I have found that people often express strong opinions rooted in ignorance. It often takes wisdom to be tentative.
Some elaboration on my responses may be helpful (or maybe not!).
You asked if chimpanzees are conscious and acknowledge that the question relates to the poll-taker's concept of consciousness. Although I'm no Daniel Dennet, I've done enough studies in consciousness to know that many view prokaryote/eukaryote cells as conscious (albeit of a qualitatively different variety from our own).
Then you ask whether it's "morally wrong to hurt animals unnecessarily". Obviously, the poll-taker's concept of morality factors in here, but whatever your take on morality, causing unnecessary suffering is generally wrong.
Personally, I think preserving the Earth's ecosystem has very little to do with utility.
The IQ questions might be contentious among some, but are decidedly less-so for me. As a teacher involved with screening "gifted" students, I recognize the ambiguity of 'g', and have seen IQ tests consistently fail. Further, the question of Ashkenazi Jews seems to insinuate a static g, but that's not a very well-supported perspective these days.
The stock market question was just an issue of awareness. If people think the price of stocks has anything to do with the 'value' of stocks, they're ignorant of how the stock market and crony capitalism works.
The XX/XY/math question was likewise an issue of awareness. Studies in Europe have shown females score higher on standardized mathematical tests. It's cultural and environmental, but there may be a genetic component somewhere in the background (and far less relevant).
Last, the calorie/fat/diet question holds less relevance to me.
Hopefully that helped clarify why I didn't find this particular set of questions as contentious as the last. :)
no subject
Some elaboration on my responses may be helpful (or maybe not!).
You asked if chimpanzees are conscious and acknowledge that the question relates to the poll-taker's concept of consciousness. Although I'm no Daniel Dennet, I've done enough studies in consciousness to know that many view prokaryote/eukaryote cells as conscious (albeit of a qualitatively different variety from our own).
Then you ask whether it's "morally wrong to hurt animals unnecessarily". Obviously, the poll-taker's concept of morality factors in here, but whatever your take on morality, causing unnecessary suffering is generally wrong.
Personally, I think preserving the Earth's ecosystem has very little to do with utility.
The IQ questions might be contentious among some, but are decidedly less-so for me. As a teacher involved with screening "gifted" students, I recognize the ambiguity of 'g', and have seen IQ tests consistently fail. Further, the question of Ashkenazi Jews seems to insinuate a static g, but that's not a very well-supported perspective these days.
The stock market question was just an issue of awareness. If people think the price of stocks has anything to do with the 'value' of stocks, they're ignorant of how the stock market and crony capitalism works.
The XX/XY/math question was likewise an issue of awareness. Studies in Europe have shown females score higher on standardized mathematical tests. It's cultural and environmental, but there may be a genetic component somewhere in the background (and far less relevant).
Last, the calorie/fat/diet question holds less relevance to me.
Hopefully that helped clarify why I didn't find this particular set of questions as contentious as the last. :)