Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 63

Thread: Average IQ of nations

  1. #26
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,603
    Points
    54,086
    Level
    72
    Points: 54,086, Level: 72
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 1,464
    Overall activity: 42.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders





    Quote Originally Posted by Expredel View Post


    Cranial capacity based on 20000 skulls measured in a 1984 study. The results for Egypt might be a clue regarding the origin of Jewish intelligence.

    Under no circumstance should this map be taken serious, we don't know the gender distribution of the skulls, malnutrition, sample size for each region, how old the skulls were, how old the persons were when they died, etc.

    Also highly unethical research which probably should be outlawed in the future.
    Neanderthals had higher cranial capacity than modern humans ..

  2. #27
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,603
    Points
    54,086
    Level
    72
    Points: 54,086, Level: 72
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 1,464
    Overall activity: 42.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by hope View Post
    Genes..nature.. play their part regarding IQ but environment..nurture.. plays an important part also. Environment can enhance IQ.
    Not only how a child is raised but where a child is raised will add or detract to IQ ability and also overall development of a child and thus adult.
    Poverty, diet, lack of education, poor healthcare, conflicts etc. have a direct affect on this.You cannot learn if there is no school to go to or you are too hungry or sick to get there or you must care for a younger sibling or walk miles to fetch water.
    In many countries children have not the luxury of regular food let alone good diet. They have not the chance of going to school and if they do, it may be for a short time. Young children instead of being at school, are at work whether it is in the home or on the street. Of course we all know these things and how this will show in IQ rates. So undeveloped countries will show a difference in IQ.under such conditions.
    In developed countries we have a better ground for the nurture of IQ. We have good healthcare, education system, grants for continued education, etc. So in answer to original question, yes I think wealth of a country insomuch as it can put money into these things will have a bearing on IQ.
    However, I am not saying every individual from a developed country will have high IQ rate just as I am not saying everyone from any undeveloped country will have lower IQ. as we know, only that in either case there is the potential for one or the other based on conditions.
    I agree. And I don't think that people with the highest IQ are allways the smartest people.
    An IQ test is very selective and does not measure all aspects of intelligence.

  3. #28
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,603
    Points
    54,086
    Level
    72
    Points: 54,086, Level: 72
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 1,464
    Overall activity: 42.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    I think Chinese and few others in the area, are the best in repetitive tasks, workaholism, and top participants of organize group activities. Their kids are really great in school environment. It is an organized activity filled with repetitive learning/work. It is only part of the world where workers need to be forced to go home (Japan), and bylaw forbids kids extra after-hours learning after 10 pm (South Korea)!
    They are genetically inclined to mentioned activities, which influences their workaholic culture, then culture vindicates and reinforces even harder work, in a positive loop cycle. This longer hours of learning might be behind few extra points of IQ, in this part of the world.
    wouldn't that be rather a matter of culture and attitude than a matter of higher intelligence?

  4. #29
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,603
    Points
    54,086
    Level
    72
    Points: 54,086, Level: 72
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 1,464
    Overall activity: 42.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Aberdeen View Post
    I do think it's very difficult to separate nature from nurture. A friend of mine thinks the reason Chinese people seem to have a special affinity for math is because they've spent centuries reading a pictographic language, which helped develop their abilities for grasping symbolic language. I'm dubious about that theory simply because of the small percentage of literate people in any country, including China, until recently. I think the value a particular culture places on certain things does affect the skill sets of individuals in that culture. But I don't really know how one would test such ideas with any certainty.

    The issue of the lower IQ part of various populations no longer being needed but breeding more than high IQ people is certainly something that various people, including a few science fiction writers, have talked about. But if a country was really concerned about that issue, there are some obvious things that could be done to address the issue. For example, I was reading something the other day about how developed countries with good daycare systems see a higher birth rate among women who are university graduates.
    it is politicians that make the rules
    they are interested in people that will vote for them, they are certainly not interested in smarter people

  5. #30
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,330
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    wouldn't that be rather a matter of culture and attitude than a matter of higher intelligence?
    Yes, though the culture which emphasizes education increases IQ of its population.
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  6. #31
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    24-02-15
    Posts
    243
    Points
    2,727
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,727, Level: 14
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 23
    Overall activity: 11.0%


    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    If the size of a skull mater we should have had civilizations started in Siberia and Greenland first, not in Near East.
    Greenland has 50000 people and Siberia is mostly inhabited as well, you can't create a civilization without sufficient numbers, this is a very weak argument. We must provide more plausible explanations than that to keep people confused.

  7. #32
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,330
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by Expredel View Post
    Greenland has 50000 people and Siberia is mostly inhabited as well, you can't create a civilization without sufficient numbers, this is a very weak argument. We must provide more plausible explanations than that to keep people confused.
    True, numbers definitely matter. Civilizations started first in most densely populated places, in farmers' cultures. However the peoples of the North, the Prairie Indians, Inuits, Eskimo or Chukchi, are not doing great in our civilization. They are not the best in schools, they don't have good jobs, they fall into addictions quickly, even though there is a huge financial help of governments these days. The civilization is already invented and everybody willing can join it. Yet, it is not working for them somehow.
    Perhaps, the key ingredient is the EEF or ENF genetic admixture of first farmers, with genetic predispositions they carried. All the existing hunter-gatherers, listed above, plus Australian Aborigines and Amazon Indians are lacking this admixture, and all of them have terribly hard time embracing what we call civilization. At least, if there was one example of pure HGs doing well in our world, I would suspect it might be just cultural phenomenon. But it is exactly the same across the board with all existing HGs, with no exception.
    In this case the size of a brain doesn't matter as much as internal architecture of it. The new brain wiring changes brought to the people by first farmers.

  8. #33
    Earl Achievements:
    Three Friends10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Maleth's Avatar
    Join Date
    22-03-14
    Location
    Malta
    Posts
    1,920
    Points
    19,448
    Level
    42
    Points: 19,448, Level: 42
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 402
    Overall activity: 2.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    EV13 A7136 y18675G+
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Country: Malta



    Quote Originally Posted by hope View Post
    Genes..nature.. play their part regarding IQ but environment..nurture.. plays an important part also. Environment can enhance IQ.
    Not only how a child is raised but where a child is raised will add or detract to IQ ability and also overall development of a child and thus adult.
    Poverty, diet, lack of education, poor healthcare, conflicts etc. have a direct affect on this.You cannot learn if there is no school to go to or you are too hungry or sick to get there or you must care for a younger sibling or walk miles to fetch water.
    In many countries children have not the luxury of regular food let alone good diet. They have not the chance of going to school and if they do, it may be for a short time. Young children instead of being at school, are at work whether it is in the home or on the street. Of course we all know these things and how this will show in IQ rates. So undeveloped countries will show a difference in IQ.under such conditions.
    In developed countries we have a better ground for the nurture of IQ. We have good healthcare, education system, grants for continued education, etc. So in answer to original question, yes I think wealth of a country insomuch as it can put money into these things will have a bearing on IQ.
    However, I am not saying every individual from a developed country will have high IQ rate just as I am not saying everyone from any undeveloped country will have lower IQ. as we know, only that in either case there is the potential for one or the other based on conditions.
    Well said hope, also in my opinion, even if a child is brought up in an advanced society that nurtures good health and promotes good education, the type of domestic environment is well known to effect the IQ development irrelevant to all the good systems that are in place.

