Race and IQ

Is there a difference of IQ between the larger race groups?

  • Yes, I think so.

    Votes: 64 58.7%

  • No, I don't think so.

    Votes: 31 28.4%

  • Not sure.

    Votes: 14 12.8%
  • Total voters
    109
The only kind of "intelligence testing" that should be used is the kind done by educational psychologists in schools, i.e. one to one, taking a couple of hours, measuring things like digit recall, visual spatial reasoning, and on and on. The reason "paper and pen" or now, computer testing is used is because the former is impractical on the scale which would be necessary.

As for your British school results example, I think what happens with immigration is that if there are controls in place the people who migrate are often among the best and brightest from their home countries. That's the case here with Indian immigration, for example, where their educational achievements and financial success are higher than the norm for "white" Americans. The same is true with Jamaicans, who do much better than African-Americans. However, that says nothing about the intellectual superiority of Indians as a whole, as all the immigrants are from higher castes and arrive with a certain level of education. Mexican Americans score much lower, but we get huge numbers of very poor, unskilled people from Mexico as there are no controls, most of them arriving illegally.
 
laetoli said:
The lowest achieving group in British schools is white working class. The highest achieving group in the Catholic girls' school, at which my wife teaches, is Nigerian and the lowest, the traveller community.
Click to expand...

If it is true (but it must be proved, which source?) it means that societal environment affects intelligence.

And Indians told me that in India there is difference in intelligence between casts (I don't know which scientific source they used).

White British working class and middle class and capitalist class (honestly I don't like to use term "class") have similar genetics and haplogroups (or maybe it is not true) and what makes a difference is social position, please give us source, research, study, it is very interesting.
 
Angela said:
However, that says nothing about the intellectual superiority of Indians as a whole
Click to expand...

In India itself there are stark contrasts between IQ scores of various caste groups.

It's a country of both Brahmins and Gypsies. Actually Gypsies came from Pakistan:

http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(12)01260-2

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048477

Note that average Gypsy IQ is 70, one SD below African-American (which is 85):

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289606001097

And this is despite the fact that Gypsies are also heavily European-admixed.

But they probably mixed only with with low-intelligence European individuals.

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

Detroit is a really luxurious high class urban metropoly compared to Roma towns:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUh-WY98jeU

But remember that the Roma / Gypsies used to be nomadic people until very recently:

So this kind of modern sedentary lifestyle is not something that they are used to:

 
BTW - I voted "Not sure" in the poll.

I think that IQ is not inherently related to race, but to bio-cultural evolution in more recent times (i.e. after major races emerged).

Civilization accelerated evolution, etc.
 
Tomenable said:
In India itself there are stark contrasts between IQ scores of various caste groups.

It's a country of both Brahmins and Gypsies. Actually Gypsies came from Pakistan:

http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(12)01260-2

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048477

Note that average Gypsy IQ is 70, one SD below African-American (which is 85):

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289606001097

And this is despite the fact that Gypsies are also heavily European-admixed.

But they probably mixed only with with low-intelligence European individuals.

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

Detroit is a really luxurious high class urban metropoly compared to Roma towns:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUh-WY98jeU

But remember that the Roma / Gypsies used to be nomadic people until very recently:

So this kind of modern sedentary lifestyle is not something that they are used to:

Click to expand...
Perhaps the 70 IQ means state of brain without proper education? It is also possible that smarter Gypsies got assimilated and not so smart are stuck in old ways of life. Who knows. However they always existed in the bottom economic margin of society, in every country.
 
Actually Fennoscandinavians and East Asians ( Koreans, Japaneses ) have the highest IQ on earth, so it's possible, that " mongoloïds ? " have a substantial more intellectual brain than other humans, it can be, because paleo-siberians with cold climate has to be more inovative for survivance than other tribes. But if you see amerindians, who had amazing pre-colombian civilizations and mongoloid origin, are somewhat reduced, intellectualy, but in a social context ( very low way of life, compare to europe or far east ). The best exemple stay Africans, the fusion between low inovation of hunter-gatherers with " segregation ? " over the years can have reduced africans to be very naturalistic. If you look about african apport in the world ( without egyptians ) you see, that they are more naturalists than intellectual. We know them for dance, music, charisma, singing, etc all naturalistic behavior, i'm personnally not very receptive to this, but a lot of woman of different origin are. So conclusion, intellect stricto sensus, seems to be more like a multi reasons reality ( social environnement, life level, interest of discoveries, good spacial perception, general cultural traits ). Im often that a civilization with Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite gonna be less intellectual, than a society like china or india, where Honnor and Shame, against the family or the clan, is an total insult.
 
Raw IQ (i. e. IQ sans educational achievement) scores don't usually show Fennoscandians come out on top. Even the obviously biased Lynn & Vanhannen have North Italians as the 'smartest' Europeans. Now I don't believe that the IQ is set in stone, but we should at least be consistent when discussing these things.
 
