Re: Nature v. Nurture (was RE: Vicious Racism)

From: Party of Citizens (citizens@vcn.bc.ca)
Date: Sat Aug 11 2001 - 14:39:44 MDT

Next message: Robert J. Bradbury: "META: Subject Lines"
Previous message: Ken Clements: "Re: Setting Space Boundaries"
In reply to: J. R. Molloy: "Re: Nature v. Nurture (was RE: Vicious Racism)"
Next in thread: Damien Sullivan: "Re: Nature v. Nurture (was RE: Vicious Racism)"
Reply: Damien Sullivan: "Re: Nature v. Nurture (was RE: Vicious Racism)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, J. R. Molloy wrote:

> From: "Zero Powers" <zero_powers@hotmail.com>
> > So is it nature or nurture? That is the question.
>
> 70% nature and 30% nurture; that is the answer.

Are there sound, scientific, a priori reasons for saying that there are no
race differences in intelligence due to nature-genetics? What are they?
POC

Next message: Robert J. Bradbury: "META: Subject Lines"
Previous message: Ken Clements: "Re: Setting Space Boundaries"
In reply to: J. R. Molloy: "Re: Nature v. Nurture (was RE: Vicious Racism)"
Next in thread: Damien Sullivan: "Re: Nature v. Nurture (was RE: Vicious Racism)"
Reply: Damien Sullivan: "Re: Nature v. Nurture (was RE: Vicious Racism)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:07 MDT