  9. #34
    Earl Achievements:
    Three Friends10000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Maleth's Avatar
    Join Date
    22-03-14
    Location
    Malta
    Posts
    1,920
    Points
    19,448
    Level
    42
    Points: 19,448, Level: 42
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 402
    Overall activity: 2.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    EV13 A7136 y18675G+
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Country: Malta



    by the way as much as I dont agree with these kind of presentations with particular agendas of supremacy (Nordic in this case) such those of Dr. Nyborg, I neither agree that Jews have some kind of super intellect since its brought up here very often. Brain is like a muscle, if the circumstances are as such that you need to use it it will grow stronger and more productive, if you don't use it you will lose it. The world can offer multi type of scenarios to flourish, get by or decline, and it just depends were one happens to be and the stimulation involved in a particular point in time. Things do not happen in one single generation but most of the time its a string of events that take a good number of generations to give a particular result and for very different reasons.

    And do not forget that EQ is as relevant as IQ even though it seems to be totally ignored.

    AlbertEinstein-Quotes Believe Ability.jpg

  10. #35
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,603
    Points
    54,086
    Level
    72
    Points: 54,086, Level: 72
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 1,464
    Overall activity: 42.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    1 members found this post helpful.
    I totally agree with all you just said here, Maleth

  11. #36
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points3 months registered
    giuseppe rossi's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-15
    Posts
    197


    Country: Italy



    Italians have the biggest brain in Europe.

    Sorry bros.

    From
    Richard Lynn RACE DIFFERENCES IN INTELLIGENCE

    http://www.speedyshare.com/csPbT/Rac...telligence.pdf

    Race Brain Size (cc)
    Europeans 1,369
    Basques 1,368
    Czechs 1,341
    Dutch 1,373
    French 1,361
    Germans 1,391
    Italians 1,411
    Poles 1,315
    Scots 1,316
    Swiss 1,408

    This is the mean brain sizes of 87 populations worldwide, based on measurements of approximately 20,000 crania, published by Smith and Beals (1990).

    Italians have also the highest measured mean IQ in Europe.

    That's without recalculations or conversions of data like in the last Lynn's book.

    http://www.getiq.net/charts.jsp

  12. #37
    Elite member Achievements:
    Created Album picturesTagger Second ClassThree Friends5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    hope's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-02-12
    Posts
    721
    Points
    8,119
    Level
    26
    Points: 8,119, Level: 26
    Level completed: 95%, Points required for next Level: 31
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: UK - Northern Ireland



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Maleth View Post
    Well said hope, also in my opinion, even if a child is brought up in an advanced society that nurtures good health and promotes good education, the type of domestic environment is well known to effect the IQ development irrelevant to all the good systems that are in place.
    Absolutely Maleth, certainly the domestic environment can have either a positive or negative input, especially during the early cognitive years. All positive input at this time, given within a stable environment, where a child feels safe, will have benefits. What a young child learns first at home and how it is encouraged to view learning can help when they begin school. The time spent reading to your child, singing, playing games etc. will help improve language, reasoning and social skills.
    On the other side, a child raised in an environment where they are neglected or have had little time or care invested in them during these early years or indeed have been raised in a stressful environment, may have problems in these areas.

  13. #38
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,330
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by giuseppe rossi View Post
    Italians have the biggest brain in Europe.

    Sorry bros.

    From
    Richard Lynn RACE DIFFERENCES IN INTELLIGENCE

    http://www.speedyshare.com/csPbT/Rac...telligence.pdf

    Race Brain Size (cc)
    Europeans 1,369
    Basques 1,368
    Czechs 1,341
    Dutch 1,373
    French 1,361
    Germans 1,391
    Italians 1,411
    Poles 1,315
    Scots 1,316
    Swiss 1,408

    This is the mean brain sizes of 87 populations worldwide, based on measurements of approximately 20,000 crania, published by Smith and Beals (1990).

    Italians have also the highest measured mean IQ in Europe.

    That's without recalculations or conversions of data like in the last Lynn's book.

    http://www.getiq.net/charts.jsp
    Are you really saying that Italians have highest mean IQ, because they have biggest heads in Europe?

    Can you find out for us the average cranial size of Romans? They ruled the world one time, perhaps they had the biggest heads too?

    PS. Your link doesn't work. And your posted study contradicts the 1984 one posted by bicicleur.

  14. #39
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    16,810
    Points
    367,522
    Level
    100
    Points: 367,522, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    I just saw this...

    The map from the 1984 study was actually posted by Expredel, but he didn't provide a link. This is what he had to say about it:

    "Under no circumstance should this map be taken serious, we don't know the gender distribution of the skulls, malnutrition, sample size for each region, how old the skulls were, how old the persons were when they died, etc.

    Also highly unethical research which probably should be outlawed in the future."

    Just for the future, if anyone refers to a study or posts a map, could you please post the link so that the source can be checked? (I'm speaking to myself as well...as I said above, anyone can make a map and put it on the web.)

    As for a correlation between skull size and IQ, I thought size didn't matter.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  15. #40
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points3 months registered
    giuseppe rossi's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-15
    Posts
    197


    Country: Italy



    The map posted by Expredel is unsourced and is pure nonsense. Japanese and half of Europe with the same brain size of Sub Saharan Africans???

    That's even worse astrology than Candille et al.

    Richard Lynn quotes Smith and Beals (1990) who measured approximately 20.000 crania of 87 populations worldwide.

    https://www.google.it/url?sa=t&rct=j...s86agUXQHn1UKw

    Mean Brain Size (cc) in Europe.
    Europeans 1,369
    Basques 1,368
    Czechs 1,341
    Dutch 1,373
    French 1,361
    Germans 1,391
    Italians 1,411
    Poles 1,315
    Scots 1,316
    Swiss 1,408

    Italians (from Sicily, Rome, Apulia and Abruzzo) resemble mostly French, Serbs, and Russians and then other Central Europeans, in
    Craniometric (Skull) Measures.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3171282/

    look a figure b.