I forgot when it was and who did it, but someone shared a map with me once that indicated IQ by nation. I would be more interested in the following:
EQ by country
I have lived in several countries and the common sense level seems to variate. And I have to tell you that some of the nations scoring high in IQ according to the map ... well, i would list them not on top for anything related to EQ.
EQ in my opinion shows when presented with a situation you are not prepared for or trained in.
Also it would be great to be able to measure a few ways regarding accomplishment vs. obstacles. It is quite different to have a regular career in let's say northern Europe where the government more or less sets the track for anyone able to pass the educational hurdles to let's say a nation where you first have to hustle up the cash to even afford to be able to get such an opportunity.
It would be great to measure something like a PQ. Potential Quotient. :)
Because then we would have something really worth looking at in term of who for example we should really pay attention to when it comes to hiring new people and wanting the type that gets things done ... not just those who are good at what they are trained in but might be completely unable when it comes to implementing their knowledge into a business environment and applying it to unexpected situations.
 
In video game buisness, we always say " run when you see koreans or finnish ". Simple joke, yes, fennoscandinavians, have a very good social and educational system, so in this case, the IQ can be biased, by social advance, but in any case, there is some strange issues along mongoloid people ( High IQ, High suicial incidence. )
 
MarkoZ said:
Raw IQ (i. e. IQ sans educational achievement) scores don't usually show Fennoscandians come out on top. Even the obviously biased Lynn & Vanhannen have North Italians as the 'smartest' Europeans. Now I don't believe that the IQ is set in stone, but we should at least be consistent when discussing these things.
Click to expand...

Indeed, and I don't think they have much "Mongoloid" ancestry. (Italians in general also have pretty low suicide rates.)

Also, just as people don't understand or acknowledge the difference between scores on educational achievement tests versus IQ tests, they also don't understand that there could be a difference in IQ between mass administered standardized IQ tests and a full battery of tests one on one with an educational psychiatrist.
 
Do these IQ tests evaluate your ability to think logically? I remember seeing a few questions and it seems that all they do is test your ability to rotate a big mass made of blocks and determine what it would look like at a certain angle or how quickly you can add numbers or something.
 
It is like trying to quantify something that is infinite. For this reason, IQ tests are biased in its very nature. There are however differences in intelligence among people that are better suited to complete different tasks. These differences are a product of natural selection and quantifying these differences would also require a notion of inferior and superior skill sets, which is again biased.
 
MarkoZ said:
Raw IQ (i. e. IQ sans educational achievement) scores don't usually show Fennoscandians come out on top. Even the obviously biased Lynn & Vanhannen have North Italians as the 'smartest' Europeans. Now I don't believe that the IQ is set in stone, but we should at least be consistent when discussing these things.
Click to expand...
NW European IQs are probably depressed due to mass immigration. Check out this link.

http://www.usnews.com/news/best-cou...0-countries-with-the-most-geniuses-per-capita
 
Well, how do we explain the differences between sub Saharan Africans and Jews. Both ethnics have been tortured by other ethnics. The European Jews, particularly the Ashkenazim of northern and central Europe. In proportion to their population, Jews have made outsize contributions to Western civilization. A simple metric is that of Nobel prizes: Though Jews constitute only 0.2% of the world’s population, they won 14% of Nobel prizes in the first half of the 20th century, 29% in the second and so far 32% in the present century. There is something here that requires explanation. If Jewish success were purely cultural, such as hectoring mothers or a zeal for education, others should have been able to do as well by copying such cultural practices. It’s therefore reasonable to ask if genetic pressures in Jews’ special history may have enhanced their cognitive skills.
Just such a pressure is described by two economic historians, Maristella Botticini and Zvi Eckstein, in their book “The Chosen Few.” In 63 or 65 AD, the high priest Joshua ben Gamla decreed that every Jewish father should send his sons to school so that they could read and understand Jewish law. Jews at that time earned their living mostly by farming, as did everyone else, and education was both expensive and of little practical use. Many Jews abandoned Judaism for the new and less rigorous Jewish sect now known as Christianity.It’s reasonable to ask if genetic pressures in Jews’ special history may have enhanced their cognitive skills.
Botticini and Eckstein say nothing about genetics but evidently, if generation after generation the Jews less able to acquire literacy became Christians, literacy and related abilities would on average be enhanced among those who remained Jews.
As commerce started to pick up in medieval Europe, Jews as a community turned out to be ideally suited for the role of becoming Europe’s traders and money-lenders. In a world where most people were illiterate, Jews could read contracts, keep accounts, appraise collateral, and do business arithmetic. They formed a natural trading network through their co-religionists in other cities, and they had rabbinical courts to settle disputes. Jews moved into money-lending not because they were forced to do so, as some accounts suggest, but because they chose the profession, Botticini and Eckstein say. It was risky but highly profitable. The more able Jews thrived and, just as in the rest of the pre-19th century world, the richer were able to support more surviving children.
As Jews adapted to a cognitively demanding niche, their abilities increased to the point that the average IQ of Ashkenazi Jews is, at 110 to 115, the highest of any known ethnic group. The population geneticists Henry Harpending and Gregory Cochran have calculated that, assuming a high heritability of intelligence, Ashkenazi IQ could have risen by 15 points in just 500 years. Ashkenazi Jews first appear in Europe around 900 AD, and Jewish cognitive skills may have been increasing well before then.
The emergence of high cognitive ability among the Ashkenazim, if genetically based, is of interest both in itself and as an instance of natural selection shaping a population within the very recent past.
 
