Why Scientists are stubborn.

[Diogenes]

Or why Scientists (and everybody else) can stubbornly persist in fallacious thinking.

The reason we’re so resistant to anomalous information — the real reason researchers automatically assume that every unexpected result is a stupid mistake — is rooted in the way the human brain works. Over the past few decades, psychologists have dismantled the myth of objectivity. The fact is, we carefully edit our reality, searching for evidence that confirms what we already believe. Although we pretend we’re empiricists — our views dictated by nothing but the facts — we’re actually blinkered, especially when it comes to information that contradicts our theories. The problem with science, then, isn’t that most experiments fail — it’s that most failures are ignored.

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/f ... pt_defeat/

Excellent Article by Wired!

Or putting it another way... Science starts as heresy, becomes common knowledge, and ends as Dogma.

[Diogenes]

This article also suggests an explanation why Jewish people are generally so smart.

In 1918, sociologist Thorstein Veblen was commissioned by a popular magazine devoted to American Jewry to write an essay on how Jewish “intellectual productivity” would be changed if Jews were given a homeland. At the time, Zionism was becoming a potent political movement, and the magazine editor assumed that Veblen would make the obvious argument: A Jewish state would lead to an intellectual boom, as Jews would no longer be held back by institutional anti-Semitism. But Veblen, always the provocateur, turned the premise on its head. He argued instead that the scientific achievements of Jews — at the time, Albert Einstein was about to win the Nobel Prize and Sigmund Freud was a best-selling author — were due largely to their marginal status. In other words, persecution wasn’t holding the Jewish community back — it was pushing it forward.

The reason, according to Veblen, was that Jews were perpetual outsiders, which filled them with a “skeptical animus.” Because they had no vested interest in “the alien lines of gentile inquiry,” they were able to question everything, even the most cherished of assumptions. Just look at Einstein, who did much of his most radical work as a lowly patent clerk in Bern, Switzerland. According to Veblen’s logic, if Einstein had gotten tenure at an elite German university, he would have become just another physics professor with a vested interest in the space-time status quo. He would never have noticed the anomalies that led him to develop the theory of relativity.

My own (previous) pet theory was that they had to live by their wits for so long in difficult and often dangerous environments that they evolved "smartness." Any dumb ones were attrited.

Now I will incorporate this new insight into my new theory. That's how I evolve my ideas.

[TallDave]

It's an interesting paradox. A lot of good science and entrepeneurship gets done because some arrogant ass spends decades trying to prove himself right. OTOH, a lot of bad science and wasted money is attributable to the same phenomenon.

Jews succeed for the obvious reasons: hard work, frugality, a respect for intellectual achievement. It's the same reasons Asian and Arabs in the U.S. have higher incomes than whites, Latinos, and blacks.

It's all about culture. I doubt any group has achieved enough genetic diversity in a few thousand years to matter much. Well, except maybe the Vitamin D problem.

[MSimon]

It's an interesting paradox. A lot of good science and entrepeneurship gets done because some arrogant ass spends decades trying to prove himself right. OTOH, a lot of bad science and wasted money is attributable to the same phenomenon.

Jews succeed for the obvious reasons: hard work, frugality, a respect for intellectual achievement. It's the same reasons Asian and Arabs in the U.S. have higher incomes than whites, Latinos, and blacks.

It's all about culture. I doubt any group has achieved enough genetic diversity in a few thousand years to matter much. Well, except maybe the Vitamin D problem.

There have been studies done on this and in fact they show Jewish IQ among Ashkenazim increased about 1 point per generation over a period of about 500 years.

http://lagriffedulion.f2s.com/dialogue.htm

Jewish Genius

http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002812.html

http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/000777.html

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/c ... l#Koestler

[MSimon]

And lest you think IQ is an artificial construct dependent on cultural factors:

IQ tests designed with push buttons and blinking lights corroborate the paper and pencil tests.

[TallDave]

Ashkenazim

I'm familiar with the concept, but I've always thought they were distilling too fine a signal from too much noise. It's possible, but I am skeptical.

But if there is a genetic difference, at best I think it is vanishingly small next to cultural factors. Michael Oher's measured IQ went up by 20-30 points in the span of a few years due to a change in his cultural surroundings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Oher

[Jccarlton]

Micheal Mann in today's WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 65102.html

I just finished the book the MSimon recommends(second that recommendation) Red Hot Lies:
http://www.amazon.com/Red-Hot-Lies-Alar ... 1596985380

The climate cabal has got to be the biggest group of Narcissistic denialists ever to supposedly conduct scientific investigation.

[Jccarlton]

Micheal Mann in today's WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 65102.html

I just finished the book the MSimon recommends(second that recommendation) Red Hot Lies:
http://www.amazon.com/Red-Hot-Lies-Alar ... 1596985380

The climate cabal has got to be the biggest group of Narcissistic denialists ever to supposedly conduct scientific investigation.

Just so were clear here's the oped hockey stick Mike was referring to:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 37244.html

[MSimon]

Ashkenazim

I'm familiar with the concept, but I've always thought they were distilling too fine a signal from too much noise. It's possible, but I am skeptical.

But if there is a genetic difference, at best I think it is vanishingly small next to cultural factors. Michael Oher's measured IQ went up by 20-30 points in the span of a few years due to a change in his cultural surroundings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Oher

Which came first the culture or the intelligence? BTW some folks posit that Jews who couldn't hack the culture melted into the surrounding population. The culture then becomes a selection mechanism.