  16. #41
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,589
    Points
    68,851
    Level
    81
    Points: 68,851, Level: 81
    Level completed: 48%, Points required for next Level: 899
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Aberdeen
    because of the small percentage of literate people in any country, including China, until recently.
    I cannot agree. Late Middle Ages saw an increase in literacy rates in Europe, also in central-eastern Europe.

    Poland-Lithuania had a relatively high literacy rate in the 15th - 16th centuries, which later declined in the 17th - 18th centuries.

    Parochial schools that emerged in the Late Middle Ages spread basic skills such as reading prayer-books, catechisms and counting the main Christian Octaves in calendar. According to book "Golden Autumn of the Polish Middle Ages" by Henryk Samsonowicz, by the end of the reign of Casimir IV Jagiellon (1480s - 1490s) around 4/5 of all parishes in the Kingdom of Poland had a school, and on average there was 1 parochial school per 800 inhabitants. In the Archdiocese of Gniezno the number of parishes was 4000 and the number of schools in the countryside and in towns was 3500 (including also cathedral schools and monastic schools).

    So I would say that in the 15th - 16th centuries even most of peasants in Poland-Lithuania had some basic level of literacy.

    Literacy declined in the 17th century when serfdom was re-introduced (google: "the refeudalization of eastern Europe in the early modern period").

    The results for Egypt might be a clue regarding the origin of Jewish intelligence.
    According to H. Harpending & G. Cochran high Ashkenazi Jewish IQ evolved under selective pressures during the Middle Ages.

    They suggest that more intelligent Jews had more surviving children than less intelligent Jews and the average IQ was gradually increasing.

    Check:

    "The 10,000 Year Explosion - How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution":

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.w...harpending.pdf

    "Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence":

    http://web.mit.edu/fustflum/document...jbiosocsci.pdf

    ==================================

    That was the case not only with Jews but also with other European Medieval populations, only perhaps to a lesser degree.

    Studies on Medieval family size show that wealthy people had more surviving children than poor people throughout most of Europe.

    In Poland-Lithuania of the 15th - 16th centuries wealthy peasants had 1,6 - 2 surviving sons per father, while peasants of average wealth had 1,1 - 1,5 (where replacement fertility = 1,05 sons per father = 2,1 children per father). Poor peasants probably had sub-replacement fertility. That was more related to wealth than to class, because medium nobles had 2 - 2,1 (the same as wealthy peasants) and magnates (very rich nobles) had 2,9. Poor nobles probably had less than 2.

    In 16th - 17th centuries in England fathers with assets at death lower than 25 pounds had sub-replacement fertility (less than 2,1 surviving children).

    By surviving I mean surviving to adulthood, so that they could have their own children.

    ====================

    From Nicholas Wade, "A Troublesome Inheritance...", New York 2014:

    https://atroublesomeinheritance.file...-the-20141.pdf

    (...) Clark has uncovered the simple genetic mechanism through which the Malthusian economy wrought these changes on the English population: the rich had more surviving children than did the poor. From a study of wills made between 1585 and 1638, he finds that will makers with £9 or less to leave their heirs had, on average, just under two children. The number of heirs rose steadily with assets, such that men with more than £1,000 in their gift, who formed the wealthiest asset class, left just over four children. The English population was fairly stable in size from 1200 to 1760. In this context, the fact that the rich were having more children than the poor led to the interesting phenomenon of unremitting social descent. Most children of the rich had to sink in the social scale, given that there were too many of them to remain in the upper class. Their social descent had the far-reaching genetic consequence that they carried with them inheritance for the same behaviors that had made their parents rich. The values of the upper middle class - nonviolence, literacy, thrift and patience - were thus infused into lower economic classes and throughout society. Generation after generation, they gradually became the values of the society as a whole. This explains the steady decrease in violence and increase in literacy that Clark has documented for the English population. Moreover, the behaviors emerged gradually over several centuries, a time course more typical of an evolutionary change than a cultural change. (...)



    And here the data for Poland-Lithuania:

    http://homoeconomicus.uwb.edu.pl/pdf...ograficzne.pdf

    From page 21 (number of sons per father who lived to their adulthood):



    ^ Note that English graph shows children per family (couple), while Polish graph shows sons per father.

    So in case of English graph replacement fertility is 2,1 while in case of Polish graph it is 1,05.

    4 surviving children in English graph, is equivalent to 2 sons living to adulthood in Polish graph.

    it might not have been a good idea for Europe to try to exterminate its Ashkenazi Jews
    Indeed. Germans exterminated millions of Ashkenazi Jews, who have the highest average IQ of all ethnic groups - imagine how many potential Nobel Prize winners did Germans exterminate! Ethnic Jews were especially successful (in relation to Gentiles) in Germany itself, where they excelled ethnic Germans in efficiency and influence 22 times according to Charles Murray. Jews were over 20% of all significant figures in Germany in 1870 - 1950, despite being only 0,9% of citizens (graph from Charles Murray, "Human Accomplishment", 2003):

    http://s28.postimg.org/jehmgvz3x/Jew...tile_ratio.png



    Those were also Germans who incited Anti-Semitism among Christians, according to Jewish-American author, Theodore Newman Kaufman:

    http://www.ihr.org/books/kaufman/perish.shtml

    "(...) Germanism Abroad

    True Germanism, being as it is a purely primitive paganism with some modern "refinements" finds that it can express itself best by committing barbaric and bestial acts of violence against civilized peoples. Thus, if Germanism were ever to prevail upon this earth we can be sure that every step would be taken though few indeed are these steps which the Germans have not already taken! to reawaken every dormant animal instinct and vicious trait in man. Thus it has been a chief aim of the German to eradicate each and every one of the three principal religions from this earth. However, the German was practical enough to realize that he could not successfully combat all the religions at one time with any hope of emerging supreme. But since their extinction was absolutely necessary to the propagation of the German dogma of hate and destruction, the Germans conceived their now infamous and ofttried trick of pitting first the believers in one religion against those of another until, at a single coup, they could deliver the final knock-out blow against the single remaining adversary. It was in Austria that they first tested the efficiency of their scheme, a test which, at that time, actually constituted organized high treason against that country. Germanism had its birth in Austria as an organized movement founded and headed by an Austrian statesman, one Schoenerer, in 1878. Its activity was rather limited in scope until 1898 when Schoenerer joined with Hasse; from that time on the Pan-German League in Berlin became the head of the movement in Austria, and it proceeded at once to establish permanent bases of operation in that country. First a plan of attack was decided upon. Hasse and Schoenerer agreed that if Germany was ever to rule over Austria the latter country must first be forced to break with Rome (Roman Catholicism). In order to achieve this objective the leaders decided upon a roundabout course of action. They therefore first created an artificially stimulated pseudo-religious revivalist movement having anti-Semitism as its primary and immediate purpose. The German Hasse found some renegade, so-called Catholics (though such men were no more Catholics in spirit than those men of any religion who, hiding behind a pulpit of a church, rail against God and preach hatred and intolerance) members of the leading Catholic Party, who agreed to act as leaders of such a movement. It was not long thereafter that a frightful wave of anti-Semitic persecution began to sweep over Austria, continuing unabated in intensity, until Schoenerer and Hasse felt that a sufficiently high degree of agitation and terrorism had been reached. Thereupon they turned their efforts against the Catholic Party and in turn, started a rabid anti-Catholic, "free from-Rome" movement of their own, Schoenerer declaring that "the chains which tie us to a Church hostile to Germanism must be broken." The "No Popery" and anti-Catholic agitation was stimulated by Hasse and Schoenerer through their introduction into Austria of numerous pseudo-evangelical, free-booter German clergymen who were liberally paid, with money and liquor, to rail against the Catholics. Though the complete success of this plan was not achieved, it did have a salutary effect; that of establishing and proving that audacity and ruthless aggressiveness of the German. (...)"

  17. #42
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,589
    Points
    68,851
    Level
    81
    Points: 68,851, Level: 81
    Level completed: 48%, Points required for next Level: 899
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aberdeen
    because of the small percentage of literate people in any country, including China, until recently.
    I cannot agree. Late Middle Ages saw an increase in literacy rates in Europe, also in central-eastern Europe.

    Poland-Lithuania had a relatively high literacy rate in the 15th - 16th centuries, which declined in the late 17th - 18th centuries.

    Parochial schools that emerged in the Late Middle Ages spread basic skills such as reading prayer-books, catechisms, and counting the main Christian Octaves in calendar. According to "The Golden Autumn of the Polish Middle Ages" by Henryk Samsonowicz, by the end of the reign of Casimir IV Jagiellon (1480s - 1490s) around 4/5 of all parishes in the Kingdom of Poland had a school, and on average there was 1 parochial school per 800 inhabitants. In the Archdiocese of Gniezno the number of parishes was 4000 and the number of schools in the countryside and in towns was 3500 (this number includes not only parochial schools but also cathedral schools and monastic schools).

    So I would say that in the 15th - 16th centuries even many peasants in Poland-Lithuania had some basic level of literacy. Literacy declined in the 17th century when serfdom was re-introduced (google: "the refeudalization of eastern Europe in the early modern period").

    Quote Originally Posted by Expredel
    The results for Egypt might be a clue regarding the origin of Jewish intelligence.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela
    As for a correlation between skull size and IQ, I thought size didn't matter.
    Indeed cranial capacity has only a very limited correlation with IQ, other factors seem to be much more important - check this article:

    https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/...iq-trainwreck/

    There seem to be a very small correlation, but in general race and ethnicity seem to correlate better with IQ than does skull size.

    ==================================

    As for Jewish intelligence - looking for the roots of it in Ancient Egypt is pointless, since it is a more recent phenomenon.

    According to H. Harpending & G. Cochran high Ashkenazi Jewish IQ evolved under strong selective pressures in the Middle Ages. They suggest that more intelligent Jews had more surviving children than less intelligent Jews and the average IQ was gradually increasing.

    Check:

    "The 10,000 Year Explosion - How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution":

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.w...harpending.pdf

    "Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence":

    http://web.mit.edu/fustflum/document...jbiosocsci.pdf

    ==================================

    That was the case not only with Jews but also with other European Medieval populations, only perhaps to a lesser degree.

    Studies on Medieval family size show that wealthy people had more surviving children than poor people throughout most of Europe.

    In Poland-Lithuania of the 15th - 16th centuries wealthy peasants had 1,6 - 2 surviving sons per father, while peasants of average wealth had 1,1 - 1,5 (where replacement fertility = 1,05 sons per father = 2,1 children per father). Poor peasants probably had sub-replacement fertility. That was more related to wealth than to class, because medium nobles had 2 - 2,1 (the same as wealthy peasants) and magnates (very rich nobles) had 2,9. Poor nobles probably had less than 2. This only refers to sons, so multiply x2 if you want sons + daughters.

    In the 16th - 17th centuries in England fathers with assets at death lower than 25 pounds also had a sub-replacement fertility (less than 2,1 surviving children). By "surviving children" I mean those surviving to adulthood, so that they could have their own children.

    ====================

    From Nicholas Wade, "A Troublesome Inheritance...", New York 2014:

    https://atroublesomeinheritance.file...-the-20141.pdf

    "(...) Clark has uncovered the simple genetic mechanism through which the Malthusian economy wrought these changes on the English population: the rich had more surviving children than did the poor. From a study of wills made between 1585 and 1638, he finds that will makers with £9 or less to leave their heirs had, on average, just under two children. The number of heirs rose steadily with assets, such that men with more than £1,000 in their gift, who formed the wealthiest asset class, left just over four children. The English population was fairly stable in size from 1200 to 1760. In this context, the fact that the rich were having more children than the poor led to the interesting phenomenon of unremitting social descent. Most children of the rich had to sink in the social scale, given that there were too many of them to remain in the upper class. Their social descent had the far-reaching genetic consequence that they carried with them inheritance for the same behaviors that had made their parents rich. The values of the upper middle class - nonviolence, literacy, thrift and patience - were thus infused into lower economic classes and throughout society. Generation after generation, they gradually became the values of the society as a whole. This explains the steady decrease in violence and increase in literacy that Clark has documented for the English population. Moreover, the behaviors emerged gradually over several centuries, a time course more typical of an evolutionary change than a cultural change. (...)"



    And here the data for Poland-Lithuania:

    http://homoeconomicus.uwb.edu.pl/pdf...ograficzne.pdf

    From page 21 (number of sons per father who lived to their adulthood):



    ^ Note that the English graph shows children per family (couple), while the Polish graph shows sons per father.

    So in case of the English graph replacement fertility is 2,1 while in case of the Polish graph it is 1,05.

    4 children living to adulthood in the English graph, is equivalent to 2 sons living to adulthood in the Polish graph.

