Re: BELL CURVE CRITIC EXPOSED?

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: J.Chang: "Re: Effectual Demonstration at Rutgers (fwd)"
• Previous message: Arun Gupta: "Re: Definition of Race"
• Maybe in reply to: Jim Rogers: "BELL CURVE CRITIC EXPOSED?"

In article <3iajon$qnu@rebecca.albany.edu>, labonnes@csc.albany.edu (S. LaBonne) writes...
In article <17FEB199510153045@cc.weber.edu>,
Martin Hutchison <mhutchison@cc.weber.edu> wrote:

> _Populations_ are real, but their boundaries are exceedingly fuzzy.
> Their division into "races" is highly arbitrary. (If you don't think
> so, try to make a comprehensive list of the "races", then go to the
> library and look up all the other lists that have been compiled over
> the years.)
>***
>Why can't the list be useful instead of comprehensive?
>And just because sets overlap does not mean that sets do not exist or are not
>useful.

Useful for what purpose? To ensure that you will always
have somebody to feel superior to? That's your problem, and
certainly is no concern of science.
****
It can be useful in deciding how to spend resources.
So, what's your point? Do you still feel the same way about overlapping sets,
that they are useless for anything?
MKH

• Next message: J.Chang: "Re: Effectual Demonstration at Rutgers (fwd)"
• Previous message: Arun Gupta: "Re: Definition of Race"
• Maybe in reply to: Jim Rogers: "BELL CURVE CRITIC EXPOSED?"