Facts, Theories, Policies
In the comments section at Foseti’s, Handle (who should seriously consider starting his own blog) continues to discuss the relationship between evolutionary theory, Christians, seculars, and the Dark Enlightenment. He glosses four possible views of humanity:
You can make a little 4×4 matrix. Humans are:
AA: The product of Evolution and thus HBD.
AB: The product of Evolution and yet EQUAL.
BA: The product of God and thus HBD.
BB: The product of God and thus EQUAL.
Notice that only AB really requires a “yet” – the contradiction is inherent. God can do anything he wants. Following the logic and evidence of Biology would lead you to AA. But AB needs a whole lot of sophistry and social pressure.
I’m persuaded. My previous post attempted to make the same point: that someone like Derb (AA) and someone like Dalrock (BA) have arrived at the same conclusion via different routes; in terms of policy, however, the conclusion is really all that matters.
To what extent would your average biology graduate student or genetics professor accept that AB is, in fact, his own worldview? If he is intellectually honest, I imagine it might look like this:
AB2: The product of Evolution and thus HBD and yet EQUAL because . . .
We’re at the third level of knowledge after because, which means that no appeal to facts or theories (evolution, IQ gaps, whatever) will convince our hypothetical Leftist biologist not to pursue Equality at all costs. For him, the pursuit is its own good. It is a policy built on morals, divorced from lower-order facts and theories. So no “facts” will convince him to abandon the policy, even though Detroit might collapse around him while Silicone Valley thrives.