Jordan Peterson

Status
Not open for further replies.
I had much more specific answers to the question in mind than some grand abstraction like "equality of outcome."

Too bad :p. I've already typed like 4x the amount here, given the quality of responses/actual representation of what I'd written to that point it wasn't worth the effort. "not 100%, not slavery" will have to do for now.

Like, in the US we have an estate tax that applies when you try to leave more than $5 million to your kids. Does that in your view constitute an arbitrary discrimination against rich people? Is it disincentivizing productivity?

Whose productivity? I find this one interesting. You want incentive to work for the kid...but why exactly 5 million, and why on estate transfer as opposed to other times? For the latter perhaps it's less costly to enforce.

How about the fact that we have a bracket system that requires you to a higher percentage of your income the more you make? Unfair discrimination that disincentivizes productivity?

Possibly. Given how corporations are bypassing individual responsibility and fingering policy setting, It'd be hard to buy their arguments that they're not getting a fair shake, but some people just have a day job that makes a bit more and then the progressive system doesn't seem as fair in that case by comparison.

The convoluted nature of tax reeks of games being played to screw people into/out of money.
 
Moderator Action: I've reopened the thread. Please try to be courteous to each other with your replies. Thank you.
 
I've come to find out that snarky pete is a big fan of Tom Waits. That makes him a little more sympathetic in my eyes.
 
I think we need a separate thread on sports and genetics, because I'm positively stunned that people will seriously argue that genes play a minor role. Are they really saying that Central African pygmies can become great at 100m sprints if they just try really hard? Or become even half decent pro basketball players? Seriously?

It seems self evident that genetics play a huge role on what sports you even stand à chance.
 
Another thread about race, performance and genetics. I'm sure it would be as well received as useful as all the previous ones. My favorite bits are when people link articles from sketchyracistblog.com with an innocent "Hmmmm, this is interesting!" as if that is figleaf enough.
 
Another thread about race, performance and genetics. I'm sure it would be as well received as useful as all the previous ones. My favorite bits are when people link articles from sketchyracistblog.com with an innocent "Hmmmm, this is interesting!" as if that is figleaf enough.
I don't know about "race", but it seems ridiculous to suggest that genetics have only a minor influence on sports when they can straight out determine you'll never be a pro in plenty of sports.
 
I don't know about "race", but it seems ridiculous to suggest that genetics have only a minor influence on sports when they can straight out determine you'll never be a pro in plenty of sports.

The freakish size of American football players often has more to do with steroids and weight rooms than with genetics.
 
Some team games require you to be tall and (usually) muscular, including basketball. Imo it is a shame, cause it leaves less room for talented players with neither; i mean how many Stocktons/Isaiah Thomases can there be, really :)
 
The freakish size of American football players often has more to do with steroids and weight rooms than with genetics.
Sure, but people born very small due to their genes will never be pro American football players. Males from Central African pygmy groups have an average height of less than 1.5m, this means that they can never be pro basketball or American football players no matter how much they try (same for sprinters, swimmers, and all kinds of different sports that require a big body).

Note that this has nothing to do with the idiotic (and racist) stereotype that "blacks are good at this, blacks suck at that". Both the central African pygmies and the West Africans that dominate sprinting are "black", but clearly one group has an advantage in average on some sports over the other.
 
I think that another thread about racial genetics would be a very bad idea.
 
Sure, but people born very small due to their genes will never be pro American football players. Males from Central African pygmy groups have an average height of less than 1.5m, this means that they can never be pro basketball or American football players no matter how much they try (same for sprinters, swimmers, and all kinds of different sports that require a big body).

Note that this has nothing to do with the idiotic (and racist) stereotype that "blacks are good at this, blacks suck at that". Both the central African pygmies and the West Africans that dominate sprinting are "black", but clearly one group has an advantage in average on some sports over the other.

Height matters too, to the point where the NFL actively discriminates most of its positions based on that (exceptions for positions like kicker), in addition the NBA for obvious reasons. NFL does have a few short players at WR/CB/S/RB but even these are relatively rare. Considering height is a genetic trait, it's interesting that his particular form of discrimination-linked-to-performance is still widely considered to be okay, whereas most discrimination is more controversial even if a link to performance is demonstrated.

The real question driving us back to the thread topic is: to what extent is cognitive ability genetic? Without a very good reason, it would be foolish to assume all or none of it is. It is certainly linked to performance (even in some of these sports actually, pro level play is often complex).
 
I think that another thread about racial genetics would be a very bad idea.
I think "race" is an idiotic concept that has little relevance outside of simple phenotypic descriptions ("the suspect is a white male"). I was talking about genes, not race. There's a lot of genetic variance within what we usually call a "race".
 
Last edited:
Some team games require you to be tall and (usually) muscular, including basketball. Imo it is a shame, cause it leaves less room for talented players with neither; i mean how many Stocktons/Isaiah Thomases can there be, really :)
Point of order... Isaiah Thomas and John Stockton are both 6 foot 1 inches tall ;) (I'm assuming you mean the old school Hall-of-Fame Thomas, not the current player, since you mentioned the two Hall-of-Famers together).

As an aside...I understand the argument you are trying to make, you just picked the wrong two guys to make that argument.:p

NBA players are so freakishly tall, that watching them on TV, you don't realize that the "little guys" are not little at all, but just actually "ordinary-tall"...

Also... Isaiah Thomas was quite muscular during his playing days:)
Spoiler :
As was John Stockton at certain points in his career:):
Spoiler :
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom