race, genetics and intelligence (1 Viewer)

[banco55]

I wonder what would be the implications if it became generally accepted that "equality of intelligence, in the sense of racial averages on tests, turns out not to be true"?

Last month, James Watson, the legendary biologist, was condemned and forced into retirement after claiming that African intelligence wasn't "the same as ours." "Racist, vicious and unsupported by science," said the Federation of American Scientists. "Utterly unsupported by scientific evidence," declared the U.S. government's supervisor of genetic research. The New York Times told readers that when Watson implied "that black Africans are less intelligent than whites, he hadn't a scientific leg to stand on."

I wish these assurances were true. They aren't. Tests do show an IQ deficit, not just for Africans relative to Europeans, but for Europeans relative to Asians. Economic and cultural theories have failed to explain most of the pattern, and there's strong preliminary evidence that part of it is genetic. It's time to prepare for the possibility that equality of intelligence, in the sense of racial averages on tests, will turn out not to be true."

http://www.slate.com/id/2178122/entry/2178123/

 

[Enteebee]

I really don't know what the implications should be... To me it seems the differences are so miniscule, probably a bigger difference between men and women lol

IQ is just another phallic comparing competition, people with race pryde will feel emasculated...

 

[Captain Gh3y]

If you walked into an African tribal society they'd think you were a complete idiot

 

[Enteebee]

If you walked into an African tribal society they'd think you were a complete idiot

Yea man, good point... I'm sure that's how they compare IQ's, these guys go out and do studies with such a huge, blatant, fucking flaw as that eh?

 

[Captain Gh3y]

Yea man, good point... I'm sure that's how they compare IQ's

IQ is something people made up

 

[Enteebee]

IQ is something people made up

So is math.

 

[banco55]

If you walked into an African tribal society they'd think you were a complete idiot

Which is precisely one of the theories on why race and intelligence (in the sense of IQ) may have some correlation. But in a modern society the skills that were useful in an African tribal society aren't much use.

"In fact, there's a mountain of evidence that differential evolution has left each population with a balance of traits that could be advantageous or disadvantageous, depending on circumstances. The list of differences is long and intricate. On average, compared with whites, blacks mature more quickly in the womb, are born earlier, and develop teeth, strength, and dexterity earlier. They sit, crawl, walk, and dress themselves earlier. They reach sexual maturity faster, and they have better eyesight. On each of these measures, East Asians lag whites and blacks. In exchange, East Asians get longer lives and bigger brains."

http://www.slate.com/id/2178122/entry/2178123/

 

[katie_tully]

Maybe the implications include the fact they still poop and pee upstream from their drinking water.

Oh wait...

 

[dieburndie]

I'm also interested in what you think the implications of this information are?
I tend to believe that the differences are marginal, and blaming them for an inability to integrate or something would be making them out to be more significant then they actually are.
I always find it kinda funny that these studies say that asians possess greater intelligence, which is usually what people who exaggerate racial differences don't want to hear.
Also, I thought Watson said he was misquoted, and didn't actually support the views attributed to him?

 

[banco55]

I'm also interested in what you think the implications of this information are?
I tend to believe that the differences are marginal, and blaming them for an inability to integrate or something would be making them out to be more significant then they actually are.
I always find it kinda funny that these studies say that asians possess greater intelligence, which is usually what people who exaggerate racial differences don't want to hear.
Also, I thought Watson said he was misquoted, and didn't actually support the views attributed to him?

Assuming it became established scientific fact I think it could lead to some advocating paternalistic, welfare state policies.

Actually there's a scientifc consenus that they aren't marginal the question is what are the causes of the differences? For example if you are talking about academic sucess there is a high correlation between IQ and academic sucess. Not to mention IQ correlates with criminality and poverty.

Well if you find the fact that asians have the highest average IQ ironic you'll be interested to know the group with the highest average IQ score are Jews of European origin. Which could help explain why they've won a totally disproportionate number of nobel prizes. So much for the "Aryan superman".

 

[jimmayyy]

We have too much variance within the races themselves.

i agree. there are too many variables in the present day to obtain concrete results. if we went back 200 years when all races were pretty much geographically isolated and easily distinctive genetically, we'd probably get interesting results.

 

[banco55]

i agree. there are too many variables in the present day to obtain concrete results. if we went back 200 years when all races were pretty much geographically isolated and easily distinctive genetically, we'd probably get interesting results.

Surely the logical conclusion from that then is that there should be very little or any genetic differences that correlate with race? ie bone density etc?

"Another common critique is that race is a fuzzy concept. By various estimates, 20 percent to 30 percent of the genes in "black" Americans actually came from Europe. Again, it's a good point, but it bolsters the case for a genetic explanation. Black Americans, like "colored" South Africans, score halfway between South African blacks and whites on IQ tests. The lowest black IQ averages in the United States show up in the South, where the rate of genetic blending is lowest. There's even some biological evidence: a correlation between racial "admixture" and brain weight. Reading about studies of "admixture" is pretty nauseating. But the nausea doesn't make the studies go away."

http://www.slate.com/id/2178122/entry/2178124/

 

[A High Way Man]

Just a note: I inferred from HSC biology that Watson and Crick weren't exactly that great.

