“We Do Not Know Why”

A Critique of Fence Sitting in the Race-IQ Debate

Many people who know that DNA is destiny in terms of race and IQ, but do not want to admit it will take the position of “we do not know why” meanwhile maintaining “it is not due to the genetics! That is pseudoscience!” Sorry. You just picked a side. It is okay to argue for the environment, however, arguing from the fence sitter position is a method of shielding oneself from attacks (as the environment only position does not hold up under scrutiny), and hiding the true beliefs.

If I were to take the position of “We do not know what causes the gaps in IQ scores!” and argue AGAINST environmental causes, you would understand that I am trying to say that the cause is the genes, but it would be totally reasonable to force me to say it. In fact, I urge environmentarians to press people who say “we really do not know why” that are rejecting their environmental explanations to say that it is the genes to make the discussion more natural and healthy. It seems that the pure goal of people who take this position is to “DEBOONK,” without defending the ONLY alternative hypothesis.

Even VAUSH has stated that everything can be boiled down to genes and environment — this is not exactly true in behavioral genetics, however, when talking about massive group differences in highly heritable traits such as intelligence, aggression, height, skin color, etc. you really do have ketchup and mustard.

As this pertains to the IQ debate, it is nothing new. An age old tactic by people who cannot accept the reality. Arthur Jensen noted this about the environmentarians. Instead of presenting their theories, they like to just critique hereditarians. It is much easier to throw punches than take them. When environmental explanations are presented, they can be eliminated one by one in short order.

unpublished stuff *anon*