Race and IQ

[Blanco]

IQ is quite overrated in my opinion. We can measure intelligence in our environment which is based on factory, urbanized societies. Someone living in the forest need other sort of intelligence which would make him less intelligent if he would move to a larger city where other forms of intelligence is needed to achieve success.
A bushman would score very low on an intelligence test which was based on our society's standards, but his intelligence would definitely be higher in some other forms of brain capacity such as memory, intuitiveness and other factors that Western societies can't measure.
East Asians such as Japanese, Chinese tend to have higher intelligence when it comes to math for example, but a lot of these people would be viewed as narrow minded in the West and "autistic" as these people usually tend to be excellent at some very specific areas in the work industry, therefore their living and earnings are only limited to a certain extent.
Some companies like Ford would lose billions if people would focus their intelligence to other areas instead of the so called public education - which would lead some people to question if a car is needed for me to reach more freedom instead using my own feet to reach miles and make a less painful living for the rest of the society and world which is dying to fight for oil in Iraq and other areas in the Middle East.
People would start to question things like if it's right for some to have billions of dollars yet still focus to use his money to invest in wars and make profit by the loss.
In my experience I've known some East Asian exchange students and i was able to see their limited knowledge and intelligence in other areas which is definitely not involved in the academic world - not saying these individuals are dumb or something inappropriate, but I'm certainly sure their skills make them only capable to function in areas like Tokyo not in other regions where other skills such as verbal intelligence are needed, especially in the business.
A lot of these academics focus only on the education fields but fail to solve problems in their life. Some would have problems to pay bills, because he doesn't know how to solve a basic logistic problem, where as he can easily measure a matrix based mathematical task.
Some even have problems to use public transport, because their memory and focus can't be capable to go from x to y.
We tend to idolize scientists, because those are the people who make the cultural standards in our society in a way that most people follow these trends. But at the same time we exclude other areas that can't be measured by modern science such as spirituality, metaphysics, intuitiveness, and other skills where verbal functions and rationalizing don't tend to work.

 

[LeBrok]

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".

I thought that too, but how can we explain Jewish success before Ashkenazim happened? They were known around Near East and around Roman Empire as best traders and lenders throughout "biblical" times.

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.

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.

Obviously the right place and the right time is very important. That's why I'm so thrilled about modern times. Educate everyone to unleash talents.

 

[Angela]

I thought that too, but how can we explain Jewish success before Ashkenazim happened? They were known around Near East and around Roman Empire as best traders and lenders throughout "biblical" times.

Except that they weren't, or at least not at levels higher than those of their neighbors. The Phoenicians, their near neighbors and cousins, built an entire empire on trade. The Greeks likewise were in every corner of the Mediterranean and beyond as merchants. The history of the first millennium BC is in one sense a history of trade wars between the Greeks, the Etruscans, the Carthaginians and the Romans. I'm not saying the Jews of the time weren't a capable and industrious people, and that there weren't traders among them, because that's all true, but at the time before the expulsions most of them were still farmers and small craftsmen. Saul of Tarsus was a tent maker, Peter was a fisherman, and so on.

I think a big change started with the Rabbis of that time who so strongly mandated that children go to school so that they could read the scriptures. To this day, a boy can't become an adult member of the Jewish community until he reads from the Torah at his bar mitzvah. That itself becomes a form of selection.

See:
http://www.bu.edu/econ/files/2012/11/dp124.pdf

Subsequent events just accelerated the process.

 

[LeBrok]

Except that they weren't, or at least not at levels higher than those of their neighbors. The Phoenicians, their near neighbors and cousins, built an entire empire on trade. The Greeks likewise were in every corner of the Mediterranean and beyond as merchants. The history of the first millennium BC is in one sense a history of trade wars between the Greeks, the Etruscans, the Carthaginians and the Romans. I'm not saying the Jews of the time weren't a capable and industrious people, and that there weren't traders among them, because that's all true, but at the time before the expulsions most of them were still farmers and small craftsmen. Saul of Tarsus was a tent maker, Peter was a fisherman, and so on.

Smart people of Canaanite origin?

I think a big change started with the Rabbis of that time who so strongly mandated that children go to school so that they could read the scriptures. To this day, a boy can't become an adult member of the Jewish community until he reads from the Torah at his bar mitzvah. That itself becomes a form of selection.

Right, the universal education, at least reading and writing, obviously gave them advantage over others. But I think there is this a bit of IQ advantage which was always there. Let's keep in mind that they've invented the biggest religion in the world, together with philosophy of "pacifism".
Do we know more influential Jews during Roman Empire, except Jesus and Apostles? Did Romans worried about growing Jewish influence in commerce and finances? Just curious.

