"William Morse"  wrote
>
> > In fact even the ideology is suspect. For instance if poor
> > Negro school performance is caused largely by their high rate of
> > single parenting, there is a strong argument that nothing should be
> > done to reverse the consequences of these lifestyle choices. On the
> > other hand if the poor performance is due to genetics, then an "equal
> > opportunities" policy would leave few or no Negroes in positions of
> > responsibility, which may not be socially desirable, so some form of
> > affirmative action may be called for.
>
> While I can agree that it may be a bad idea to reinforce poor lifestyle
> choices (and a worse idea to encourage single parenting, which is what
> the well meaning Aid For Dependent Children program tended to do), we
> need to be careful in assessing what is actually a poor choice. For poor
> urban dwellers in the US - especially minorities with disproportionately
> high rates of male incarceration and unemployment - it may make more
> sense for females to have children at a relatively young age, when the
> children will be healthier, and have assistance in raising them by
> mothers and aunts who have had time to amass some wealth. There are
> obvious disadvantages to this choice, but we should recognize that for
> many people the "choices" can be quite constrained - and
that widespread
> social phenomena are unlikely to be maladaptive.
>
Of course. The "welfare queen" is very highly adapted, and in Darwinian
terms it doesn't matter how to acquire the resources to pass on your genes,
as long as they are passed on. This is why "evolutionary morality" is so
ridiculous.

I think one of the problems is that, for the poor, enormous effort is
required to obtain very long-term benefits. For instance if you stick out a
job for six months at MacDonalds you might be promoted to "crew
leader", and
if you do that for a year then you might be in a position to get a job as a
quality controller in a factory or something. However it is very easy to
fall out with someone at MacDonalds, get the sack, and be back to square
one. In fact most MacDonald's crew last only a few weeks. It is quite easy
to stick out a degree course at Oxford for three years, knowing that a
respected qualification and probably a good job is at the end of it, but it
still not uncommon for people to drop out. How much more difficult to serve
time at a burger bar, with much worse conditions and no clear result at the
end of it.

The point I was making is that believing "genes determine IQ" doesn't
necessarily provide ammunition for arguing that "affirmative action is
wrong", you can just as easily argue the opposite. The man whose psychosis
is caused by defective genes deserves better treatment than the man with the
same problem caused by taking street drugs.
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 9/11/04 6:28:23 AM