words, they admit that what is observable by science about nature,
is some other nature than they have. So many people hold that opinion that
it is a sort of collective narcosis.
Try the questions on some professors at your school - or anyone. As a social
scientist your duty for the purposes of this experiment will be to ignore
what they answer and only record the /type/ of answer. IE, did anyone make
any observations at all, or did everyone speculate/guess &c and have
'ideas'?
|
|
know
who you are. I'm sure you bought a ticket. Don't worry about it."=20
Einstein nodded appreciatively. The conductor continued down the aisle
punching tickets. As he was ready to move to the next car, he turned =
around
and saw the great physicist down on his hands and knees looking under =
his
seat for his ticket. The conductor rushed back and said, "Dr. Einstein, =
toto...
|
His grades were not poor, however, even in subjects he was not
really interested in. He got average grades in those and high marks
in math and science.
|
Dr.
Einstein, don't worry, I know who you are. No problem. You don't need a
ticket. I'm sure you bought one." Einstein looked at him and said, =
"Young
man, I too, know who I am. What I don't know is where I'm going.'" =
Having
said that Billy Graham continued, "See the suit I'm wearing? It's a =
brand
new suit. My wife, my children, and my grandchildren are telling me I've
gotten a little slovenly in my old age. I used to be a bit more =
fastidious.
So I went out and bought a new suit for this luncheon and one more =
occasion.
You know what that occasion is? This is the suit in which I'll be =
buried.
But when you hear I'm dead, I don't want you to immediately remember the
suit I'm wearing. I want you to remember this: I not only know who I am =
...
I also know where I'm going."
RichAsianKid...
|
One more question: what do you say to someone who tells you that it's
not necessarily the wisest to spend so much mental effort in a game of
chess. It's like memorizing the multiplication tables again and again -
Chess One...
|
Does a piano player use 'mental' effort? If so, is this rewarding to the
paino player? Do you remember that my frined said, 'I do not see the pieces,
I do not see the board'. Is this 'mental' in any usual sense of calculation,
or is calculation second to some act oif imagination?
Chess One...
|
I should have included two things in this message, one is a spell checker,
the other is to mention 'The Flow' which is a state of mind, very rare!
where you see everything effortlessly, and feel good at the same time. It is
not like having to beers and 'a glow', what you see is real, and quite
remarkably outside normal experience of 'thought' and what a task thinking
RichAsianKid...
|
Like flow, perhaps? Like the chess board doesn't exist? Is that what
you mean?
I think of IQ is a capacity for goal-directed action, perhaps an
ability to adapt to changing circumstances. It correlates with logical
thinking, and ability to grasp new knowledge. Intelligence, like
creativity, are notoriously difficult to define as you well know, in
part because intelligent beings - humans - are studying this themselves
|
is.
I don't know if mathematicians here experience it, or know of it, or if this
term is only associated with a phenomenon related to chess players [and
assume Go players too]
|
It is better, you will excuse me, for answering this way, than replying to
'mentalisation' of the game, since, at high level it is not well understood,
and instead, people insert metaphors which they hope will be accepted,
rather than for any strict verity.
I have heard mathematicians speak like this of what they do. Its rather
strange, a semiotic thing. What they say is for your understanding, rather
than as they experience it themselves.
|
a computer (or calculator) can do the same for you. Basically some
think that chess players have a tremendous cognitive ability, and yet
their mental powers are constricted into 64 squares; it's not much
value to society (chess players are not paid well generally). Imagine
Chess One...
|
chess players are valuable for pattern recognition skills, which gives them
jobs in such things as cryptography, and stock-market analysis :)
|
what else they could have done - e.g. spending time building bridges in
enginneering for example, or becoming a mathematician or doctor etc -
utilizing and unleashing all the mental powers into fields which
society values. What'd be your comeback? (keep in mind that enjoyment
Chess One...
|
or social science, psychology, any meta~ field where seep patterns are mnore
important than surface events?
I would answer that there is not much employment in our cultures, east and
west, for such skills
So we all fake it ;)
Cordially, Phil
RichAsianKid...
|
Thanks but hey what can I say? I still prefer the hard sciences. It's
harder to fake reality that way.