 

[Angela]

Perhaps. After all, the ancestors of both the Phoenicians and the Jews also "invented" agriculture, and the related animal domestication, and literacy, and urban life, and metallurgy in Western Eurasia, so....However, the Greeks and the Romans were no slouches either. Again, perhaps a combination of native ability and being in the right place at the right time.

Yes indeed, the Romans at times banned Jews from the capitol. Usually, from memory and a quick look at wiki, the reasons were "religious", or in reality "political". Romans didn't really care, in general, what religion people practiced, but nominal "worship" of the "gods"of the state, in addition to one's own "gods" was one way that they maintained unity and loyalty across the Empire. They accommodated the "strange" to them practices of the Jews under certain Emperors, exempting them from what was required of everyone else, but certain Emperors demanded at least lip service, or, like Caligula, were just mad, and that led eventually to the wars of the first century AD.

"Tiberius^[10] forbade Judaism in Rome, and Claudius expelled them from the city. However, the passage of Suetonius is ambiguous: "Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus he [Claudius] expelled them from the city".^[8]Chrestus has been identified as another form of Christus^{[citation needed]}; the disturbances may have been related to the arrival of the first Christians in Rome, and that the Roman authorities, failing to distinguish between the Jews and the Early Christians, simply decided to expel them all.^{[citation needed]}The Crisis under Caligula (37-41) has been proposed as the "first open break between Rome and the Jews", even though problems were already evident during the Census of Quirinius in 6 and under Sejanus (before 31).^[11] After the Jewish-Roman wars (66-135), Hadrian changed the name of Iudaea province to Syria Palaestina and Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina in an attempt to erase the historical ties of the Jewish people to the region.^[12] In addition, after 70, Jews and Jewish Proselytes were only allowed to practice their religion if they paid the Jewish Tax, and after 135 were barred from Jerusalem except for the day of Tisha B'Av."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_persecution_in_the_Roman_Empire

There was incessant conflict in Alexandria between Jews and Greeks, with the Romans having to discipline both. Some of that conflict was undoubtedly mercantile.

I'm not aware of any "famous" Jews in the Roman world who were famous for their participation in the wider culture, if you know what I mean. Perhaps one who "crossed the line" in the gentile realm would have been Philo of Alexandria.

http://www.iep.utm.edu/philo/

There are so few because Jewish life and customs of the times were diametrically opposed to the values and customs of the Greco-Roman world. To achieve "success" in the wider world would have meant no longer being a Jew.

 

[IronSide]

I don't know if this was discussed earlier in this thread, it's too long and i'm lazy to go through all of it :embarassed:

Ashkenazi Jews suffer from a number of genetic diseases like Torsion Dystonia which is strangely linked to higher IQ.

A question to any Jewish person I would like to have an answer, don't you feel, even for a little bit, that you are superior to others because you are Jewish ? does this "feeling" cloud your moral judgement regarding race issues (have you ever thought that certain races deserve what they get because they have low intelligence) ? do you believe it ?

Well if you answer positive for any of the aforementioned questions, then congratulations, you have brought upon yourself the wrath of our strong arm of justice, Angela the great, who will most likely ban you, or give you a stern warning, because you are a racist :grin:

 

[bicicleur 2]

oh .. oh ..
I'm curious about what will come next here ..

 

[Angela]

I'm glad my efforts are being appreciated.

Beware the wrath of Athena! :grin:

 

[Bergin]

Intelligence, as any other natural or nurtured trait, is supposed to provide surviving advantages.
When I see the 2.5 milliard people living between China and India, I think I have the answer.

 

[BalkanPower]

it is true tha in average asians have the highest iq. Besides IQ, every race has a better and more unique thing to them compared to others (average guy). e.g blacks are good athletes, asians are smarter etc....

 

[firetown]

But what about having a way to measure creativity and true potential? You can be determined as intelligent in terms of performing well in a setting where you apply knowledge to instructions. But then there are people who think on their own and find solutions that have not been given to them by someone else. Then there are others who are great in terms of following orders, being productive, but when presented with a situation they have not been trained on, they are completely lost.

How would you ensure that we can tell true potential through an IQ test?

it is true tha in average asians have the highest iq. Besides IQ, every race has a better and more unique thing to them compared to others (average guy). e.g blacks are good athletes, asians are smarter etc....

 

[LeBrok]

But what about having a way to measure creativity and true potential? You can be determined as intelligent in terms of performing well in a setting where you apply knowledge to instructions. But then there are people who think on their own and find solutions that have not been given to them by someone else. Then there are others who are great in terms of following orders, being productive, but when presented with a situation they have not been trained on, they are completely lost.

How would you ensure that we can tell true potential through an IQ test?

Good point. We should invent a social test to complement IQ test. Social IQ test?

