Men are smarter then women

Debate isn't analogous of bourgeois egalitarianism, you can't just assume I'm going to do all the work for you. The philosophic burden of proof is the obligation on a party in an epistemic dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position. When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a non-agnostic claim [1]. In this case, Pro undoubtedly has that burden as well as a scientific burden of evidence considering his claim is based on biology. As such, I'm not assuming that Pro should be "doing all the work for me" but rather holding him to the proper expectations of any standard debate. The reason my last round was so short is because he did not make any arguments for me to respond to in R1. So far he has failed to make any arguments in favor of the resolution.Try to clash instead of responding with under 20 characters.Being rude and exhibiting poor conduct is not a contention. "based on IQ results, SAT scores, historical patriarchy and the like."Due to the fact that this is such an incomplete, unsourced and non-cited explanation, I thought Pro was going to expand on this hence why I didn't respond to it in the previous round. I'll start by pointing out that patriarchy has no bearing on men being smarter than women, and Pro must explain how or why that is the case which he hasn't thus far. Moreover, patriarchy has not always been employed. First, we'll have to define patriarchy. The official definition is a form of social organization in which the father is the supreme authority in the family, clan, or tribe; a society, community, or country based on this social organization [2]. In that case, you can see that male intelligence is not implied anywhere in that description as all it says is that the male has more authority, not greater intelligence. Pro hasn't proven that authority warrants intelligence. For our purposes, we are probably defining patriarchy as a male-dominated (controlled) society. So how or why was this authority established? One major component was the rise of monotheism as the Jewish tradition is heavily patriarchal. According to the Creation story, God made man in His (notice God who is allegedly sex-less is always referred to as male) image, and woman was created by taking a rib from that man to give him a companion. I could go on, but in short, religious myths and tradition have perpetuated the idea that men are somehow superior to women and ought to be more highly revered. For instance, women could not become clergy, own property, etc. Another reason for male dominance is of course their physical prowess. This is why men were (and still can be to an extent) compared to "pack leaders" in the animal kingdom. However, dominant strength is not an argument for dominant intelligence. I could go on about why a historic patriarchy proves nothing, but I'll wait to see what Pro comes up with about establishing how patriarchy is about intelligence before responding.Regarding SAT scores, this standardized test is among the most highly criticized in the nation in terms of its assessment. There have been concerns about whether the test is equitable to all those taking it [3], and reports that the test has no statistical validity for tracking trends in measuring ability of American students [4]. It measures how many questions you can get right in a specific amount of time, but that is quite problematic and far from a legitimate indicator of overall "intelligence." For the sake of character space I'll leave it at that unless Pro challenges this; however, the point is that the test has proven to be far from accurate in terms of appropriately measuring intelligence vs. test taking skills, and only emphasizes or rewards specific aptitudes while ignoring various other indicators of intelligence. The theory of multiple intelligences differentiates intelligence into various specific (primarily sensory) modalities rather than seeing it as dominated by a single general ability. There are a wide variety of cognitive abilities which are only very weakly correlated with one another, despite the close correlations between aspects of intelligence generally measured by traditional intelligence (IQ) tests or psychometrics [5]. The various types of intelligences include: spatial, linguistic, logical-mathematical, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic and existential. Traditional IQ tests focus on logical-mathematical and spatial questions. However it is well established that women perform better than men on tests of verbal application and obtain better scores than men on most verbal memory tasks [6]. Women are also more "socially intelligent" than men. They have more brain circuits for communication, reading emotions , social nuances, nurturing skills and a greater ability to use both sides of the brain simultaneously (multi-tasking). Women are better at reading faces and recognizing emotional overtones in others, which largely explains the phenomena of "women's intuition" [7]. Obviously this is a significant evolutionary advantage. Even the idea that men are naturally better at math and logic can be challenged on the grounds that social trends have led to this presumption. Research indicates that just exposing people to the perception that men are better than women at math not only makes women perform worse, but men are likely to rate their own math abilities more highly than girls even if their test scores were exactly the same. In countries where women aren't thought to be inferior at math, girls are much better represented in high-level math competitions [8]. There have also been other studies indicating that it's not sex but height which plays a role in determining intelligence. Psychometricians have known since the end of the 19th century that height is positively correlated with intelligence: taller people on average are more intelligent than shorter people, and men are taller than women in every human population. However once we control for height, women are slightly but significantly more intelligent than men. Height has exactly the same effect on intelligence for men and women [9]. -- CONCLUSION --Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa notes that general intelligence has likely evolved as a domain-specific psychological mechanism to deal with evolutionary novelty. However, unlike populations in different geographic parts of the world, men and women within a population have always faced the same level of evolutionary novelty throughout evolutionary history because they have always migrated together [9]. As such, there would have been no reason for men to be more intelligent than women though it's true their brain components are different thus warranting differing strengths and weaknesses. Pro hasn't attempted to prove that particular strengths akin to men are superior indicators of overall intelligence compared to the strengths of women. He also hasn't proven that his measuring indicators are valid. Until he does, we have no reason to accept that men are more intelligent than women. [1] Michalos, Alex. Principles of Logic. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. 1969. p. 370. [2] http://dictionary.reference.com...[3] Jacobs, W. R. Is the SAT Fair? Journal of College Admissions, 1995. Vol 146. pp. 22-31.[4] http://65.181.147.127/TMSTN/Articles/ContUseAndMisuseSATscores.pdf[5] http://en.wikipedia.org...[6] Rahman, Qazi; Abrahams, Sharon; Wilson, Glenn D. Neuropsychology, Vol 17(2), Apr 2003, 240-246.[7] http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com...[8] http://jezebel.com...[9] http://www.psychologytoday.com...