Minty said:
Well, how do we explain the differences between sub Saharan Africans and Jews. Both ethnics have been tortured by other ethnics. The European Jews, particularly the Ashkenazim of northern and central Europe. In proportion to their population, Jews have made outsize contributions to Western civilization. A simple metric is that of Nobel prizes: Though Jews constitute only 0.2% of the world’s population, they won 14% of Nobel prizes in the first half of the 20th century, 29% in the second and so far 32% in the present century. There is something here that requires explanation. If Jewish success were purely cultural, such as hectoring mothers or a zeal for education, others should have been able to do as well by copying such cultural practices. It’s therefore reasonable to ask if genetic pressures in Jews’ special history may have enhanced their cognitive skills.
Just such a pressure is described by two economic historians, Maristella Botticini and Zvi Eckstein, in their book “The Chosen Few.” In 63 or 65 AD, the high priest Joshua ben Gamla decreed that every Jewish father should send his sons to school so that they could read and understand Jewish law. Jews at that time earned their living mostly by farming, as did everyone else, and education was both expensive and of little practical use. Many Jews abandoned Judaism for the new and less rigorous Jewish sect now known as Christianity.It’s reasonable to ask if genetic pressures in Jews’ special history may have enhanced their cognitive skills.
Botticini and Eckstein say nothing about genetics but evidently, if generation after generation the Jews less able to acquire literacy became Christians, literacy and related abilities would on average be enhanced among those who remained Jews.
As commerce started to pick up in medieval Europe, Jews as a community turned out to be ideally suited for the role of becoming Europe’s traders and money-lenders. In a world where most people were illiterate, Jews could read contracts, keep accounts, appraise collateral, and do business arithmetic. They formed a natural trading network through their co-religionists in other cities, and they had rabbinical courts to settle disputes. Jews moved into money-lending not because they were forced to do so, as some accounts suggest, but because they chose the profession, Botticini and Eckstein say. It was risky but highly profitable. The more able Jews thrived and, just as in the rest of the pre-19th century world, the richer were able to support more surviving children.
As Jews adapted to a cognitively demanding niche, their abilities increased to the point that the average IQ of Ashkenazi Jews is, at 110 to 115, the highest of any known ethnic group. The population geneticists Henry Harpending and Gregory Cochran have calculated that, assuming a high heritability of intelligence, Ashkenazi IQ could have risen by 15 points in just 500 years. Ashkenazi Jews first appear in Europe around 900 AD, and Jewish cognitive skills may have been increasing well before then.
The emergence of high cognitive ability among the Ashkenazim, if genetically based, is of interest both in itself and as an instance of natural selection shaping a population within the very recent past.
Click to expand...
I've been thinking this about few more ancient ethnic groups. Their rise could have been attributed to being more intelligent than surrounding others. Why Greeks, why the Romans, why Phoenicians, and not the others? Jews could be one of them surviving till today in their genetic and cultural isolation.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25609-Smart-ancient-people
 
In terms of the Ashkenazim I think an important factor may be the repeated attempts to exterminate them. When there are evils like the butchery during the Crusades, or the pogroms, etc., the strong, the intelligent, the creative, the resourceful are more likely to survive. The irony is that if this is true, all of these attempts by envious outsiders would only have made them more "fit".

@Minty,
Actually, modern "business" arithmetic, accounting, including double entry book-keeping, modern banking including letters of credit, monetary exchange, etc. weren't invented by Jews; they were invented by Tuscans, and adapted early by Lombards. As with Jews, this led them to be much hated in certain countries. There were "pogroms" of a sort in England against "Lombard" money lenders, for example.
https://books.google.com/books?id=N... against Lombards in medieval England&f=false

@LeBroc
So, why Tuscans, not only in business and banking, but art and on and on?

I think some of this is being in the right place at the right time as well as having the intellectual wherewithal to take advantage of it.

The Low Countries had a Renaissance later on, and in the modern era there is England, for example, or Germany later on.
 
Minty said:
Well, how do we explain the differences between sub Saharan Africans and Jews. Both ethnics have been tortured by other ethnics. The European Jews, particularly the Ashkenazim of northern and central Europe. In proportion to their population, Jews have made outsize contributions to Western civilization. A simple metric is that of Nobel prizes: Though Jews constitute only 0.2% of the world’s population, they won 14% of Nobel prizes in the first half of the 20th century, 29% in the second and so far 32% in the present century. There is something here that requires explanation. If Jewish success were purely cultural, such as hectoring mothers or a zeal for education, others should have been able to do as well by copying such cultural practices. It’s therefore reasonable to ask if genetic pressures in Jews’ special history may have enhanced their cognitive skills.
Just such a pressure is described by two economic historians, Maristella Botticini and Zvi Eckstein, in their book “The Chosen Few.” In 63 or 65 AD, the high priest Joshua ben Gamla decreed that every Jewish father should send his sons to school so that they could read and understand Jewish law. Jews at that time earned their living mostly by farming, as did everyone else, and education was both expensive and of little practical use. Many Jews abandoned Judaism for the new and less rigorous Jewish sect now known as Christianity.It’s reasonable to ask if genetic pressures in Jews’ special history may have enhanced their cognitive skills.
Botticini and Eckstein say nothing about genetics but evidently, if generation after generation the Jews less able to acquire literacy became Christians, literacy and related abilities would on average be enhanced among those who remained Jews.
As commerce started to pick up in medieval Europe, Jews as a community turned out to be ideally suited for the role of becoming Europe’s traders and money-lenders. In a world where most people were illiterate, Jews could read contracts, keep accounts, appraise collateral, and do business arithmetic. They formed a natural trading network through their co-religionists in other cities, and they had rabbinical courts to settle disputes. Jews moved into money-lending not because they were forced to do so, as some accounts suggest, but because they chose the profession, Botticini and Eckstein say. It was risky but highly profitable. The more able Jews thrived and, just as in the rest of the pre-19th century world, the richer were able to support more surviving children.
As Jews adapted to a cognitively demanding niche, their abilities increased to the point that the average IQ of Ashkenazi Jews is, at 110 to 115, the highest of any known ethnic group. The population geneticists Henry Harpending and Gregory Cochran have calculated that, assuming a high heritability of intelligence, Ashkenazi IQ could have risen by 15 points in just 500 years. Ashkenazi Jews first appear in Europe around 900 AD, and Jewish cognitive skills may have been increasing well before then.
The emergence of high cognitive ability among the Ashkenazim, if genetically based, is of interest both in itself and as an instance of natural selection eshaping a population within the very recent past.
Click to expand...

If you dig long enough (which shouldn't be very long at all) you'll find that those 'population geneticists' always have ties to political groups of a certain affiliation.

The usual narratives about Ashkenazic intelligence don't account for the fact that the source populations of American Ashkenazim came from Eastern Europe, where most of their ancestors led rather humble lives. Western European high finance dynasties were the exception. So, f elevated IQ were a result of adaption to accounting & finance, you'd expect the effects to be much more pronounced in, say, Italians and the Dutch. But that isn't the case, so it's obviously culture.
 
MarkoZ said:
If you dig long enough (which shouldn't be very long at all) you'll find that those 'population geneticists' always have ties to political groups of a certain affiliation.

The usual narratives about Ashkenazic intelligence don't account for the fact that the source populations of American Ashkenazim came from Eastern Europe, where most of their ancestors led rather humble lives. Western European high finance dynasties were the exception. So, f elevated IQ were a result of adaption to accounting & finance, you'd expect the effects to be much more pronounced in, say, Italians and the Dutch. But that isn't the case, so it's obviously culture.
Click to expand...

Marko, genetics, including detailed IBD analysis, has proven that the eastern European ancestry in Ashkenazim is extremely small, perhaps somewhere around 5 to under 10%. Genetically, Ashkenazim have really almost nothing to do with Eastern Europeans despite living there for hundreds of years.

Ed. Indeed, their genetically closest European populations are Southern Italians and Aegean Islanders.
 
Last edited:
Angela said:
Marko, genetics, including detailed IBD analysis, has proven that the eastern European ancestry in Ashkenazim is extremely small, perhaps somewhere around 5 to under 10%. Genetically, Ashkenazim have really almost nothing to do with Eastern Europeans despite living there for hundreds of years.

Ed. Indeed, their genetically closest European populations are Southern Italians and Aegean Islanders.
Click to expand...

I didn't express myself very well. I meant Eastern Europe in an exclusively geographic sense. My point is that the timeframe for wide-scale cognitive evolution in Ashkenazim would have been very small. Jews in Polish-Lithuania, for example, seldom held prominent secular positions and were mostly concerned with Talmudic learning. The association of Jews and finance seems to be more of an anti-semitic stereotype.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 128790 times.

Back
Top