Tag Archives: science

Defining ‘Progress’

From Social Matter: When We Talk About Tradition, What Do We Really Mean?

This passage stood out and is a position I have argued awhile:

Yet, many mistakenly attribute the corruptions of the modern world to science and technology because of the close correlation that is thought to exist between the two. Because the rises of modernistic worldview and high technology occurred more or less contemporaneously, it is widely believed that the two necessitate each other

The one does not necessarily follow from the other, however. There is nothing about scientific knowledge that intrinsically demands, or even preponderantly suggests, the sort of atheistic rationalism that is widely considered to be coupled with it.

In NRx discussion and articles, often words like ‘progress’, ‘modernity’, and ‘progressivism’ are often thrown about, as unalloyed evil, but it seems like not much thought or care is taken in understanding what these words really mean.

‘Progress’ and ‘modernity’ are very broad. They can mean technological progress or modernity – cars replacing horses; computers replacing typewriters; antibiotics replacing blood-letting. It can also mean social ‘progress’ (suffrage, civil rights, democracy, etc.).

Modernity can means better architecture that is impervious to natural disasters…it’s not just about civil rights.

Technological progress should be isolated from ‘progress’ as in liberalism; the two need not be interchangeable, nor should technology be the antecedent of liberalism. The UAE, for example, embraces technology, with the total rejection of leftist ideals such as democracy and civil rights. Even in pre-1960′s America there were great titans of industry and science, who created economic value and enriched the world with their creations, but only decades later did political correctness really start to spiral out of control, and it still is.

grey enlightenment AUGUST 15, 2016 AT 8:41 PM
technological progress should be isolated from ‘progress’ as in liberalism; the two need not be interchangeable. The UAE for example combines technology with total rejection of leftist ideals such as democracy and .

From wiki:

Progressivism is a philosophy based on the idea of progress, which asserts that advancement in science, technology, economic development, and social organization are vital to improve the human condition. Progressivism became highly significant during the Age of Enlightenment in Europe, out of the belief that Europe was demonstrating that societies could progress in civility from barbaric conditions to civilization through strengthening the basis of empirical knowledge as the foundation of society

We can keep the science and economic development but reject the other stuff.

But a counter-argument is that technology may have a dysgenic effect, resulting in overpopulation and lower global IQ. But there’s where Exit comes into play.

‘Trickle Up’ Economics; Silicon Valley Technocracy; Neo Liberals

From AVC Trickle Up Economics

I would like to propose another approach that I call “trickle up economics” in which we lower the tax and other burdens on the lower and middle class, we invest in educating their children (and them), we make sure they have the skills to get good jobs in the economy of the future, and we make sure they have access to things like good transportation, safe neighborhoods, healthy food, quality health care services, etc that are required for them to be fully functioning citizens in our society.

Fred is ignoring how the effective tax rate for the lower and middle class has actually been declining for the past few decades due to growing entitlement spending, tax credits, and other benefits that are paid for by higher-income earners. The lowest of income earners actually have a negative effective tax rate:

If anything, we’re spoiling the underclass. The top 5% deserve more, as they the individuals who create jobs, businesses, economic value, and wealth – too much of which is redistributed to those on the bottom who do not contribute to the economy or to technological progress in any meaningful way.

But it’s not that I want the government completely out of the picture – I’m not a libertarian anarchist – but resource optimization is needed. In much the same way that a company restructures to become more efficient and productive, America needs a similar restructuring. Silicon Valley has proven again and again adept at weathering all macroeconomic storms – from recessions, to financial crisis, emerging markets busts, to oil crashes – while other regions struggle with chronic stagnation. Maybe this is a testament to the efficacy of high-IQ and ingenuity of Silicon Valley, combined with a free market and meritocracy, and if the ethos of this technology subculture is applied to broader governance, maybe America will reach its full potential.

But then why do I read AVC if Fred is wrong many times? Because he still gets a few things right, and his optimism about technology and markets sets him apart from welfare liberals, the worst kind of all, like Stiglitz, midget Robert Reich, Krugman, and, of course, Bernie Sanders. There are perspectives from across the political aisle that are congruent to some of my views, particularly some aspects of macroeconomics. The ‘neo left’, which includes Larry Summers and Steven Levitt, to their credit, understand the importance of property rights and the ownership society within a meritocracy, and they are more receptive to science that runs counter to the egalitarian/’blank slate’ worldview, whereas welfare liberals try to censor HBD-based science while promoting dubious global warming science. The welfare left attacks creationism, yet they become creationists when confronted with the science of IQ as it pertains to socioeconomic achievement.

The american dream has always been about opportunity. You start out with nothing and through hard work and a good body and mind, you make it and lead yourself and your family to a better life. That, by the way, is the story of the Gotham Gal and me. We arrived in NYC in 1983 with not a penny to our names. Nada. Nothing. I am not even sure how we came up with the security deposit for our first apartment. But we had good educations and had secured good jobs. And we worked for everything we have. We made it.

The welfare left wants to believe that capitalism and the ‘American Dream’ is dead due to too much wealth inequality, yet hard-working, high-IQ people like Fred keep proving the left wrong.

Anita Sarkeesian Supports Classroom Segregation

From Michael Cernovich’s Twitter (and from his blog, Crime and Federalism):

I’m amazed she hasn’t deleted her tweet suggesting that segregating classrooms by race and gender could improve learning. HBD-based solutions are never allowed by the ‘pro science’ ‘tolerant’ ‘open minded’ left if the results could be interpreted to mean that protected minorities are inferior at cognitive tasks compared to whites and non-protected minorities. This is why the left is so adamant about doing away with the SAT and IQ tests, which originally were created to help the economically disadvantaged to get into elite schools, because certain minorities don’t score as high as others. The left wants to do away with these tests because forcing equal outcomes is more important creating than equal opportunities. Liberals like Larry Summers, or even feminists like Tim Hunt, aren’t immune from public shaming by the left for expressing views that run affront of the ‘blank slate’ leftist orthodoxy, as yet further examples of the ‘pro science’ left picking and choosing the science they want to believe in.

And, yes, although Anita Sarkeesian is the scourge of Gamergate and ‘the right’, that doesn’t change the fact that maybe there is some truth to her statement. Although black academic achievement has proved markedly since Brown vs Board of Evacuation, achievement for whites has also improved, so the black-white gap remains as wide as ever, according to http://www.epi.org/:

Black student achievement, nationwide, and in every state, has improved at a spectacular rate since Brown. Although we don’t have a reliable measure of achievement going back very far in time, we have good data for the last few decades, from the federal sampled test of math and reading, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). It shows, for example, that black fourth-graders now have average math scores that are better than average white math scores only a generation ago. Yet because average white achievement has also improved, the gap between black and white achievement remains. The average black student still performs better than only about 25 percent of white students, making the goal of equal qualification for the labor market a distant and daunting goal.7

The black-white achievement gap has remained persistent since the availability of data going as far back as the 60′s, with blacks consistently lagging whites at standardized test results, educational attainment, and income. If Brown was supposed to close this gap, it has obviously failed.

Related:

The Left’s Problem With Science

The Liberal War On Science