If you want to IQ test, then a fair test would be to test the IQs of African migrants who have had the relatively same education and upbringing as their caucasian or east asian counterparts.

It's no fair testing some tribal guy

 

[banco55]

Just a note: I inferred from HSC biology that Watson and Crick weren't exactly that great.

If you want to IQ test, then a fair test would be to test the IQs of African migrants who have had the relatively same education and upbringing as their caucasian or east asian counterparts.

It's no fair testing some tribal guy

You think that hasn't being done?

"My first reaction, looking at this pattern, was that if the highest-scoring blacks are those who have lighter skin or live in whiter countries, the reason must be their high socioeconomic status relative to other blacks. But then you have to explain why, on the SAT, white kids from households with annual incomes of $20,000 to $30,000 easily outscore black kids from households with annual incomes of $80,000 to $100,000. You also have to explain why, on IQ tests, white kids of parents with low incomes *and low IQs outscore black kids of parents with high incomes and high IQs. Or why Inuits and Native Americans outscore American blacks"

 

[jb_nc]

oh sup man seems u mixed up weblinks you want: www.stormfront.org

 

[banco55]

oh sup man seems u mixed up weblinks you want: www.stormfront.org

Really solid argument

 

[KFunk]

A couple random issues:

(1) Lots of confounding factors can arise when conducting an IQ test. For example, low socioeconomic status will likely correlate with poor performance. Environments which are less stimulating, for lack of resources, or homes in which parents have to work 24/7 will tend, as far as I know, to lead to 'underdevelopment' of certain abilities. A poor group of people may test as 'less intelligent' when really their socioeconomic status is leading to sub-optimal development. I heard recently of a child (from a disadvantaged home) trying to perform on an IQ test during which they had concepts in their mind which answered some of the questions, but where they frequently lacked the appropriate vocabulary. For example, take the question "what do you do if the house next door is on fire?" - they knew you were supposed to call some kind of service but couldn't generate the term 'fire brigade', even though they could have drawn you a fire truck. Poverty of cogntive ability or poverty of stimuli/learning environment? You decide.

Also, some tests can accidently draw upon cultural strengths etc... etc... I know they always try and iron these kinds of issues out, but it's really hard (if it is possible at all?) to get a single test which assesses all groups fairly.

(2) One mistake to avoid is talking about 'the average asian' or 'the average jew'. Broad descriptive statistics can be dangerous when used to generalise too much. Within any of these populations there will be a range of IQ scores including people at both the high and the low ends of the scale. Perhaps an overall average might help you guage the level at which you aim you standard education programs (that is, if the optimal teaching methods differ for individuals with different IQs) but I'm not really sure how useful a comparison of averages between cultures is going to be. This kind of thing tends too often towards an exercise in penis waving.

 

[scarybunny]

yeah Kfunk's pretty much on the money. If a child isn't in an environment which stimulates certain functions of their brain, it doesn't happen. Or they can't express themselves OR are unfamiliar or intimidated by the method of testing.

I mean when does a tribal african have to take any kind of test? They don't. So their performance in the test is not necessarily indicative of their actual ability. I remember when I did my IQ test in year 3 I got bored and walked out before it was over. You can't test a 7 year old during recess.

Also traditional IQ tests only measure mathematical/logical and verbal intelligence, which doesn't cover the range at all. Gardner sez there are 9 types of intelligence, and some of them would be impossible to examine.

Sooo it is obviously possible for a race/socioeconomic group to score better on IQ tests but it doesn't necessarily mean they're "smarter".

 

[Enteebee]

I mean when does a tribal african have to take any kind of test? They don't. So their performance in the test is not necessarily indicative of their actual ability. I remember when I did my IQ test in year 3 I got bored and walked out before it was over. You can't test a 7 year old during recess.

They would eliminate this as best they can, imo enough that we can still see a statistical difference between different races that isn't explainable by anything other than perhaps genetics.

Also traditional IQ tests only measure mathematical/logical and verbal intelligence, which doesn't cover the range at all. Gardner sez there are 9 types of intelligence, and some of them would be impossible to examine.

There's much less evidentiary support for any sort of 'different types of intelligence' then there is for an IQ, which tends to correlate great on average to higher test scores, better jobs etc... meh

 

[banco55]

yeah Kfunk's pretty much on the money. If a child isn't in an environment which stimulates certain functions of their brain, it doesn't happen. Or they can't express themselves OR are unfamiliar or intimidated by the method of testing.

I mean when does a tribal african have to take any kind of test? They don't. So their performance in the test is not necessarily indicative of their actual ability. I remember when I did my IQ test in year 3 I got bored and walked out before it was over. You can't test a 7 year old during recess.

Also traditional IQ tests only measure mathematical/logical and verbal intelligence, which doesn't cover the range at all. Gardner sez there are 9 types of intelligence, and some of them would be impossible to examine.

Sooo it is obviously possible for a race/socioeconomic group to score better on IQ tests but it doesn't necessarily mean they're "smarter".

Do u really think scientists are such idiots that they are comparing african tribesmen with people from Hong Kong? Of course they have done their best to factor in things like socio-economic status and what environment they were raised in.