reply to post by makinho21
First off: As for Atheists being more intelligent. On average, I would say this is probably a good correlation - though correlation does not mean
causation. Atheists are generally more intelligent because they are more rational, either for lack of easy answers or by use of rationality to break
free of religion. This doesn't mean that religious people can't be extremely intelligent (Gregor Mendel, Kenneth Miller, Robert Bakker, or
Theodosius Dobzhansky), or that Atheists cannot be dumber than creationists. On average, however, you'll likely find that those who are more
intelligent are more likely to become Atheists. For instance, 90%+ of all scientists are Atheists.
On to another point:
I guess he thinks there is a genetic difference in intelligence between human sexes and races.
Actually... there is. The "blank slate" philosophy which has guided study into human behavior the last century or so is
wrong. We are not all
born equal in capability or capacity.
The truth is, that heritability is every bit as important as environment - and the serendipity of chance and experience play a much larger role than
most want to admit. This is not a "middle road" apologetic, but what we're actually observing across populations, in the wiring of the brain, and
in studies involving clones (identical twins) and fraternal twins both in the same home and adopted out.
It isn't an excuse or justification for racism or discrimination, because a hereditary dispensation is only applicable to populations at large - not
to individuals. The same way evolution operates on populations, not individuals. We are born with innate talents, moral templates, sexual
orientations, and instincts. However, with the plasticity and adaptability of the brain, these only represent rough drafts which can be altered under
the right environment, in the right culture, with the right experiences, and with serendipity.
Yet, considering how poorly scientific understanding filters down to the public understanding - this is still going to be a very big hot button to the
idiots and racists who think it's some kind of argument for social eugenics. For god's sake, most people still don't understand even the basic
tenants of evolution or emergence and complexity.
Even the specter of geocentricism and anthropomorphizing nature is still with us. The breeze is not "gentle", and the sun does not "set in the
west" - because the breeze is not conscious and empathetic, and the sun does not revolve around the Earth.
The Blank Slate: Modern Denial of Human Nature
Jonathan Haydt: Real difference between Liberals and Conservatives
Steven Pinker: Chalking it up to the Blank Slate
Richard Dawkins: Natural Selection and Evolutionary Psychology 1/2