Skip to main content

Ann Coulter

Ann Coulter, recently published If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans, and as is typical, she continues her vitriolic blather.

A Republican site, using the General Social Survey, thought it had proven the idea that liberals were less intelligent, using the verbal test from the survey, and on average, this might be true. But then, the author looked further.

The test is divided into three (3) score groups, high, medium and low, and the results showed that Democrats are dominant in the high and low scorers - this is similar to the dichotomy of voting preferences, where cities composed of the educated and poor are Democrat, and suburban/rural voters are Republican. Aside from party affiliation liberals dominate the high scores, while middle of the road and conservative voters dominate the other, lower-scoring groups. Among the intelligent, Republicans are usually the least represented.

The group with the largest representation in the high verbal scorers are Independents, followed by Democrats, and lastly Republicans. If one looked around for scholarly proof, without much equivocation, one would find that liberals are more intelligent than conservatives.

As for Coulter's book, isn't this just more of the same Republican/Conservative double-think? Isn't this tripe more of the same conservative media machine that allows the absurd, obscene, and wrong to trump intelligent discussion?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst by Robert M. Sapolsky My rating: 5 of 5 stars I finished reading this crying. It is a work of neurobiology, social science, anthropology, and history, but ultimately it is a work of great humanity, suggesting ways that humans, our groups, our systems, and our societies can be made better. View all my reviews

A Journey — if You Dare — Into the Minds of Silicon Valley Programmers

My responses in a NY Times comment section for the book, Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World by Clive Thompson : #1 - Link Although I've been a software developer for 15 years, and for longer alternating between a project manager, team lead, or analyst, mostly in finance, and now with a cancer center, I found it funny that you blame the people doing the coding for not seeing the harm it could cause. First, most scientific advancement has dark elements, and it is usually not the science but how it is used and sold by business people that is the problem. This leads to the second problem, in that it is not coding that is in itself problematic, but specifically how technology is harnessed to sell. It is normal and desirable to track users, to log actions, to collect telemetry, so as to monitor systems, respond to errors, and to develop new features, but that normal engineering practice has been used to surveil users for the purpose of selling. Blaming

Don't learn to code. Learn to think.

A response to  Don't learn to code. Learn to think. : Below is is my usual response when I see an article stating that everyone should learn to code:  Rather than programming, it is more important to impart the thinking of computer science (CS) than a specific implementation. Programming can be an end point for some students, but it is likely that programming itself will be increasingly automated, so that one needs more the general concepts common in CS. Even then, programming itself is to some degree a grunt task that one progresses beyond:  The following are typical components of a CS degree: algorithms & flowcharting systems thinking logical systems and set theory object-orientation & patterns probability, statistics, mathematics All of the above can be useful in an increasingly automated and data-driven world.