it's outrageous the NYT called Scoot a racist like Charles Murray! also, Scoot agrees with race science, precisely as Murray does. Also, the leaked 2014 email is only outrageous if you hadn't read SSC
> It was not the sight of Mitchum that made him sit still in horror. It was the realization that there was no one he could call to expose this thing…
content warning: Zack Davis. so of course this is merely the intro to Zack's unquenchable outrage at Yudkowsky using the pronouns that someone wants to be called by
oh holy shit I was only a handful of paragraphs in but he literally says that!!!
So The New York Times implicitly accuses us of being racists, like Charles Murray, and instead of pointing out that being a racist like Charles Murray is the obviously correct position that sensible people will tend to reach in the course of being sensible, we disingenuously deny everything.
one point for (pseudo)intellectual honesty i guess!
I wanted to see what kind of person would defend Scott, but disparage Murray so..
ctrl-f "Murray"
read quote relatedctrl-w
I almost don't want to know what motte the author has set up to make Murray's hereditarianism seem "obviously correct" and "sensible". Are we supposed to ignore the cross burning and constant race science posting on twitter?
IMO, we don't want to poke the hornet's nest of Davis defending Murray, lest we get another 20k word sequence that we have to slog through to sneer at.