 

[FBS]

There are tests that evaluate social intelligence, self-awareness, styles of thinking (perception & observation, decision style and effectiveness), empathy, etc... mostly marketed as EQ (which for me is a big mistake since those tests are not only about emotional intelligence, so it does a huge disservice to itself). There do exist even far more complex tests that do test the bio-psycho-social aspects but nobody cares of their existence. Old habits and beliefs die hard, so IQ is still a buzzword. It has been proven over and over that high IQ does not predict success in life. There has to be balance of IQ & EQ in order to be successful, likable & accepted and most of all to be happy.

 

[Angela]

There are tests that evaluate social intelligence, self-awareness, styles of thinking (perception & observation, decision style and effectiveness), empathy, etc... mostly marketed as EQ (which for me is a big mistake since those tests are not only about emotional intelligence, so it does a huge disservice to itself). There do exist even far more complex tests that do test the bio-psycho-social aspects but nobody cares of their existence. Old habits and beliefs die hard, so IQ is still a buzzword. It has been proven over and over that high IQ does not predict success in life. There has to be balance of IQ & EQ in order to be successful, likable & accepted and most of all to be happy.

Well said, FBS. I couldn't agree more.

 

[LeBrok]

There are tests that evaluate social intelligence, self-awareness, styles of thinking (perception & observation, decision style and effectiveness), empathy, etc... mostly marketed as EQ (which for me is a big mistake since those tests are not only about emotional intelligence, so it does a huge disservice to itself). There do exist even far more complex tests that do test the bio-psycho-social aspects but nobody cares of their existence. Old habits and beliefs die hard, so IQ is still a buzzword. It has been proven over and over that high IQ does not predict success in life. There has to be balance of IQ & EQ in order to be successful, likable & accepted and most of all to be happy.

In individual cases yes, but in broader statistical sense people of higher IQ are more likely to succeed in life over people with lower IQ. There should be standardized IQ and EQ test (or Social IQ test) and also perhaps a reality test (spiritual and conspiracy inclination test).

 

[FBS]

Intelligence(s) depend on our brain capacity & life conditions (of our predecessors and ours).
Brain capacity - depends on our biology such as genes that we carry and diseases that we may catch or accidents that may happen to us (they do influence for better or for worse), lifestyle (what we eat, are we active, what we read and feed our brain with)
Life conditions - geography, climate, state, social status, family, schooling and education, lifestyle (food that we can afford, house/flat), and so on....

An the trick is in how do we solve problems of our life conditions - how do we put to work our brain capacity in solving our life problems. And this we can measure and see what sort of intelligences we are using to solve our life issues.

IQ tests measure mathematical, spacial and language skills which are necessary but are just basics.

 

[FBS]

In individual cases yes, but in broader statistical sense people of higher IQ are more likely to succeed in life over people with lower IQ. There should be standardized IQ and EQ test (or Social IQ test) and also perhaps a reality test (spiritual and conspiracy inclination test).

True, IQ is the basis to do well in mainstream education and to get employed, but keeping jobs, excelling in the carer, do good, have long term thinking, being aware of the world around you, people affected by what you're doing, generations affected ....... species, ... other intelligence's are far more complex and are not focusing on only short term thinking. So low IQ or low EQ = problem, balance (or closer to balance) is what we need. And it is proven that we can develop our intelligence's further if we do not have any clinical problem (biological or psychological).

There are very sophisticated tests that do measure the brain styles & brain capacities and those are wonderful tools but the mainstream is focused on IQ. Unfortunately this will only change when we are faced with life and death situation.

 

[Bergin]

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.

I don't know much about the genetic component. I live in Israel (i am not jewish) and we get talks once in a while about the jewish culture. If I remember correctly, what defined a jewish person in europe since day one was: 1-religion, and 2-impossibility to own land. The second one is pretty critical, IMO, as it cuts completely the connection of a population from agriculture, farming and rurality in general at very early stage. As such, they were forced for centuries to focus on investment: trading, technology, finance.

At the end the dominant majority of nobel prices are awarded to people who work in big centers. Anyway, this is just my opinion.

 

[LeBrok]

I don't know much about the genetic component. I live in Israel (i am not jewish) and we get talks once in a while about the jewish culture. If I remember correctly, what defined a jewish person in europe since day one was: 1-religion, and 2-impossibility to own land. The second one is pretty critical, IMO, as it cuts completely the connection of a population from agriculture, farming and rurality in general at very early stage. As such, they were forced for centuries to focus on investment: trading, technology, finance.

At the end the dominant majority of nobel prices are awarded to people who work in big centers. Anyway, this is just my opinion.

In Eastern Europe (Siolo) most of Jews lived in villages, and I'm sure they owned the land too. Though I'm not 100% sure how it was structured. I'm sure though that before WW2 they owned land and properties/buildings in Poland.

 

[davef]

My iq is 1. Lol