    ===============================

    The same pattern was also observed among Ashkenazi Jews - from Harpending's "The 10,000 Year Explosion":

    From pages 199 (214) - 200 (215) of the PDF book in the link posted above:

    "(...) Jews who were particularly good at these high-complexity jobs enjoyed increased reproductive success. As Weinryb noted: “More children survived to adulthood in affluent families than in less affluent ones. A number of genealogies of business leaders, prominent rabbis, community leaders, and the like - generally belonging to the more affluent classes show that such people often had four, six, sometimes even eight or nine children who reached adulthood. On the other hand, there are some indications that poorer families tended to be small ones. It should also be added that overcrowding, which favors epidemics, was more prevalent among the poorer classes.” In short, Weinryb wrote, “the number of children surviving among Polish Jews seems to have varied considerably from one social level to another.” He also suggested that wealthier Jews were less crowded, as they lived in bigger houses; could keep their houses warmer; could afford wet-nurses; and had better access to rural refuges from epidemics. As an example, he cites a census of the town of Brody in 1764 showing that homeowner households had 1.2 children per adult member, while tenant households had 0.6. (...)"

    it might not have been a good idea for Europe to try to exterminate its Ashkenazi Jews
    Indeed. Germans exterminated millions of Ashkenazi Jews, who have the highest average IQ of all ethnic groups - imagine how many potential Nobel Prize winners died. Ethnic Jews were especially successful (in relation to Gentiles) in Germany itself, where they excelled ethnic Germans in high-ranking accomplishment 22 times according to Charles Murray - Jews were over 20% of all significant figures in Germany in 1870 - 1950, despite being only 0,9% of all citizens (graph from Charles Murray, "Human Accomplishment", 2003):

    http://s28.postimg.org/jehmgvz3x/Jew...tile_ratio.png



    Charles Murray, "Human Accomplishment. The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950", 2003:

    https://www.gwern.net/docs/2003-murr...mplishment.pdf

    According to Jewish-American author, Theodore Newman Kaufman, those were Germans who incited Anti-Semitism among Christians:

    http://www.ihr.org/books/kaufman/perish.shtml

    "(...) Germanism Abroad

    True Germanism, being as it is a purely primitive paganism with some modern "refinements" finds that it can express itself best by committing barbaric and bestial acts of violence against civilized peoples. Thus, if Germanism were ever to prevail upon this earth we can be sure that every step would be taken though few indeed are these steps which the Germans have not already taken! to reawaken every dormant animal instinct and vicious trait in man. Thus it has been a chief aim of the German to eradicate each and every one of the three principal religions from this earth. However, the German was practical enough to realize that he could not successfully combat all the religions at one time with any hope of emerging supreme. But since their extinction was absolutely necessary to the propagation of the German dogma of hate and destruction, the Germans conceived their now infamous and ofttried trick of pitting first the believers in one religion against those of another until, at a single coup, they could deliver the final knock-out blow against the single remaining adversary. It was in Austria that they first tested the efficiency of their scheme, a test which, at that time, actually constituted organized high treason against that country. Germanism had its birth in Austria as an organized movement founded and headed by an Austrian statesman, one Schoenerer, in 1878. Its activity was rather limited in scope until 1898 when Schoenerer joined with Hasse; from that time on the Pan-German League in Berlin became the head of the movement in Austria, and it proceeded at once to establish permanent bases of operation in that country. First a plan of attack was decided upon. Hasse and Schoenerer agreed that if Germany was ever to rule over Austria the latter country must first be forced to break with Rome (Roman Catholicism). In order to achieve this objective the leaders decided upon a roundabout course of action. They therefore first created an artificially stimulated pseudo-religious revivalist movement having anti-Semitism as its primary and immediate purpose. The German Hasse found some renegade, so-called Catholics (though such men were no more Catholics in spirit than those men of any religion who, hiding behind a pulpit of a church, rail against God and preach hatred and intolerance) members of the leading Catholic Party, who agreed to act as leaders of such a movement. It was not long thereafter that a frightful wave of anti-Semitic persecution began to sweep over Austria, continuing unabated in intensity, until Schoenerer and Hasse felt that a sufficiently high degree of agitation and terrorism had been reached. Thereupon they turned their efforts against the Catholic Party and in turn, started a rabid anti-Catholic, "free from-Rome" movement of their own, Schoenerer declaring that "the chains which tie us to a Church hostile to Germanism must be broken." The "No Popery" and anti-Catholic agitation was stimulated by Hasse and Schoenerer through their introduction into Austria of numerous pseudo-evangelical, free-booter German clergymen who were liberally paid, with money and liquor, to rail against the Catholics. Though the complete success of this plan was not achieved, it did have a salutary effect; that of establishing and proving that audacity and ruthless aggressiveness of the German. (...)"

    =============================

    Back to IQ:

    How Medieval feudalism and manorialism in Europe increased selective pressures leading to gradual increase of European IQ:

    "(...) Inheritance for peasants did not normally extend beyond the next of kin, and an eligible heir had to be produced on each holding or there was a risk of reversion to the lord. The feudal mode of production was thus characterized by a strong linkage of landholding to marriage and marriage to procreation. Those without land could not easily marry, and those with land had to marry and produce offspring to keep the holding productive and in the family. Only legitimate offspring (i.e., those sanctified by wedlock) could succeed to a holding. The timing of marriage was normally dependent on entry to a holding, and marriage was the principal social regulator of fertility. The land-poor therefore tended to marry later than well-established peasants, and to raise fewer children. The poorest stratum did not reproduce their own numbers in most periods. The population grew by means of a molecular process of downward mobility engendered within peasant families. Those young adults who were not favoured by inheritance and lost out in the scramble for established village holdings became the mass labour force of the system’s extensive growth, moving to the periphery and clearing new land. (...)"

    In modern Europe there is the opposite trend - thanks to welfare systems, poor people tend to have more children than rich people. People with no education tend to have children earlier (and - in total - more of them) than people who continue education at universities. According to Michael A. Woodley, due to this kind of relaxation of selective pressures, European IQ is already on the decline since ca. 1850:

    Michael A. Woodley, "The social and scientific temporal correlates of genotypic intelligence and the Flynn effect":

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...60289611001620

    "(...) Some of Woodley’s main points include: IQ rose among European populations from the Middle Ages to the present, reaching a 105 average in 1850, and has since declined (...)"

    Europe is dumbing down since ca. 1850 even without immigration - average IQ among native Europeans is also declining.

