Replies

In the sixties many leftists tried to spread the lie of the tabula rasa or blank slate.

The "tabula rasa" theory is the basis of free enterprise and personal liberty. It implies that anyone has the potential to rise above their circumstances through effort.

IQ is considered determinative, which makes it a convenient tool for nanny-state authoritarians to maintain their power over everyone else.

Tabula rasa came from Greek philosophy. Claiming that any of that has to do with free enterprise and personal liberty, especially when people like John Money used tabula rasa to raise the notion of “gender identity” as a “social construct” rather than anything definite—IOW, he used tabula rasa to justify transexualism and his work therein (so-called gender reassignment) as well as his theories on sexuality in general (mostly homosexuality)—is way, way beyond specious.

No it isn't. I don't know where you picked that up. It's a leftist tool to spread the myth that since all people are born with no hardwired intelligence, every person on earth has the same apitude as every other person, and everybody has the same opportunities to excel in whatever field they want. And since nobody is hardwired to succeed in certain areas, anything anybody knows or does is the result of society putting it there. You couldn't have done it on your own, so whatever you earn is not yours. And males and females only act they way do because the patriarchy decides what the sexes know and how they act.

While everybody should have the same opportunity, people are different. Some people have high aptitudes in some areas (math,science, etc.) that others don't. The facts are incontrovertible: if you don't have the necessary high intelligence for a lot of jobs that need people with high IQs or aptitudes, you're not going to succeed. And the sexes are different as well as a number of studies have conclusively proved.

The "tabula rasa" theory is the basis of free enterprise and personal liberty.

Nope. It's the basis of the idea that mankind is infinitely malleable, that he can be changed and molded to fit the new socialist world.

It's the human equivalent of Lysenkoism, that genetics is a lie.

Eugenics is not the study of human differences and how they are (or are not) inherited, it's the promotion of selective breeding (or forced non-breeding by sterilization).

But let's assume that the Nazis and others who supported eugenics in the 20th killed 15M people.

The most aggressive supporters of the tabula rasa theory are Communists, since they can then dodge the question of how they're going to get around innate human nature. According to them, there IS no innate human nature. Tabula rasa.

The TR boys killed upwards of 100M people in the 20th, possibly as many as 150M.

If we're going to discredit a theory because of how it is used, shouldn't it be TR that's discredited, not eugenics?