• Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The joke is “this could have been prevented, if that guy became infertile, but unfortunately, modern medicine saved him”. That’s not jumping to codclusions, that’s the literal text of the movie.

    Seriously, what’s wrong with your media literacy? It’s so obvious.

    It kinda seems you are dismissing the possibility of nurture attributing to the equation at all, which in and of itself is a eugenics based argument.

    Nice try. I’m simply interpreting the text of the movie.

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      The joke is “this could have been prevented, if that guy became infertile, but unfortunately, modern medicine saved him”. That’s not jumping to codclusions, that’s the literal text of the movie.

      Yes…it is. Preventing a deadbeat dad from abandoning even more families to poverty is not saying that his genes are cursed or something.

      Seriously, what’s wrong with your media literacy? It’s so obvious

      Have you not ever heard of nature vs nurture? Never heard of tabula rassa? You do know that intellect isn’t determined by genes alone, correct?

      Nice try. I’m sim’ly interpreting the text of the movie.

      Yes, through the lens of eugenics…

      • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        The movie constantly focuses on genetics. It even ends with the naration that the (relatively smart) hero has a few smart kids and his dumb friend has a few dumb ones. The movie never interacts with *any socioeconomic factors, except for conflating poor people with dumb people.

        Have you not ever heard of nature vs nurture?

        The movie doesn’t get into that argument.

        Never heard of tabula rassa?

        What does “clean slate” have to do with this?

        You do know that intellect isn’t determined by genes alone, correct?

        Yes, that’s my point. The premise of the movie hinges on intelligence being mainly inherited.

        • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          The movie constantly focuses on genetics. It even ends with the naration that the (relatively smart) hero has a few smart kids and his dumb friend has a few dumb ones.

          It doesn’t mention genes… In the clip you are talking about where he has smart kids, you can see both of the parents actively teaching their kids how to read. It then pans over to his friends who had a bunch of dumb kids and he’s teaching them to play with fireworks or something.

          The movie never interacts with *any socioeconomic factors, except for conflating poor people with dumb people.

          If it never interacts with socioeconomics how does it conflate poor people with dumb people?

          The movie doesn’t get into that argument.

          It’s the whole point of the movie…

          What does “clean slate” have to do with this?

          Lol, so no. You don’t understand.

          Yes, that’s my point. The premise of the movie hinges on intelligence being mainly inherited.

          How are you making that determination? How does one delineate between the two within the context of the movie?

          • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            It doesn’t mention genes…

            Dude, modern eugenics was invented almost 40 years before they knew genes were even a thing. Do you expect them pointing at a double helix and saying “this is the stupid gene”, before you accept a premise that’s based on breeding having an eugenic message?

            In the clip you are talking about where he has smart kids, you can see both of the parents actively teaching their kids how to read. It then pans over to his friends who had a bunch of dumb kids and he’s teaching them to play with fireworks or something.

            Nice cherry-picking. In the rest of the clip, they’re constantly ref renceing, how much “stupid” people breed. One punchline is specifically that a stupid person’s junk was saved.

            If it never interacts with socioeconomics how does it conflate poor people with dumb people?

            Do you know what “except” means?

            It’s the whole point of the movie…

            When? When does it reference the dichotomy of nature vs. nurture.

            Lol, so no. You don’t understand.

            “Tabula rasa” is used in German as an equivalent of “clean slate”. I read that stuff up… the movie explicitly negates these behaviorist ideas. (Again: it focuses almost exclusively on breeding)

            You would have a point if it would have focused more on the poor children being badly cared for, instead of slutshaming the poor.

            • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              6 months ago

              Dude, modern eugenics was invented almost 40 years before they knew genes were even a thing. Do you expect them pointing at a double helix and saying “this is the stupid gene”, before you accept a premise that’s based on breeding having an eugenic message?

              Yes, and this movie was written in the 2000s… If we want to get pedantic with the science aspect, then your theory is out the window to begin with. 500 years is not long enough for a species to radically alter their intellect on a societal scale.

