A collection of 155 posts
It seems that gaining more knowledge, even on topics where that knowledge could be damaging in the short term, is the preferable approach.
Despite strong genetic influences on IQ (and there are strong genetic influences on IQ), we can’t calculate the proportion of credit for Einstein’s intellect that is owed solely to his genes.
Why? For one, there is very little political and ideological diversity in the social sciences.
With critical support from nonprofits like the Galapagos Conservancy and advice from an international team of conservation scientists.
What if much of what we know about the causes of crime is either deeply flawed or flat out wrong?
We harbor no illusions that a single article will alter anyone’s mindset on the issue of race differences in a deeply appreciable manner.
If this rate of letter propagation continues, we’ll soon have an acronym that spans several lines and will be worth well over two thousand points in Scrabble.
All of this discussion leaves unanswered the question of how we decide if something represents a breakthrough — after all, there isn’t an international court of arbitration for creativity.
The anti-democratic attitude of the liberal elite is absurd from a theoretical viewpoint because a democratic judgment represents the will of the majority...
The goal of public health is ostensibly primary prevention: this means a focus on anticipating, (rather than treating), disease, disorder, and injury.
The situationist idea that personality is an illusion is an arresting one, but it is false.
To our knowledge, we have yet to see a similar example applied specifically to race.
To go from noticing that genetic differences were making a difference to knowing which genetic differences were making a difference, geneticists had to move from the classical twin methods to the modern “molecular” methods.
We should start at the beginning, which is to say, conception. That magical moment when sperm meets egg holds an important insight.