There’s pretty unambiguous statistical evidence that it happens. The Asian Ivy League percentage has remained basically fixed for 20 years despite the college-age Asian population doubling (and Asian SAT scores increasing slightly).
epursimuove
Karma: 74
The number of Asians (both East and South) among American readers is pretty surprisingly low − 43⁄855 ~= 5%. This despite Asians being, e.g., ~15% of the Ivy League student body (it’d be much higher without affirmative action), and close to 50% of Silicon Valley workers.
So either LW assigns a median probability of at least one in 10,000 that God created the universe and then did nothing
Religion Deist/pantheist/etc.: 22,, 1.5%
The main character is a precocious, day-dreaming, socially inept child—is it really surprising that he appeals to precocious, day-dreaming, socially inept children?
There seems to be a pretty big potential confounder: age. Many respondents’ younger siblings are too young to be contributing to this site, while no one’s older siblings are too old (unless they’re dead, but since ~98% of the community is under age 60 that’s not a significant concern).
A: Gur srzhe (be guvtuobar) vf gur ybatrfg, urnivrfg, naq zbfg ibyhzvabhf obar va gur uhzna obql. Vg znxrf hc 26% bs na vaqvivqhny’f urvtug ba vgf bja. Gur frpbaq ybatrfg obar vf gur gvovn (be fuvaobar) vf gur frpbaq ybatrfg, naq V pbhyqa’g svaq vasbezngvba ba gur frpbaq urnivrfg. Hapyrne vs gur cryivf pbhagf, orpnhfr gur cryivf vf znqr bs frireny obarf shfrq gbtrgure.
Ner lbh fher nobhg guvf? Fbzr Tbbtyvat tvirf n znff nebhaq 260-300t sbe na nqhyg srzhe, pbzcnerq gb 1xt sbe n fxhyy, nygubhtu tenagrq abar bs gur uvgf V svaq frrz greevoyl fpubyneyl.
The first electric cars were made in the 1880s. Is Tesla Motors using old technology?
The Mars rovers use lots of new technology (the aerobraking system and “skycrane”, to name one). NASA has certainly experimented with new propulsion technology like VASIMIR and ion drives, it’s just that these are high-specific-impulse low-thrust platforms unsuitable for launch but good for maneuvering once in orbit. Not all aspects of a field will advance at the same rate. Compare processing power to battery capacity, for example.
Do you have any evidence that any of these things actually happen to a significant extent? Virtually everyone is able to distinguish claims about tendencies from absolute claims, even if they lack the knowledge to express this distinction formally. Here’s Steven Pinker summarizing research on stereotypes:
Moreover, even when people believe that ethnic groups have characteristic traits, they are never mindless stereotypers who literally believe that each and every member of the group possesses those traits. People may think that Germans are, on average, more efficient than non-Germans, but no one believes that every last German is more efficient than every non-German. And people have no trouble overriding a stereotype when they have good information about an individual. Contrary to a common accusation, teachers’ impressions of their individual pupils are not contaminated by their stereotypes of race, gender, or socioeconomic status. The teachers’ impressions accurately reflect the pupil’s performance as measured by objective tests.
Or writing in a manner that simply takes it for granted that black people are unintelligent and prone to crime.
If someone can’t distinguish between a categorical statement (“all demographic X people have trait T”) and a statement about statistical tendencies (“the demographic X average for trait T is N standard deviations below that of demographic Y”) , I question their ability to contribute to any community that’s based around rigorous thinking.
Whoops. Fixed.
If by most places you’re talking about the world (or Western/American world) in general, that’s pretty clearly false. The considerable majority of Americans reject the feminist label, for example. If you’re talking about internet communities with well-educated members, then it probably is true.
It doesn’t repel “anyone whose experience disagrees”, it repels anyone unwilling to hear opposing viewpoints. While having had different experiences may correlate with an unwillingness to hear opposing viewpoints, it’s highly dubious that this correlation is strong enough to completely exclude the former category.
I have difficulty seeing how you can do biology beyond pure description (“Here’s a species of bird with appearance X and behavior Y”) while ignoring both genetics and natural selection. Doing cellular biology seems near-impossible if you can’t mention DNA, while ecology is similarly linked to selection pressure.
(Those are the undergraduate majors with the highest admittance rate to law school.)
Does this control for different average IQ (or SAT, if you prefer) among different majors?
You’re assuming that the new arrival has more information to offer than the departing one. I suspect the opposite is true. There’s probably a sizable negative correlation between one’s reluctance to hear uncomfortable ideas and the quality of the information one has to offer.
I’m not actually that intelligent (IQ about 92 or 96 if I remember right)
This seems quite unlikely given your reasonably high-quality posting history. Is this number from a professionally administered test? Do you have a condition like dyslexia or dyscalculia that impairs specific abilities but not others?
I would find such a feature to be extraordinarily obnoxious, to the point that I’d be inclined to refused such a test purely out of anger (and my scores are not at all embarrassing). I can’t think of any other examples of a website threatening to publicly shame you for non-compliance.
The ‘contrarian’ answers to 1, 2, 3 and 5 are standard libertarian positions, while 4 is pretty common among some denominations of anarchism. They’re hardly “suppressed” ideas.
What does this mean? Google isn’t helping and the only mention I see on LW is this post.