"This source on the book is bad because it's biased and not from the authors"
Are the authors unbiased, or are we to say that the only permissible bias is that of the author? I genuinely think those are the only two readings and both are completely stupid.
When you are saying that intelligence is mostly genetically heritable and that black people have hereditarily lower intelligence, but you aren't saying they are genetically inferior or anything racist like that
The authors imply some sicko shit beyond this, but "black people are genetically inferior" is plainly what the text says in overt fashion.
"The Bell Curve" is bad, but one thing people genuinely get wrong a lot is that "heritability" doesn't necessarily mean "passes through genes". Your economic class is "heritable" since you usually get it from your parents, after all.
Reedy white guy discovers that dogwhistles give him plausible deniability, so he can still say things with the energy of racial slurs with far less of the social repercussions.
I don't understand why people tweet things. Is this a single bit of an ongoing conversation? Did he just learn what The Bell Curve is and crack off? Who is this message intended for, and what is it intended to say to them?
I have idle thoughts too, but I've never felt an urge to broadcast them.
That's literally what Twitter is all about and why it's so unhinged. The only other aspect is reacting if the to of your head to somebody else's idle thoughts.
Who is this? Is he a failed YouTuber or something? That’s even sadder than being a failed Hollywood actor with the bar being so low to become a content creator.
failed autism influencer/"lifecoach" a less successful version of their buddy, the "actually autistic coach", but equally lacking in any actual mental health training
Something that really frustrates me as a writer is that we spend so much time on our words yet people misinterpret what we say or don’t even bother to read them at all.
🤣 the person who didn't bother to read the bell curve, wow, what a ride