RichAsianKid...
|
You like ee cummings?
On a separate note, what about Jackson Pollock?
|
(Counterpoint: why not create reality rather than just 'observing' it,
right? Creating is way more fun. Observation is passive, dull etc.
Creation is active.)
RichAsianKid...
|
Can this be why 'changing the world' is so much more enticing (i.e.
thrust behind liberalism perhaps, making a difference) to the young,
while the old just moan and mope about the futility of it all...
|
|
RichAsianKid...
|
I think I know what you're getting at - the 'zone', the 'rapture', the
sense of euphoria perhaps ecstasy - not sure if I'd say orgasmic
experience...but some people experience that in sports too......running
gets some people high, for instance. I'd say though that it is
Chess One...
|
Except its a bit more cerebral. The experience is simple, but not common; to
effortlessly see everything without any of the straining we normally
associate with thinking, as we mentioned earlier.
I have encounter 'flow' outside of chess - once when examining a highly
complex landscape for patterns in it - 12 hours passed and I thought it was
2, but the experience was of sustained concentration and insight, no
tiredness at all - insight more than any calculus, and such thinking as
there was came after the fact, so to speak, first the insight then the
thinking. Right brain then left brain. I could even say that the insight, to
coin a phrase, was like 'liquid lightning', whereas the thinking was
relatively 'molasses'.
|
necessary for the participant and the activity to be suited for each
other in terms of skill level - the feeling comes from being able to
perhaps untie a gordian knot, solve an intricate problem, or just to
live & feel worthwhile living in the world - perhaps (? often) defined
relatively to your peers (i.e. I can solve the problem; many of my
peers cannot). Too much challenge leads to frustration; too little
leads to boredom. These cases are outside the state of flow.
Chess One...
(Since you're pedantic about spelling I'd just clarify one comment I
Chess One...
|
Yes. But a hypocrit! I am too lazy a typist to avoid misspellings, and
sometimes too lazy to look things up.
|
made earlier that must have left many people [aside from scaa]
scratching their heads. I said:
Classical Music/Bach = expresso
Trance/pop = 18 year old malt scotch
'18 year old' part was meant to be a pun - for 18 year olds that is...
Chess One...
|
I am no kid - I am 52, and /have/ kids, but speaking with a lady my own age
the other day she told me that she was one of 5 kids, and her father was a
doctor - she remarked that they were all in very good health and
mentally/creatively active in their lives - and also that when they were
young the only thing their father ever gave them for any ailment was whisky.
Never an aspirin even, not in their whole lives.
Of course, we then discussed types of whiskey included aged single malts,
especially the Isla type, which smells rank like manure, and tastes of
smoked bracken. :)
Unknown what relation whiskey drinking has to math appreciation- there
should be more studies.
Cordially, Phil
|
More appropriate may be classical music = coffee, pop music = beer (for
college students)
|
|
is not part of this equation - it can be quite stressful if you play
RichAsianKid...
|
I speculate that alcohol enhances artistic creativity, but dulls
scientific insight. Total speculation I know. Just a thought. As you
Chess One...
|
I think to state the condition in the positive is worthwhile; that the
attention of one's whole being is required to claim intelligence, which is
not a quantity in this sense, as much as a quality which is present or is
not present.
Most other measures are means to bemuse ourselves, to no particular
advantage a form of nervous stall.
I also think this is understood on every continent and by every group of
people, and though is not a popular aphorism compared with the lawyers'
scenario of indecent rhetoric and deliberate partiality which passes for
normative standard in many disciplines, is still a proposition which stands
on its own feet. That all people aver it is a greater mark of our similarity
than of any amount of differences we may have by virtue of factor at all.
RichAsianKid...
|
The Nazis (at least as 'popularized') didn't. It is certainly not
integral to the human condition. You now sound very unscientific
actually if I may be permitted to say - quality over quantity? This is
'obfuscationist' is that the term? It's wimpish & unacceptable by
scientific standards, almost, not that I know that much about it, just
stating my opinion.
Keep in mind that Einstein said 'the process of scientific discovery is
a continual flight from wonder'.
It's rough, and btw I just caught that quote today actually, but it
does illustrate a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
