On balance Caucasians have a Higher IQ than African Americans

It looks like, once again, I have accepted an already lost debate, just as with my last debate pertaining to interracial relations ".and one specifically tendered to me, too, no doubt, though our glorious leader Mikal did hum and haw. I don"t hold it against him, though. In fact, it"s almost an honour to take part in this debate, hopeless though it may seem, which strikes a chord with my very being. Gap Inc. Mikal is playing it very simply. He would but bring it straight down to hard statistics, supposedly to definitional norms, completely bypassing the inspection of his definitions as meaningful. This is hardly acceptable, however, given the grave relevance of what we are debating, how absolutely HUGELY the consideration of intelligence plays into our social structure. If the resolution were that English people, on balance, spoke English better than French people, then that might be acceptable. But not here. Not with so much on the line. And so we are left with the question, "What does intelligence quotient actually mean?" Note: In the opening round Mikal states that "this is a pretty clear debate", and that there is to be "no semantics"; but are my objections really and truly just semantics; though obviously semantics, should they be considered cheating? What is the meaning of intelligence to the average person but with regard to ability, potential, and, primarily, mental dexterity? Who truly reads "intelligence quotient", with complete emotional detachment, as referring merely to some certain test or tests which some certain group or groups or one singular individual has devised? Nobody: that is the absolute truth of it. And it is the same with many such words " "communism", for example; are there not many amongst you who would simply define "communism" as "death"? " or any other sort of stereotype rests upon the exact same thing. In truth, it is enormously difficult to have a "pretty clear debate", so infused with emotion as words tend to become. Instead, there will always be breakdowns in communication " and, indeed, concerning something such as intelligence, we might as well be throwing out such words as "terrorist", or "Islam", and expecting everyone to just converge on some specific reality; which is, of course, absurd " and so hard semantics become practically essential when trying to hammer out anything " anything " with any real meaning. What is intelligence, then, and how should we measure it? Is IQ testing at current justified in its nomenclature; should not each test deal its merit in extreme specificity; are we justified in gauging from trends that such-and-such " say, that black people should score lower on average than white people " should always be the case? These are all incredibly weighty questions, but go almost completely unconsidered, though as if granted, on the large, behind the weight of the results themselves. Should one simply concede that there is a gap between black and white people in this thing which calls itself the "intelligence quotient" by the results of some mere tests? And concede to some so vile as would wish to relegate the other to an animal, vicious Cain who would slay Abel? ".One should wonder what that would leave us with. And of course, should we change the name of it, the same stigma gets attached to the new name, and the same old rigmarole begins again, people becoming so agitated by a word, or words, as to lose all reason".. But then it should just be denied again. Revamped again. Let us not think for one second that this is just how it is. Now, " that might sound cheesy or whatever; I know it does " it does to me anyway " but there is actual meaning behind it nonetheless. Generally, we"re all going to fit ourselves into absolutely ridiculous niches " deeply psychological niches: the Irish as sadly singing, merry war-makers; Canadians, " as I"m very easily perceiving by my ridiculous aunt home for Christmas " ridiculously P.C., in attempting to tame their sister nation the U.S. no doubt; Aussies are a nation of autists trying to pretend the Chinese don"t exist; women go for the womanly jobs; men, the providers; and so on; and so on; and so on. --R.L. Stine----Frankenstein-----wrote horror books. This is how ridiculous we are. We"re all trying to fit ourselves into this strange f*cking existence (excuse my French " what"s that about though? The French as perverts? There"s more of it probably), and, uh, "well, you can see how absolutely and precisely we will conform to stereotypes; to our perceptions of what we are "at least I hope so! And then what comes of telling black people they are inherently dumber? "we all know that spiel about teachers telling kids they"re dumb; how the kids will live up to the charge in a sort of defiance " as if to own it. If you"re afraid of dogs, dogs are going to act the dog with you ---Yes, this is getting ridiculous; but it"s true"".We"re all fitting together in crazily complex, yet ridiculously retarded ways, and you are most likely being an absolute sh*t in your conceptions of people. F*ck, even victim blaming is a much trickier topic of discussion than most people give it credit for being. They say that faith can move mountains, and it can; but people never think that maybe it might work against you " that faith might pick the mountain up and drop it on your head for you"..Well, it does. And it"s because we"re retarded gods, basically. ".I don"t even care. F*ck formality, and f*ck winning this debate. But I"m right, and I know I am. And I"m probably not going to post anymore rounds after this; but I don"t need to do that either. The videos are my argument. And I'm not reformatting from Word either. Mikal if you want another round out of me, you're going to have to post within the hour probably. PEACE, homies!!! http://www.youtube.com... http://www.youtube.com...