Are some facts outlawed?

Question

I was a lifeguard. In training, we were taught that, all things being equal, Euro-Americans and Asian-Americans were more neutrally buoyant than African-Americans due to differences in muscle to fat ratios. This fact helped us on the job, making us alert for fatigued African-American boys who were most at risk to drown.

Now, there may be some other differences in this world that are too taboo to be mentioned. Should some facts be outlawed? Are some differences too politically charged to be admitted even if they are true?

For example, if it can be proven that whites are weaker, all things equal, should they have different criteria to becomes soldiers, or to achieve relative fitness levels in school?

Guys, don't get stuck on the example I raised. There are much nastier examples that illustrate the point that I wanted to avoid: two scnadinavians published "Bell Curve" about a decade ago and got slammed. The book proved a link between IQ and race. This is considered too taboo to be formally acknowledged.

Crabby -- you jump too quickly. I did not know that book was discredited. But, again, don't get stuck on the examples and jump to conclusions about my character. I'm interested to know if people believe that some proven differences should be suppressed or acknowledged. Use whatever example resonates for you. The IQ and race link, if it exists, is obviously the most charged of all.

Answer 1

The problem is you're confusing statistical categories. Let's suppose I need individuals who can carry a certain weight, for a certain distance, in a given time. In some military applications (in which I have some experience), these situations do arise.

What you must do is find the individuals who can best perform the task in question - given as large a group to choose from as is practical. If in the end this means you have more blacks than white, that's fine. The point is you're always going to have "weaker" blacks relative to "stronger" whites or from other groups - and vice versa. Inevitably you wind up with a mixed group - even if you do wind up with more from this or that group. You can't start from the general premise of: "Blacks are stronger so let's build an army made of just blacks." Even if you wanted to use such an absurdly minimal criteria, it would eliminate too many good candidates from other groups.

By the way it turns out that blacks are represented by at least twice their portion of the population in the combat arms.

Answer 2

Thanks for your "additional details"--you revealed your true colors. The "Bell Curve" was published by a group later revealed to be neo-Nazis. But the book was not "slammed because it proved a link between IQ and race." As anyone at alll familier with it knows, it was slammeed because the authors falsified and misrepresented data to make it appear that way.

The only people who haven't rejected that piece of trash are racists.

Answer 3

the subject of race is forbidden by the nut jigglers who run yahoo, dr shockley the inventor of the transistor sudiied race and determined that 40% of negroes were below an idiot (60)in iq commie scum
on universities and now at yahoo wont let truth out.

Answer 4

I think outlawed may be a bit strong but there is no doubt that the information gets filtered by the government because they know what is good for us. Don't they?

Answer 5

I think the requirements for military fitness are equal for all. If you do not qualify you're either out or given a job suitable to your abilities.

Failing "boot camp" means you're out.

Answer 6

yeah i think some things just are not spoken of...