Sonia Sotomayor Tapped For Hight Court

come on all you righties. The key for the case was their was no or little difference in qualifications of the minorities and yet there was a difference in the scores of race. Arguing that maybe something else caused it is making you look stupid. You can't compare when there is no difference in qualifications or ability to when their is.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm not arguing that case. I know nothing about it. I'm arguing with the general statement, made in this thread, about IQ and other common standardized tests. Specifically, I cannot see how they are racially biased or understand what that even means, given the nature of what is being tested.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

different cultures think differently. It's possible to design the test to focus on what certain cultures think like thus biasing the test in their favor.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Works for me, just one little detail though

That might be overstating it, but just barely if so. The question as I understand it is whether the City should have pulled the test because they suspected serious Title VII exposure. Their argument is that they were following the law in their response. They saw the test results and said, "This looks bad under Title VII." And so they asked around and it turns out that the test does contain some irrelevant material, and does not actually test supervisory ability. Between those points, the city argues, it really had no choice but to scrap the test results.

The district court agreed. And the appellate said it succinctly: The city had no good choices.

Where I contest specifically is whether the city has determined definitively that racial bias existed in the test.

As to the rest, I won't argue against your general assessment of the city's credibility.

 

Frankly, that stinks of shit.

How do different cultures think differently about math? 2+2 is four no matter where you live. Reading comprehension is much the same. You can either read and understand what I write or you can't.

Furthermore, in order for your bias to exist, you actually have to be dealing with different cultures. In most cases, we aren't. The diagram Mad posted was a racial diagram of Americans, I believe. Thus, they all come from the same culture, and yet, they score differently on the exam.

 

Oh... that's just RICH Ice!

You said: "Several hundred, on issues such as health care reform and government bailouts of banks and the like. And now I'M supposed to verify your information and do your research for you! I'm supposed to prove the fact that since Americans don't want an auto bail-out that they are somehow "left-libertarians"! (Oh... oh, that's right, on the issues that are only important to you)

This has gotten patently ridiculous. You have to be either joking or totally insane. It's not like you said, "Well, something like a hundred..." you made a blatant statement of fact, and then when called out on your lies (BLATANT at that), you respond with some survey on the US public not wanting an auto industry bail out, and that It's MY responsibility to Google your sources! If it's so easy why not post them yourself?

So, I Googled and Binged your words: "majority + Americans + left +L ibertarian" and here's what I got:

Google
Bing

Tell me where you find "HUNDREDS OF STATISTICS/POLLS SHOWING THAT AMERICANS ARE LEFT-LEANING LIBERTARIANS. Hell, show me ANY poll that shows this! It's not even like you were just arguing some subjective opinion in this case. This is--what?--the fifth or sixth time in as many weeks you've posted supposed facts and then ran with your tail between your legs when called out on them, hiding behind the excuse, "Well, do your own research" or somesuch.

Wow.

You've gotten that bad.

No. I'd be happy as a clam is your could do your own and--say--start with backing up your claims, if only for once.

Reasonable? How the hezmada are you being REASONABLE!?!!? You just lied through your teeth (again) and then when called on on that lie tried to put the obligation on ME to prove that you were telling the truth. Shit, NO WONDER you can't trust yourself to evaluate redacted CIA documents, you can't even muster up the intellectual mechanics to put together a reasonable debate. YES-- REASONABLE, as in: containing clear thought processes supported by facts, WHICH FACTS, you claim to have on hand (but, clearly fail to provide when called-upon to do so).

Well, that would be a reasonable argument, iceaura, IF (and this one will take some concentration on your part), IF, I claimed to be able to "hold my breath for two hours, fly like with little bat wings... or light fires through telekinesis..." which, since I haven't proposed any of those things, really isn't relevant at all. Since you, however, have seen fit to post NUMEROUS "facts" from pretty much day one around here, yet cannot be bothered to support any of them, it isn't really stretch of sanity for me to actually expect you to back your statements up with SOMETHING resembling a fact... something verifiable. Call me crazy.