              Nice cherry-picking. In the rest of the clip, they’re constantly ref renceing, how much “stupid” people breed. One punchline is specifically that a stupid person’s junk was saved.

              The rest of the clip? It’s literally the end of the movie… And again, there’s no way to delineate if the stupidity in question is a byproduct of parenting vs “breeding” as you put it.

              Do you know what “except” means?

              Lol, and how does it conflate poor people with stupidity? Just out of the blue…no context?

              the movie explicitly negates these behaviorist ideas.

              Lol, no it doesn’t.

              You would have a point if it would have focused more on the poor children being badly cared for, instead of slutshaming the poor.

              Lol, what are you talking about? I’ve brought up the care of children several times, and havent brought up sexual provocation at all?

              I think you need to take a nap or something.

                • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Lol, I really don’t know what this guy’s going on about. I feel the only way you could be this obtuse about nature vs nurture argument is if you actually believe intellect is a purely inherited trait.

              • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                6 months ago

                Yes, and this movie was written in the 2000s… If we want to get pedantic with the science aspect, then your theory is out the window to begin with.

                What theory? Eugenics doesn’t work in real life. I’m critizising the movie on its’ own premise, not on scientific pedantry.

                It’s literally the end of the movie…

                Wait, I thought the clip was the setup of the premise. Like, the beginning. What other clip have I shared?

                here’s no way to delineate if the stupidity in question is a byproduct of parenting vs “breeding” as you put it.

                the prologue constantly bangs on how much stupid people are fucking and smart people don’t. You never see a focus on kids not being raised well, which would be a nuture standpoint.

                how does it conflate poor people with stupidity?

                Basically all idiots in the movie are coded like white “trash” trailer park people (except the President, maybe).

                Lol, no it doesn’t.

                Where is an example of a behaviorist stance by the movie? The first five minutes is back to back jokes about reproduction (fucking). Where are the behaviorist scenes?

                • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  What theory? Eugenics doesn’t work in real life. I’m critizising the movie on its’ own premise, not on scientific pedantry.

                  But you aren’t… There isn’t any clear delineation in the movie that would suggest they’re implying intellect is due to nature over nurture.

                  The reason this is still a debate in psychology is because it’s hard to achieve a statistically viable sample size for a conclusive study. To make a factual delineation you would have to know about the parents intellectual capabilities and then their children’s intellectual abilities. However, we would also need to study a child that they didn’t raise…

                  So, unless Idiocracy has a scene in it where the child of “smart parents” was raised by idiots, and remained smart… Then it’s impossible to know if they were implying bits an inherited trait.

                  Wait, I thought the clip was the setup of the premise. Like, the beginning. What other clip have I shared?

                  I was talking about the end of the movie…that’s what we were talking about from what you quoted.

                  At around 3 min in this clip. The narrator says they have 3 of the smartest kids in the world, and in the scene we can see the protagonist teaching his kids how to read. It also says his friends has 30 of the dumbest kids in the world, and he is teaching them how to chase each other with mallets.

                  the prologue constantly bangs on how much stupid people are fucking and smart people don’t.

                  People in lower income levels tend to have more kids with less access to decent public education… America being a land of inequality based on social status isn’t exactly a new idea.

                  You never see a focus on kids not being raised well, which would be a nuture standpoint.

                  In the clip you just posted their are kids being actively ignored by the parents who are arguing over infidelity… Not exactly great parenting.

                  Basically all idiots in the movie are coded like white “trash” trailer park people (except the President, maybe).

                  I did not get that impression… Maybe you just have some biased preconceptions about trailer parks?

                  Where is an example of a behaviorist stance by the movie?

                  How about the parts where you ignore the family structure and behavior of the “idiots” in the same scene? How about the protagonist teaching his kids to learn?

                  • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    Ok, that’s like… three “nurture” mentions (although being smart doesn’t make you a good parent and being dumb doesn’t make you a bad one, so I’m already generous) against… how many mentions that dumb people do be fucking?

                    But you’ve clearly made up your mind and refuse to see the obvious classist notions of the movie. I can’t do any more than pointing out the obvious if you don’t want to see it.