    ====================================

    BTW - Hitler's extermination of European Jewry prevented their assimilation into and integration with European societies. This has taken place in the USA on the other hand, where Americans of Jewish descent now frequently intermarry with Non-Jewish Americans.
    Last edited by Tomenable; 27-03-15 at 15:00.

  18. #43
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points3 months registered
    giuseppe rossi's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-15
    Posts
    197


    Country: Italy



    There is a very strong correlation between brain size controlled for height and weight and the mean IQ.

    Just read the
    RACE DIFFERENCES IN INTELLIGENCE by Richard Lynn.

  19. #44
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,589
    Points
    68,851
    Level
    81
    Points: 68,851, Level: 81
    Level completed: 48%, Points required for next Level: 899
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Nope. The correlation between cranial capacity and IQ is small (about 0.10).

    There are some African populations with large brain size (controlled for height and weight), who still have low IQ.

    ======================

    Buj in 1981 tested the IQ of 10,737 Europeans:

    https://books.google.pl/books?id=P_f...n%20IQ&f=false



    Here are the results of Buj's 1981 study:

    http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape...4820&t=4513114



    Surprisingly they are pretty consistent with Richard Lynn's first edition:

    http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sho...=1#post3477172


  20. #45
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points3 months registered
    giuseppe rossi's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-15
    Posts
    197


    Country: Italy



    I've read your "sources" and they look like nonsense.

    Moreover Richard Lynn quotes Smith and Beals (1990) who measured approximately 20.000 crania of 87 populations worldwide, while your source quotes the older and wronger Beals et al., 1984.

    Read the book of Richard Lynn and you will see that there is a very strong correlation between mean IQ and brain size.

  21. #46
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,589
    Points
    68,851
    Level
    81
    Points: 68,851, Level: 81
    Level completed: 48%, Points required for next Level: 899
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    European brains are getting smaller for the last 10,000 years - had there been a very strong correlation, it would have meant modern Europeans are dumber than cavemen:

    http://johnhawks.net/research/hawks-...tion-holocene/

    "(...) The greatest temporal detail is available from Europe, reviewed by Henneberg Henneberg:1988b. Samples of up to several thousand skulls have estimates of endocranial volume. The largest set of these are based on external measurements, corrected for average vault thickness. The literature also includes a substantial number of direct measurements of endocranial volume by seed or water displacement. Henneberg Henneberg:1988b reports a Mesolithic mean endocranial volume for males of 1567 ml (based on internal cranial module of 144.1). This estimate is based on a relatively small sample of 35 individuals. For Neolithic and Eneolithic samples, with 1017 individuals, the mean endocranial volume estimate reduced to 1496 ml (internal cranial module 141.9), Bronze and Iron Age samples had a mean estimate of 1468 ml (internal cranial module 141.0), Roman period mean estimate 1452 ml (internal cranial module 140.5), and Early Middle Ages 1449 (internal cranial module 140.4). Late Middle Ages had a mean estimate 1418 (internal cranial module 139.4), and Modern Times'' (which comprises post-Medieval samples) corresponded to a mean estimate of 1391 ml. (...)"

    Brains have been getting smaller also after controlling for body mass and stature:

    "(...) Stature estimates exist for a broad sample of ancient European populations, showing approximate stasis in stature during the last 4000–6000 years. Over the same time period, the estimated endocranial volume declined slightly more than 100 ml in Europe from an estimated 1496 ml to 1391 ml. This decline cannot be explained by decreases in stature, because the stature did not change. Additionally, although these early samples are small, Mesolithic Europeans had larger endocranial volumes than Upper Paleolithic Europeans, across the same interval when they underwent a substantial decline in stature. That Mesolithic change in endocranial volume is in the opposite direction expected from the change in stature. (...)"

    "(...) Body mass is related to brain size in humans with a phenotypic correlation of r≈0.29. The standard deviation of male body mass within recent human populations ranges around 11 kg, a value near the midpoint of within-sex variation in other primate species Smith:Jungers:1997. Using these values along with the others listed in Table 1, selection on body mass would be expected to reduce the mean endocranial volume by 4.3 ml for each kilogram of reduction in body mass.
    The decline in body mass in human populations during the last 10,000 years has been estimated as less than 5 kg, or less than a 10 percent reduction in mass from a Late Upper Paleolithic mean of some 63 kg Ruff:1997. A decline of 5 kg would predict a decrease in endocranial volume only around 22 ml. The observed decline in several regions (including Europe, China, Southern Africa, and Australia) is between 100 and 150 ml during the past 10,000 years. Therefore, the reduction in body mass would be expected to have decreased brain size by only one-fifth to one-seventh the observed decline.

    We can look at the inverse question: how much reduction in body mass would be required to cause a 150 ml reduction in endocranial volume? Using the same ratio (4.3 ml per kilogram body mass), the endocranial volume contrast would predict a reduction of 34 kg. This value is implausibly high, by more than a factor of five. The reduction of endocranial volume in these populations is not well explained by body mass according to equation 1. Selection for smaller mass is insufficient to account for reduction in brain size or vault dimensions. (...)"

    A similar decrease of brain size was observed in domesticated animals:

    "(...) The decline of human endocranial volume during the last 10,000 years is paralleled most obviously by the reductions of brain size in domesticated animal species, including dogs, cattle and sheep, compared to their wild progenitors. Nutritional, developmental, and functional issues are all possible explanations for these parallel cases of brain size reduction. (...)"


    ==========================

    BTW - Homo Erectus speciman named "Bodo" from 600,000 years ago had brain size close to 1,250 cm3:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2752549/

    The book you cited shows that some modern human ethnic groups have lower average brain size than "Bodo".

    "Bodo" was quite exceptional though, because the average brain size in Homo Erectus was 1,100 cm3, IIRC.

    ===========================

    This paper claims that average cranial volume in modern Africans is 1,268 cm3:

    http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rus...Intell2003.pdf

    But there are different methods of measurement, which give different results:

    http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

    East Asian have larger brains than Europeans no matter which method is used:

    https://abc102.wordpress.com/2011/02...lates-with-iq/


  22. #47
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    16,810
    Points
    367,522
    Level
    100
    Points: 367,522, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Tomenable: Here are the results of Buj's 1981 study:
    By all means, let's hunt for a study that presents our own ethnic group in the best possible light in terms of IQ, and ignore the others. What an edifying spectacle!

    The Buj study does indeed show a normalized mean IQ for Poles of 105 versus 102 for Italians. Jaworowska and Szustrowa 1991, however, gives a mean for Poles of 92. Plus, has anyone ever heard of "within the margin of error"? (I also highly doubt that IQ tests should not include a verbal component, but that's a separate issue.)