But instead of all that, I get: A web-page on how the American public doesn't want bail outs (well, DUH!)... and THAT is your supporting information on the belief that Americans are left-libertarians? Really?

Okay. Good luck with that.

~String

 

its the simple truth.

a lot of these tests deal with the abilities of deduction. Say you ask a question that involves time do you really think people from culture that view time as linear and infinite, linear and finite, and circular are all going to go from a to b and the same way.

all things aren't equal like economic status. Their are different cultures in the Us.

 

That is the biggest and most ridiculous load of nonsense I've ever heard. There is absolutely NO difference between one culture's ability to figure out mathematical time differences from the next. And if they CAN'T then they have no fucking business being fire fighters, since all fighters have to complete timed tests for running in and out of buildings in both simulated and real burning situations. You can have the deep-thinking fire fighters who sit, pondering the cyclical nature of the universe, I'll take the ones who are strong, fast and tough any day.

Moreover, I've lived in Latin America. I speak Spanish fluently and not a single one of them (In Spain [obviously not Latin America], Mexico, Venezuela and Costa Rica) have ever answered complicated time-related questions with Buddhist monk nonsense. Blacks, at least every single one of them I've ever known, don't spout your ethereal nonsense when answering simple questions like, "Um, I need you to come in for a shift tonight at 5pm, is that okay?"

Provide one shred of evidence that shows that different cultures cannot answer mathematical time questions because of varying philosophies about linear versus circular time.

12am minus 4 hours is 8pm no matter where you are from.

~String

 

the example was more for the comment on how culture affects IQ tests and the like which are far more abstract than concrete.
But if the test was for a leadership role type promotion than once again it is an abstract quality and it doesn't seem like much but look at all the the kinds of questions that the answers can be affected by culture when it comes to that. what is leadership? What is good leadership? what makes a good leader? what should a leaders' responsibilities be? add on to that that the written word cannot convey the same nuance as the spoken word add you have a the possibility of having different answers because of culture.

 

The Piraha people of the Amazon do not have words for numbers above 3. Furthermore, all attempts to teach them math inevitably fail.

 

Which still doesn't explain how a test that contains math, problem solving and logic is "culturally biased."

Which is precisely why most fearful cities and corporations have INTRODUCED standardized testing, to remove the element of "bias" out of the promotion process. Everybody gets the same test. Everybody has the same chance. If it was left up to some ambiguous interview process, then the minority candidate who loses the position to a white man can never say, "Well, the white manager wanted the white guy more than the black guy."

So the issue now is that at standardized test was somehow secretly biased (an accusation which no one has proven, to date)

Two good questions, but those presumably were going to be determined by the people taking the EXACT SAME TEST.

I'm an HR manager with a large retailer. I have 114 employees working for me. What makes a good leader? The simplest answer is: The person who can be an leader of each individual; who can be a different leader for different people. The person who is the same guy for everybody is a shitty leader. It's the leader who is a very different person for each individual, yet who has the same standards for all of them, who truly leads his people.

That's not even in question here, since that's not even part of the discussion. We're discussing intellectual ability, which intellectual ability was--presumably--required (at least at a minimum) of all of them.

~String

 

Really?

Try proving it . . .

No, they don't.

I took the GRE last year.

It was math, reading comprehension and vocabulary. You don't have to deduce anything about the area of a triangle or what legerdemain means. You either know this or you don't. They are not open to interpretation.

The one area open to subjectivity is the essay portion. But even there, the graders are simply looking for things like clarity of thought, organization and sentence structure. They don't really care what you are writing or from what position you chose.

Consider that MOST of the world operates on an established system of time, um, yeah I would say reading a watch in the Sudan is no different than it is in New York. So what are you on about?

No, shit.

