Even renegade social science dudes are linear thinkers.

The other day, Jayman tweeted about the downfall of Gary Taube's project, who attempted to finger sugar as the culprit of obesity. The failure supposedly reinforces to Jayman that only calories are the sole metric required for diet. Jayman, a person who we can categorize in the HBD camp, illustrates IQ differences between groups, which makes himself controversial because it goes against the idea of egalitarianism. What is strange is that despite believing in differences in IQ, they believe metabolism and chemical composition doesn't matter between human beings in regards to diet.

This reminds me that even the renegade social scientists are still overly simplistic, just like macroeconomics has one big metric that overshadows all others, like GDP, so does HDB with IQ as the largest determinant.

 What is it about radical positivists to think that systems are linear and homogeneous? Why do these goofballs always think that invoking Occam's Razor, an axiom postulated by a 12th-century friar, by the way, is an argument to oversimplify analysis of a system?