Why "african americans" can never excel at anything relative to the white majority : they can't be the smartest, nor the poorest, nor the best nor the neediest nor the anything else-est. Not ever.

Saturday, 10 March, Year 10 d.Tr. | Author: Mircea Popescu

We've been discussing statistics now and again (and again), but apparently nothing's harder "to understand" for common folk than plain, obvious and common sense items they do not wish to even consider, let alone grok.

Let's go again : black people living in the United States can not be the smartest, poorest, best, neediest nor dominate any other normally distributed category of performance however defined because there's just not enough of them.

That's it, and it's sufficient. Here, with visual aids :


The large white space eating the tiny black space represent the relative populations : there's a factor of about 8 separating white and black populations ; and there's a factor of about 8 separating white and black surfaces.

Because the black distribution is so small, you need roughly speaking three standard deviations to match performance equivalent to one single standard deviation in the larger distribution. This is to say that in order to find a black guy who is better than two thirds of the general population at any given task -- being a fireman, or being indigent, or being just about anything else -- you are looking for a black guy that is better than 99.87% than all black guys at the same task.

Yes, you read that right : only the one-in-a-thousand black swan can compare on equal footing with the one third of the general population. You need the best black guy out of one thousand black guys to get a black guy that can compete on equal footing with a white guy that's the best of... a random sample of three dudes.

Which is why (for instance) having anything but white people on, say, Stanford's list of full scholarships for reason of anything (academic performance, economic indigence, anything whatsoever) this year (or any other year) is strictly obscene, as the white guys are not only the most deserving academically and by such a large margin no Ivy league could possibly admit anyone else in any sort of fair contest -- but they're also the neediest, by equally such a large margin that idem.

Where's your "science" now ?

Are you willing to admit it's just bullshit you made up with no basis in reality whatsoever ? Or not just yet ?

Who's gonna provide "just the facts" carefully curated of any actual facts so the sort of rank nonsense you swim in can continue ?

Hm ?

Comments feed : RSS 2.0. Leave your own comment below, or send a trackback.

4 Responses

  1. Nonsense. A randomly chosen black will deviate with the same probability as a randomly chosen white. Assuming that race and performance are independent (as I may, you said any property), the proportion of blacks in people over 1SD, 2SDs, ... will be exactly the same as their proportion in the entire population. Apply Bayes and see for yourself.

  2. Mircea Popescu`s avatar
    Mircea Popescu 
    Saturday, 10 March 2018

    This is entirely false : an item chosen for property P will not be found as frequently an item' chosen for property P and property Q. As the property "being black" already imposes a 1:8 improbability upon occurence, you will find a competent black policeman ~for every eight competent white firemen you find. Apply whatever you want, there's no such thing as magical pantsuit-fairness.

  3. How can it be entirely false when you just stated pretty much the same thing?

  4. Mircea Popescu`s avatar
    Mircea Popescu 
    Saturday, 10 March 2018

    Well, it's not ; I just misread what you said.

    Anyway, the problem remaining is that both our comments discuss an imaginary world where being black is of the nature of "your ssn ending in 6" or "being born on a tuesday".

    This is eminently not what the pantsuit party claims ; instead they claim "african american" is a group. If indeed this is true (which evidently it is not), then the above discussion in the article exactly applies, and my comment will have to be ammended from

    you will find a competent black policeman ~for every eight competent white firemen you find

    to the finer

    you will find a marginally competent black policeman for maybe every third marginally competent white firemen you find ; but you will find middling competent black policemen extremely rarely, and anything better than that absolutely never.

    This still neglects important long tail effects, which account for interesting natural properties such as "you will not be finding any stars in chemistry labs, notwithstanding that balls of hydrogen of various sizes are often found there", ie, there will never be such a thing as an "african-american renaissance" or industrial revolution, or anything else worth the mention. There is after all a reason the nightlife of Columbus, Ohio is not 10% of the nightlife of New York, notwithstanding that the population is.

Add your cents! »
    If this is your first comment, it will wait to be approved. This usually takes a few hours. Subsequent comments are not delayed.