And if you notice I made no claim to the contrary, largely because I have seen the data and realize how much of a role economics plays in test scores. Typically, wealthier kids go to better schools. They also have parents who shell out money for test prep that poor kids don't get. But none of this equals a "cultural bias" that prevents certain races from performing. It's an economic bias that affects the poor of all races.

There are nuances to one culture. Some people call them subcultures. But there is only one holistic culture. This is not to say Texas isn't different than California, but you need to show how that impacts a person's ability to figure out math. I don't think you can.

 

Interesting statement. Perhaps even worthy of its own thread.

 

Wow. You sited one of the ONLY stone age culture on Earth who don't count (which is just odd, since we all have ten fingers, which sets the pattern for all subsequent numbers). So, okay. I stand corrected.

Now, were any of them applying to be a firefighter in Connecticut? Have any of them managed to make their way to the USA to apply for public service leadership positions? I doubt it.

So, the point stands, that nobody has proven that this test was culturally biased, except that not enough blacks and Hispanics passed it. Is this how we start grading our tests in school? If not enough black kids in Geometry pass the test, then we grade on a curve to appear more PC? Really?

No wonder our schools are so shitty.

When I lived in Europe, EVERYBODY took the same tests and you didn't pass the year unless you passed the final every half. If you didn't: you fail. Wonder if that's why they actually educate their students and we, presumably, don't?

~String

 

now your asking an entirely different question. the original question was how it would be possible for the test to be biased not how it is or isn't.

all that means is everyone takes a test with the same built in biases not that the test isn't biased. you can design a test to get the results you want.

your missing the point. Culturally people can and do have very different views on this. with the right phraseology and knowing how different groups see the connotations of certain words you can design questions to elicit the answers that will make one group get rated more favorable over another. Have you ever taken a test that had questions that had overly verbose questions or had questions that were overly complicated in sentence structure? Those kinds of questions are the ones tend to be designed to trigger different answers from different groups. I mean questions designed to reveal differences aren't unknown and they do actually have a purpose. You ever take a psych exam?

 

No, you're supposed to quit deflecting issues and badgering people with irrelevancies. If you don't want to believe that the general run of Americans seems to be mostly left libertarian overall, as visible on this forum whenever someone reposts the Political Compass link, then don't. I assure you I couldn't care less, and plan to do no work at all toward attempting persuasion of you. You wanted polls, and the reception accorded my trial sample shows me that hundreds more polls like it would have no effect on you. It's like supplying count with links. Speaking of whom, another gem from that rich mine:

Your failure to understand things is without much significance, by now.

There are several separate and mutually reinforcing arguments for the likely biases of most standardized tests as they are used in real life. The IQ is best documented - among them, for the IQ: researchers (such as Claude Steele) have found that black Americans do significantly better on disguised IQ tests - ones presented in such a way that the taker doesn't know what kind of test they are - while white Americans show no such presentation bias. Steele claims to be able to create such "stereotype vulnerability" in whites vs yellows, women vs men, old vs young, and other such areas of stereotype. The black vs white one is one of the more damaging, he thinks. That's one line of argument.

A few related links on different approaches to the much argued IQ test:
http://www.yorku.ca/steeves/1010M_2008/CH15_Social_6pp.pdf
http://eprints.ru.ac.za/504/01/Gaylard_MA.pdf South African perspective.
http://news.stanford.edu/pr/95/950816Arc5120.html An article introducing Steele's "stereotype vulnerability".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect This article points out many circumstances worth considering, such as:

How many Virginia type situations, and related types of circumstance for generations throughout the US, would it take to bias a national average IQ?

The point is: regardless of how one's intuition assesses the likelihood of these factors, and the others with these implications, predominating, they are solid and well-established lines of inquiry. The notion that the exam producing those extremely biased results was itself flawed is not a strange, unsupported, unlikely proposition. It fits the facts as we know them, and until it is dealt with the test results should be discarded on the statistical evidence.