    For Germans, depending on the study, the IQ score ranges from 90 to 107, for the French from 94 to 102. What does this tell us? It should tell us that we don't have good studies. You need to have careful and uniform sample selection, and you need to control for age, type of test, when administered, etc. Then, if such a study were actually done, given that these kind of mass tests are really performance tests to some degree, how do you factor in for the quality of the educational system? To get a real measure would require sitting tens of thousands of young children down with an educational psychologist who is going to spend hours with them measuring things like digit recall and speed of processing. Don't any of you have experience with this personally?

    As I stated before, the only thing that these tests are good at predicting is performance at university. In the real world, other factors come into play in terms of professional and financial success, at least unless you're spending all day by yourself in front of a computer...things like social and emotional intelligence, for example. Do you think that in terms of whether you can start a thriving business or become CEO of a large company (once you have a high average IQ of, say, over 110 or 115) that the determining factor is whether someone has an IQ of 115 versus 125?

    Even in terms of Nobel prizes, studies show that over a certain IQ, it isn't the highest IQ people who get them, necessarily...
    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...sary-be-genius

    Eysenck (1983), Simonton (1984) and Torrance (1974) have conducted research that suggests a correlation of IQ and creativity only up to about 120. Tunco also confirmed 120 as an important threshold for creativity.

  23. #48
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,589
    Points
    68,851
    Level
    81
    Points: 68,851, Level: 81
    Level completed: 48%, Points required for next Level: 899
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    As for the shrinking of European (and not just European) brains during the last 10,000 years. There is a correlation between brain size and IQ, but correlation does not always imply causation - especially given the evolutionary processes. It would be ridiculous to assume that Europeans were more intelligent in Mesolithic times than in the Early Modern Era and in the Industrial Era, only because their skulls were bigger.

    Selection for smaller brain was most probably driven - possibly also among other factors - by perinatal mortality (stillbirths).

    Bigger head of child means harder birth and greater chance of dying for both infant and mother.

    However, at the same time there was another selective pressure - selection for higher intelligence, driven by civilization.

    So - all in all - evolution promoted the survival of people with "more efficient" brains (i.e. small enough to reduce risk at birth, but intelligent). Under such diverse selective pressures Europeans managed to get smarter despite their decreasing average brain size.

    Quote Originally Posted by Angela
    The Buj study does indeed show a normalized mean IQ for Poles of 105 versus 102 for Italians. Jaworowska and Szustrowa 1991, however, gives a mean for Poles of 92. Plus, has anyone ever heard of "within the margin of error"?
    Richard Lynn & Tatu Vanhannen in their 2012 "Intelligence: A Unifying Construct for the Social Sciences":

    http://www.ttu.ee/public/m/mart-murd...l_Sciences.pdf

    Give a mean national IQ of 96.1 for Italy and a mean national IQ of 96.1 for Poland.

    Raven 2008 gives a mean national IQ for Poland as 102 (sample size 756).

    Buj had a sample size of 835 for his Polish IQ of 106.

    Another study for Poland (I don't remember the author & year - but it is quoted by Lynn in one of his books) gave 99.

    Basso et al. in their 1987 study gave for Italians 76 (sample size 138) - I wonder if there is a typo here [96 / 86 instead of 76?].

    Pace & Sprini in their 1998 study gave a mean national IQ for Italians as 90 (sample size 5370).

    Belacchi et al. in their 2008 study gave a mean national IQ for Italians as 95 (sample size 1378).

    =============================

    As you can see results vary dramatically between studies.

    Creating a "ranking" of European IQs is pointless because all Europeans have similar mean IQs.

    Another example of different scores in each study is Germany - Kurth, 1969 gave a mean national IQ for Germany as 90. Buj, 1981 as 107. Guthke & Al-Zoubi, 1987 as 97. Raven 1995 as 97. Roivainen 2010 as 101. Georgas et. al. 2003 as 99. Winkelman 1972 as 99.

    Similar differences between studies.

    Most of differences in IQ between European ethnic groups in various studies are due to sampling errors.

    Hence in one study X Europeans have higher IQ than Y Europeans, while another study may show the opposite pattern.

  24. #49
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,589
    Points
    68,851
    Level
    81
    Points: 68,851, Level: 81
    Level completed: 48%, Points required for next Level: 899
    Overall activity: 4.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela
    As I stated before, the only thing that these tests are good at predicting is performance at university.
    Probably not even this.

    Some very intelligent people have never graduated (both historical figures & modern ones - among the latter e.g. Christopher M. Langan):

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Langan

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggur-Ca2nzs



    Christopher Langan has a confirmed, measured IQ of 200:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-788Upky2Y

    High IQ surely helps at university, but first and foremost you need other personality traits:

    Binet and Simson - "For success in scholastic studies there is need for qualities that depend above all on attention, will, character (for instance, a certain docility), a regularity of habits, and especially on continuity of effort."

    Which is for example why even people with 200 IQ can fail to have a university graduate diploma (example: mentioned above Mr C. Langan).

    Knight - "A high degree of cognitive ability is often accompanied by a temperamental aversion from continuous work, by a lack of persistence and perseverance."

    Spearman - "Obviously intelligence alone would never make a big man of any sort. For it measures only the cognitive aspect of mental activity."

    That's why Spearman invented "general intelligence" which "appears to indicate something in addition to cognitive ability (IQ)":

    "General intelligence is the ability to perceive, comprehend, and reason, combined with the capacity to choose worth-while subjects for study, eagerness to acquire, use, transmit, and if possible add to knowledge and understanding, and the faculty for sustained effort towards these ends. A person is intelligent in so far as his cognitive ability and personality tend towards productiveness through mental activity. One of the most obvious effects of general intelligence is the ability to succeed in ordinary examinations at school or university, or in the similar ones that psychologists call achievement tests but for which the term attainment tests is preferred here. If all the testees subjected to such tests had experienced the same environments throughout life, the results would give some indication of their relative general intelligences."

    So, high IQ is helpful in life (just like, for example, good looks), but high IQ alone doesn't guarantee success in anything.

    Also:

    Witty and Theman made a study of 24 African-American school children with tested IQ scores of 140 and above and found out that "although the highly gifted African-American usually goes on to fulfil her or his early promise, failure is also frequent."
    So high IQ is not always a cure for pathological culture and upbringing.

    =====================

    Some other definitions of intelligence I found:

    E. G. Boring - "Intelligence, by definition, is what intelligence tests measure."

    Binet - "Intelligence reveals itself by the best possible adaptation of the individual to his environment."