Too much noise in the signal? I guess that would explain all those Nobel Prizes or Chess Masters.

When a group performs two to five standard deviations beyond the norm I think the signal is adequate to distinguish from the noise.

In the Griffe duLion piece they were looking at a piece of the puzzle. For some trait in a population the expected number was in the range of .25 for the sample size. The actual number was 5. That is 20X average. Well beyond the noise. It is possible it was an outlier sample. Except for all those Nobels in Medicine, Chemistry, and Physics.

[MirariNefas]

When a group performs two to five standard deviations beyond the norm I think the signal is adequate to distinguish from the noise.

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_intelligence):

Certain psychometric studies have recorded people of Jewish background[clarification needed] as scoring higher than average on various tests,[1][3] with estimates ranging from 3 to 12 points above the mean of white gentiles, whose score is generally normalized to 100.

Let's look at the different studies on wikipedia:

-Backman 1972: Verbal Knowledge 107.8, English Language 99.5, Mathematics 109.7, Visual Reasoning 91.3, Perceptual Speed and Accuracy 102.2, Memory 95.1

-Storfer 1990: 112

-Herrnstein/Murray 1994: 112.6, American Jews, from the NLSY

-Lynn 2006: 103.5, Ashkenazi Jews in Israel

Two to five standard deviations for the whole group? No. That would be astronomical. But interesting nonetheless.

The Nobels is something else though, apparantly not explainable by IQ alone. Is there a subgroup of extra high IQ performers in the mix? Or does the group just have a greater motivation to acheive in certain ways? Looks more cultural to me. Though, yes, I am being lazy and using wikipedia and generalizing instead of doing real research on the matter. Perhaps that's just my gentile heritage showing through.

[Diogenes]

I guess I made a mistake with my second post. I knew I should have put it up as another topic, but since the point was raised in the same article I thought it would be appropriate to mention it while people were thinking about the article just after reading it.

Now the second topic has totally reduced the original point I wanted to make down to the noise level.


People are NOT objective. Not even scientists. People go through life with pre-conceived notions that are the starting premise to any discussion with them. People really don't question their own assumptions. They don't even realize that they HAVE questionable assumptions. They assume that what THEY believe is absolutely correct, and if you don't agree with them, it is YOU who are wrong. (Religious people especially.)


Objectivity simply does not come easily to most people. Contrarianism often does.

[MSimon]

Two to five standard deviations for the whole group? No. That would be astronomical. But interesting nonetheless.

I was referring to a Griffe duLion link which I posted above. I believe I mentioned that. I believe they were looking at IQs above 120 (or was it 140?)

As you know from your study of statistics a one standard deviation at the mean will produce a bigger differential at one or two SDs above the mean.

You should really look at the link if you want all the details.

[MSimon]

Though, yes, I am being lazy and using wikipedia and generalizing instead of doing real research on the matter. Perhaps that's just my gentile heritage showing through.

You can give a man a link but you can't make him read.

None the less I will try again.

http://lagriffedulion.f2s.com/dialogue.htm

Update: I was wrong. It is this link:

http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002812.html

[MSimon]

The Nobels is something else though, apparantly not explainable by IQ alone. Is there a subgroup of extra high IQ performers in the mix?

Yeah. Ashkenazi Jews.

And of course culture makes a big difference. Which is why so many 70 IQ Jews are winning Nobels.

[IntLibber]

This article also suggests an explanation why Jewish people are generally so smart.

In 1918, sociologist Thorstein Veblen was commissioned by a popular magazine devoted to American Jewry to write an essay on how Jewish “intellectual productivity” would be changed if Jews were given a homeland. At the time, Zionism was becoming a potent political movement, and the magazine editor assumed that Veblen would make the obvious argument: A Jewish state would lead to an intellectual boom, as Jews would no longer be held back by institutional anti-Semitism. But Veblen, always the provocateur, turned the premise on its head. He argued instead that the scientific achievements of Jews — at the time, Albert Einstein was about to win the Nobel Prize and Sigmund Freud was a best-selling author — were due largely to their marginal status. In other words, persecution wasn’t holding the Jewish community back — it was pushing it forward.

The reason, according to Veblen, was that Jews were perpetual outsiders, which filled them with a “skeptical animus.” Because they had no vested interest in “the alien lines of gentile inquiry,” they were able to question everything, even the most cherished of assumptions. Just look at Einstein, who did much of his most radical work as a lowly patent clerk in Bern, Switzerland. According to Veblen’s logic, if Einstein had gotten tenure at an elite German university, he would have become just another physics professor with a vested interest in the space-time status quo. He would never have noticed the anomalies that led him to develop the theory of relativity.

My own (previous) pet theory was that they had to live by their wits for so long in difficult and often dangerous environments that they evolved "smartness." Any dumb ones were attrited.

Now I will incorporate this new insight into my new theory. That's how I evolve my ideas.

The problem with this sort of theory is that jewish 'smartness' dates back to the pre-Roman era, when jews compiled the Torah to preserve their religio-cultural identity during and after the babylonian captivity, and thereafter the Talmud documents the history of theological scholarship and debate that went on for centuries, an historical record of scholarship that was unprecedented. Jewish "smartness" dates back to this time and, if anything, is not the result of jewish marginalization, but is instead the reason why jews survived millenia of marginalization when so many other less well documented cultures have vanished from history.