We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Sunday, November 17. 2013
Or do we just see the smartest of them in the USA? In any event, they often make those of us descended from northern European immigrant bumpkins seem a little slow on the uptake.
Is this a racist question?
Posted by The News Junkie in The Culture, "Culture," Pop Culture and Recreation at 12:22 | Comments (14) | Trackback (1)
Tracked: Nov 17, 21:00
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
You are not allowed to know the answer to this. Ashkenazi Jews average 1 SD - 15 points IQ higher than the rest of the populations. I have seen estimates pushing that down to 110, but still, it's there and the current evidence is that it is largely genetic. That is, all the clever ideas that people bring up as hypotheses that it's cultural have actually been thought of by other folks before and tested. When you try to measure them, they largely wash out. That doesn't stop people from insisting that it must be cultural anyway, because, well, gee, it just has to be. So they share anecdotes, in the absence of evidence. It must be the expectations, or the books, or the hard work, or the learning Hebrew, or something, anything, other than genetics. Because we don't like that answer.
Northeast Asians seem to measure in at average IQ 105. That is less solidly measured (there's a lot of the interior of China that we don't have good numbers for), but still pretty good. That might turn out to be more the coastal areas, but so far, they are still holding up.
There are suggestions that a NW European population centering on Frisia and gradually getting better over the last 8 centuries might also average over 100, but the data on that is murkier.
Please note that these are all data for populations, not individuals. Half the people are above that centerpoint and half below it in every subgroup. This knowledge gives you some predictive value of how groups will perform at some tasks. But single-number measures, even if they could be precise, are not good at predicting outcomes of individuals. Analogy: Though height is an advantage, the tallest basketball players are not always the best.
Don't forget the Scots! They average about 110 on your IQ scale. Most of the great inventions attributed to those from "Great Britain,' are from those of Scottish origin.
This tends to reinforce the genetic origins of intelligence.
" ... they often make those of us descended from northern European immigrant bumpkins seem a little slow on the uptake."
Speak for yourself dude. My Dutch/Scots-Irish/English ancestors have a long proud tradition of engineering in the family. Not slow at all. Math is Us.
It's not just IQ and skin color. Human populations differ in all sorts of physical and mental characteristics, and the differences are largely genetic. In fact every physical, mental and behavioral characteristic of humans has a substantial genetic component. This even extends to things like religious and political party affiliation and food and music preferences.
Cavali-Sforza et als classic book "The History and Geography of Human Genes" documents at least 10 to 15 races in Africa and an equal or larger number outside Africa. If the usual taxonomic rules were used, some of these races would be classified as species.
Cavali-Sforza and his coauthors were forced by the publisher to include a disclaimer that no human races existed. But the disclaimer is absurd on its face, and if true would be proof that data in the book were fraudulent. Galilean moments still exist, and modern governments and institutions are even more vigilant and aggressive in enforcing pc dogma than the Catholic Church ever was or is.
Smarts matter but also the context.
They exercise their smarts in the propitious context of Western Civilization .... which many of them are doing their best to undermine.
How smart it that?
If you took a typical baby from a typical American household at birth and gave it to a Jewish family or a 1st generation Asian family to raise as their own you would get the same result. From about the 3rd grade on Jewish children from strict Jewish families spend most of their time either in school or studying. Additionally their parents expect and demand exceptionalism while constantly telling their children that they are better then others and that more is expected of them. Almost every minute of their youth is monitored and controlled. This tends to be true in many 1st generation Asian families as well. Most Asian families lose this kind of tradition after a couple of generations and their children are just like the rest of us Americans where some are exceptional some despicable and the majority somewhere in between.
No, this is exactly what I said would not happen. What you are seeing is effect, not cause. This is commonly believed, because it accords with some important American values, but it doesn't have evidence to back it up. It is not the trying hard and being on the make that makes the difference.
Jews and Chinese have evolved in cultures that for 2000 years or more gave the highest honors and position in society to those who could master dense masses of written matter.
With the Chinese it was Mandarins and the works of Confucious; the Jews Rabbis and the Talmud. Families of Rabbis and of Mandarins tended to intermarry.
Think of Mendel and his beans.
It seems to me that both groups have a culture of valuing education. That alone will make a difference over generations.
I disagree. The value of hard work is greatly underestimated. As is the value of parents working with their children to make the education system work. I think it is an awesome fact that humans have so much potential while at the same time I am saddened that so few live up to it. The message here is not (so much) that genetics dictate your success or failure but rather it is that all or most of us could be so much more with sufficient effort and focus.
Gone With the Wind. Rick in NC, and Blog Dog - then show the evidence. You will find it is not there. The possible environmental explanations - SES, books in the home, expectations, school district, parental education, exposure to languages - can all be measured, and they show very little correlation, even when taken together. The environmental explanations were present in abundance before the Renaissance - yet there is no record that the Jews were considered especially smart before the 14th C. Sephardic and Oriental Jews do not have higher IQ's, though they share most if not all of the purported environmental factors. Ashkenazi Jews do not have especially good Spatial scores.
I don't say that environment counts for nothing - I would hardly have adopted three boys if I believed that were the case - but it counts for far less in intellectual candlepower than we have been led to believe.
Here's some of my evidence. But if you try to research this, to find actual scientific evidence to prove me wrong, you will become convinced.
Arguing that there are no differences of almost anything including average intelligence between different identifiable groups of humans that are at least partly explained by genes is like arguing that there are no such differences between different types of dogs.
It is much easier to see in dogs, perhaps, but all dogs belong to one species. The average differences between them on temperament, intelligence, good-naturedness, trainability, tracking ability, herding ability, retrieving ability is easy to show, and no amount of current environmental pressures can do much about it.
Just as different 'varieties' of dogs have been genetically selected for different traits is no different from human 'varieties' being selected for different traits.
Even so, one standard deviation above the mean is not that much, really. It probably is real, but the difference is not really that great. It does shift the curve to the right.
And all the evidence I've ever seen shows that IQ [or g] is around 50% heritable.
Focus and effort are essential to bringing out whatever gifts are there, but AVI has all the evidence on his side of the assertion. The horsepower is either there or it isn't.