So what? The point is, was, and has been all along here that the burden of proof is on the test. That is Federal policy and rule, the law the judges are sworn to uphold, and it was adopted for very good reason - a hundred years of experience with racially biased and deliberately rigged exams set up to favor the group doing the setting up.

 

This is interesting. Can you provide any examples of tests that have been proven to do this? I understand that people with language barriers might have difficulties with tests, but is there any chance that ANYBODY can show me a test example and or verifiable study where this has been proven, or are we all supposed to just buy into this on the word of the left?

~String

 

Since you mentioned my name, I feel it necessary to point out that your statement above is little more than a giant attempt to deflect attention from the fact that yet again you have absolutely NOTHING to back up a claim you made on this website.

Furthermore, looking at the bold section, you seem to have conveniently set yourself up in a lofty position from which you are NEVER required to try to persuade anyone of anything you say, because, hey, actually trying to argue a point and convince people of it just isn't your bag, is it? I also like how "badgering people with irrelevancies" is apparently your way of labeling those who question your undisputed, blue-collar, lefty, omniscience.

Apparently, the pattern we're supposed to accept is:

1. You state an opinion as fact.

2. We accept it.

Because asking you to back your opinion up is "badgering" you, right?

Funny thing is, I can post at least three times in as many weeks that you have been demonstrably WRONG about something (to say nothing of your Iran contra gaff) -- and that's me being kind and not calling you a liar or an idiot, which are also distinct possibilities. So I guess the question is, why should anyone listen to anything you have to say on any issue, given your demonstrated inaccuracy and ethereal qualities?

 

Yes. How DARE this debate be about substance, which substance you posited and then upon closer inspection turned out to be blatant lies. Yeah. That's me badgering you. You poor poor dear. Your treatment has obviously been bad.

I mean, what kind of a world is it where a guy can't say something like, "Hundreds of polls show that Americans are left-libertarian on the issues..." and not just have people accept that fact (in fact, a cornerstone of his entire argument) without calling him out on it? Oh. Right. It's called a SCIENTIFIC FORUM. You know-- the kind where you're expected to support your facts with proof.

I know this must get tiresome for you (you know, us asking you to actually have a reasonable argument supported by real facts and all), but do us a favor and at least give us a clue where you got this "hundreds" of surveys and/or polls? It's not like you made a small grammatical error.

Wait! You're using THIS forum as one of your one hundred sources as to the political leanings of the USA? Very scientific of you. What's your technique?

Well, duh, because you've provided not one RELEVANT link actually showing the words "left-leaning" when describing the USA. You've patched together this belief through some convoluted logic and then posted it with the expectation that it be accepted as fact.

Shit, Ice, if you want to be treated a little more lightly, then here's a thought: ACTUALLY POST A SINGLE POLL THAT SHOWS THAT A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ARE LEFT-LIBERTARIAN. Just one. I don't need hundreds. But that ONE better state that Americans are left-libertarian.

But we know where this will go. You won't be able to find one and in order to save face you'll use your typical gramatical tricks to say something like, "Well, it wouldn't help anyway." or "Well, you have to read them all, and you guys just wouldn't bother." Which is-- as always--your way of admitting defeat.

Remember, this is all based upon YOUR post. Your statement of fact. Not mine. Not Counte's. Not Tiassa's. Not Mad's. Not PJ's. Not Buffalo's. You also don't see any of your much more respectable left-leaning friends jumping in here precisely because anybody who reads your tripe just has to slap their forehead in embarrassment at what you try to pass off as logic.

Really? This is another time where I'm going to ask you to back it up with something verifiable. Since when did the defending party carry the burden of proof in a court of law? I'd like to see a federal law or court case on this.

Um. Which Federal policy and rule is that... exactly?

~String

 

hence the question about the psych exam. They are a prime example of questions designed to get different answers of questions based on triggers.



i know this isn't a direct answer but please bear with me.