    "Intelligence is conscious adaptation to new situations."

    "The ability to utilize previous experience in meeting new situations."

    "The ability to act effectively under given conditions."

    "The ability to learn and to utilize in new situations knowledge or skill acquired by learning."

    "Selective adaptation through acquired knowledge."

    William Stern - "The general ability of an individual to engage his thought consciously on new requirements; it is general mental ability to adapt to new tasks and conditions of life."

    "The power of attention."

    "The ability to reason well and to form sound judgements."

    "The ability to think in abstract terms."

  25. #50
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    16,810
    Points
    367,522
    Level
    100
    Points: 367,522, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Tomenable:European brains are getting smaller for the last 10,000 years - had there been a very strong correlation, it would have meant modern Europeans are dumber than cavemen:
    I'm aware that Cro-Magnon, for example, had bigger brains, but they were also brawnier, so you have to factor in the effect of size. However, you're assuming they were not more intelligent, when in actuality their level of intelligence is unknown to us.

    Tomenable: East Asian have larger brains than Europeans no matter which method is used:
    Well, they also have the highest recorded IQ scores, so I don't see how that advances your argument.

    Tomenable:A similar decrease of brain size was observed in domesticated animals:

    "(...) The decline of human endocranial volume during the last 10,000 years is paralleled most obviously by the reductions of brain size in domesticated animal species, including dogs, cattle and sheep, compared to their wild progenitors. Nutritional, developmental, and functional issues are all possible explanations for these parallel cases of brain size reduction. (...)"
    You might want to take a look at this: Does Domestication Produce Dummies:
    http://scienceblogs.com/observations...cated-dummies/

    This is a populist analysis of the different points of view with regard to the correlation of brain volume and intelligence:
    http://discovermagazine.com/2010/sep...rain-shrinking

    Hawks does indeed think our brains have gotten more efficient.

    However, for a contrary point of view...

    “You may not want to hear this,” says cognitive scientist David Geary of the University of Missouri, “but I think the best explanation for the decline in our brain size is the idiocracy theory.” Geary is referring to the eponymous 2006 film by Mike Judge about an ordinary guy who becomes involved in a hibernation experiment at the dawn of the 21st century. When he wakes up 500 years later, he is easily the smartest person on the dumbed-down planet. “I think something a little bit like that happened to us,” Geary says. In other words, idiocracy is where we are now."

    "Another popular theory attributes the decrease to the advent of agriculture, which, paradoxically, had the initial effect of worsening nutrition. Quite simply, the first farmers were not very successful at eking out a living from the land, and their grain-heavy diet was deficient in protein and vitamins—critical for fueling growth of the body and brain. In response to chronic malnutrition, our body and brain might have shrunk. Many anthropologists are skeptical of that explanation, however. The reason: The agricultural revolution did not arrive in Australia or southern Africa until almost contemporary times, yet brain size has declined since the Stone Age in those places, too."

    "Bailey and Geary found population density did indeed track closely with brain size, but in a surprising way. When population numbers were low, as was the case for most of our evolution, the cranium kept getting bigger. But as population went from sparse to dense in a given area, cranial size declined, highlighted by a sudden 3 to 4 percent drop in EQ starting around 15,000 to 10,000 years ago. “We saw that trend in Europe, China, Africa, Malaysia—everywhere we looked,” Geary says.

    The observation led the researchers to a radical conclusion: As complex societies emerged, the brain became smaller because people did not have to be as smart to stay alive. As Geary explains, individuals who would not have been able to survive by their wits alone could scrape by with the help of others—supported, as it were, by the first social safety nets".

    “Practically speaking,” he explains, “our ancestors were not our intellectual or creative equals because they lacked the same kind of cultural support. The rise of agriculture and modern cities based on economic specialization has allowed the very brightest people to focus their efforts in the sciences, the arts, and other fields. Their ancient counterparts didn’t have that infrastructure to support them. It took all their efforts just to get through life.”

    Tamer but dumber?

    "Other researchers think many of their colleagues are barking up the wrong tree with their focus on intelligence as the key to the riddle of our disappearing gray matter. What may have caused the trend instead, they argue, is selection against aggression. In essence, we domesticated ourselves, according to Richard Wrangham, a primatologist at Harvard University and a leading proponent of this view."

    "So what breeding effect might have sent humans down the same path? Wrangham offers a blunt response: capital punishment. “Over the last 100,000 years,” he theorizes, “language became sufficiently sophisticated that when you had some bully who was a repeat offender, people got together and said, ‘We’ve got to do something about Joe.’ And they would make a calm, deliberate decision to kill Joe or expel him from the group—the functional equivalent of executing him.” Anthropological records on hunter-gatherers suggest that capital punishment has been a regular feature of our species, according to Wrangham. In two recent and well-documented studies of New Guinea groups following ancient tribal custom, the ultimate punishment appears to be meted out to at least 10 percent of the young men in each generation. The story written in our bones is that we look more and more peaceful over the last 50,000 years,” Wrangham says. And that is not all. If he is correct, domestication has also transformed our cognitive style."

    "For more insight, Hare is now studying other primates, notably bonobos. He tells me he suspects that these great apes are domesticated chimps. As if on cue, bursts of exotic, birdlike trills suddenly drown out his voice over the phone. “Sorry about that,” he shouts over the line. “Those are the bonobos.” It turns out that as I am speaking to him, Hare is not at his desk at Duke but in a Congo forest where the bonobos live. “Bonobos look and behave like juvenile chimps,” he continues. “They are gracile. They never show lethal aggression and do not kill each other. They also have brains that are 20 percent smaller than those of chimps.”


    For yet another theory: Jantz-"His theory: In earlier periods, when famine was more common, people with unusually large brains would have been at greater peril of starving to death because of gray matter’s prodigious energy requirements. But with the unprecedented abundance of food in more recent times, those selective forces have relaxed, reducing the evolutionary cost of a large brain."

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Righteous Among The Nations
    By Dian in forum European Culture & History
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 22-11-11, 01:32
  2. Average Wage by Country and City
    By edao in forum European Economy
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-07-11, 00:58
  3. My average faces by countries (composite/morphes)
    By julia90 in forum Anthropology & Ethnography
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 03-04-11, 13:11
  4. Famous names of nations...
    By Ulubatli in forum Humour & Tests
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-02-11, 08:33
  5. Belgium has highest average income tax of 30 OECD countries
    By Maciamo in forum European News & Hot Topics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30-03-06, 10:11

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •