Are the Northern European countries much more clever than the ones in the South?

It would also be interesting to see a list of inventions north vs. south.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Eupedia Forum mobile app
 
Inventions are only one part of a culture. Art, music, philosophy, etc. are not "inventions".

Plus, the kinds of lists that show up on the internet or places like Wikipedia are usually about relatively recent "inventions", not the ones which underlay all of Western Civilization. They're also not ranked by importance. The "invention" of agriculture or metallurgy is more important than the invention of the electric stove by dozens of orders of magnitude.
 
I'm afraid history disproves that. Farming and animal husbandry, metallurgy as a whole, certainly bronze metallurgy, the first great cities and civilizations, writing, the Greek and Roman civilizations, and the beginning of the Renaissance, have absolutely nothing to do with Northern Europe. That's a relatively recent phenomenon.

Well yes but I'm skeptical that any of these had much to do with intelligence, maybe just a consequence of higher population.

Scandinavian countries are doing very well for themselves, the whole of Europe really, and that at least should be appreciated and acknowledged.
 
There are dumb Northern Europeans, there are smart Northern Europeans.
There are dumb Southern Europeans, there are smart Southern Europeans.

If you're dumb, you're still dumb regardless of ancestry :).
 
There are dumb Northern Europeans, there are smart Northern Europeans.
There are dumb Southern Europeans, there are smart Southern Europeans.

If you're dumb, you're still dumb regardless of ancestry :).

Such eloquence davef, well done.
 
I think north Europeans have to work harder and become cleverer because of the cold climate just to survive.

I think their work ethics relates mostly to I haplogroup and I also believe due to climate......


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
Inventions are only one part of a culture. Art, music, philosophy, etc. are not "inventions".

Plus, the kinds of lists that show up on the internet or places like Wikipedia are usually about relatively recent "inventions", not the ones which underlay all of Western Civilization. They're also not ranked by importance. The "invention" of agriculture or metallurgy is more important than the invention of the electric stove by dozens of orders of magnitude.
Yes, I'm aware of it and I didn't have any specific list in mind. I just have a feeling that the south is better in this regard. Maybe only due to population density.

But art, culture and civilization usually progress after some bigger inventions.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Eupedia Forum mobile app
 
I think their work ethics relates mostly to I haplogroup and I also believe due to climate......


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

I believe that DNA transfers a lot of info also subconsciously shaping culture and behavior. Nordic countries have a different mind set due to their formation process recorded in their DNA.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
I think north Europeans have to work harder and become cleverer because of the cold climate just to survive.

Ancient Arabians had a harsh life too, the desert, the thirst, the heat, the constant look for pasture, daily tribal warfare and raids, to plan to live through all of that according to you would result in a master race, I couldn't find one.
 
There are dumb Northern Europeans, there are smart Northern Europeans.
There are dumb Southern Europeans, there are smart Southern Europeans.

If you're dumb, you're still dumb regardless of ancestry :).
Well put. Any difference comes from historical or environmental factors, not the latitude.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Eupedia Forum mobile app
 
Well yes but I'm skeptical that any of these had much to do with intelligence, maybe just a consequence of higher population.

Scandinavian countries are doing very well for themselves, the whole of Europe really, and that at least should be appreciated and acknowledged.

Never said it shouldn't, but that wasn't the comment.

Large population size was important, as it would lead to a desire to increase the availability of food. More highly concentrated populations also lead to more exchange of ideas. Another important factor was the incredibly large variety of food sources in the Near East, from different types of grains to different wild, but manageable animals and a good climate depending on the period. This actually started the cycle, by leading to large population sizes even before the actual "domestication" of plants and animals.

However, without a relatively high level of intelligence you don't have a lot of abstract thought, nor do you have a very high level of problem solving. That applies not only to the ancient Near East but to China and places like ancient Peru or Mexico as well.

The same thing would apply to England during the Industrial Revolution. You had large populations supported by a strong agricultural and trade based economy, many waterways, and on and on. They were also blessed by large deposits of iron and coal. They had the wit to take advantage of those things. However, the real flowering of the British Empire was because they conquered other countries, or at least dominated them, and got their resources for a pittance, so a lot of things come into play with how prosperous a country becomes. You have to have resources, but also the wit to use them.

Germany is another good example. The idea of "Lebensraum", or space for living, was part of the German national imperative since before the first World War and was even more important to the Nazis. That's why they planned to exterminate the Poles and Russians once they got through with the Jews and the Gypsies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensraum

Is it a coincidence that Germany became a power house economically under Hitler? He had some good ideas, often cribbed from Mussolini, but the big spike came through conquering so much of Europe, especially Eastern Europe. One of the prime motivations given for the take over was to get access to all that nice, flat farmland.

In an industrial and even post industrial age raw materials are extremely important. Not as kosher anymore to go take them by force from other areas, or to take their food either. So, in the last hundred two hundred or so years, having your own natural resources like coal, iron, natural gas, lots of hydroelectric power is very important, as well as lots of arable farm land, and having easy access to the main water trade routes, although the last is less important with the onset of cargo planes.

If you go to some source like the UN you'll see that a country like Italy, for example, doesn't have, and hasn't had since before the Roman Empire enough arable land to support its population, and has virtually no natural resources to speak of any longer. This means that everything it produces is produced with raw materials it has purchased abroad, and is processed using energy also purchased from abroad. Obviously, that's extremely expensive. The only way it has survived economically is by "added value" through creativity, design etc. producing products which bring a higher price. I don't know how much longer that can continue given the manufacturing might and outright copyright infringement of China and other East Asian countries.

I could also make an argument that Italy never fully recovered from the movement of trade away from the Near East and to the Americas and to the disastrous French invasion and other events of the late Renaissance, but that's for another thread.
 
there are not so many realy clever people
but there is a lot of nonsense
be it nationalistic, fascist, socialist, communist, religious or political correct nonsense
if the majority of the people can abstain from that kind of nonsense, that country will do well
we don't need high intelligence, just common sense will do
 
Northern countries learned from southerns! See the alphabet they use, Algebra, numerals, music, art, architecture, style just to name a few.They all point south. The foundations of civilisation were laid from south. So it can not be said than Northerns are smarter. The opposite can
 
No, is the other way around. I’m Really Smart. Believe Me! I’m among Stupids.
ps I’m been sarcastic! [emoji848]
 
Any attempt to elevate one part of Europe over another one is odious in my opinion, no matter which side is doing it. I hope I didn't give any other impression.
 
There are dumb Northern Europeans, there are smart Northern Europeans.
There are dumb Southern Europeans, there are smart Southern Europeans.

If you're dumb, you're still dumb regardless of ancestry :).
To be honest, that's the best answer I have seen so far. To me Ethnic and admixture does not mean anything
 
No, if they were more clever, they would have had empires since the beginning of time and would not rely on Greeks and Romans to civilize them.
 
Don't forget that the Greeks and Romans lived near the more civilized Near East. Sometimes it pays to be in the right place at the right time. There are a lot of factors involved in creating a prosperous and advanced culture besides native wit.

Davef's answer is indeed the best one.
 
I don't think ancestry or whatever happened 1000 years or longer ago matters.
If you would have visited Germany in the early 1950's you wouldn't have taught of them as clever.
What made them succesfull again is a no-nonsense attitude and good working ethics.
 

This thread has been viewed 34652 times.

Back
Top