Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why canít we talk about IQ?
Politico ^ | August 9, 2013 | Jason Richwine

Posted on 08/09/2013 3:06:33 PM PDT by reaganaut1

“IQ is a metric of such dubiousness that almost no serious educational researcher uses it anymore,” the Guardian’s Ana Marie Cox wrote back in May. It was a breathtakingly ignorant statement. Psychologist Jelte Wicherts noted in response that a search for “IQ test” in Google’s academic database yielded more than 10,000 hits — just for the year 2013.

But Cox’s assertion is all too common. There is a large discrepancy between what educated laypeople believe about cognitive science and what experts actually know. Journalists are steeped in the lay wisdom, so they are repeatedly surprised when someone forthrightly discusses the real science of mental ability.

If that science happens to deal with group differences in average IQ, the journalists’ surprise turns into shock and disdain. Experts who speak publicly about IQ differences end up portrayed as weird contrarians at best, and peddlers of racist pseudoscience at worst.

I’m speaking from experience. My Harvard Ph.D. dissertation contains some scientifically unremarkable statements about ethnic differences in average IQ, including the IQ difference between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites. For four years, the dissertation did what almost every other dissertation does — collected dust in the university library. But when it was unearthed in the midst of the immigration debate, I experienced the vilification firsthand.

For people who have studied mental ability, what’s truly frustrating is the déjà vu they feel each time a media firestorm like this one erupts. Attempts by experts in the field to defend the embattled messenger inevitably fall on deaf ears. When the firestorm is over, the media’s mindset always resets to a state of comfortable ignorance, ready to be shocked all over again when the next messenger comes along.

(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: bellcurve; iq; richwine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-217 next last
To: reaganaut1
Thank you for posting this piece by Jason Richwine. Please note my own support for Dr. Richwine: Jason Richwine Incident.

I am very glad to see this intelligent young seeker of truth & defender of reality, fighting back. The Leftist would-be thought controllers have created a very, very dangerous climate of deliberate make-believe, which increasingly parallels Hans Christian Andersen's engaging but disturbing fable, The Emperor's New Clothes.

Just as one honest little boy pierced the fantasy bubble in the story, one can only hope that a few honest students of reality, will puncture the collectivist/egalitarian world of make-believe, which is undermining the future of the West.

William Flax

151 posted on 08/12/2013 7:56:21 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Not sure where I downloaded this from, but the part about Neanderthal DNA is interesting. Here it is, for what’s it’s worth.

IQ (intelligence) is inherited and not equally distributed among human races. Multiple IQ tests conducted world-wide over several decades have been normed for every conceivable variable and Blacks always rank at the bottom, even in non-verbal tests. There has never never been an IQ test administered anywhere in the world where the racial rankings were different; Jews, Asian, White, non-White Hispanic and then American Blacks and African Blacks.

Racial activist groups have tried to create their own tests to demonstrate intellectual parity of the races and attack the integrity of existing tests but the rankings are always the same; African Blacks average a 70 IQ (only 2% of Whites score this low), American Blacks are 85 (due to mixing with Whites, 20% on average), non-White Hispanics are 87, Whites 100, Asians 106 and Ashkenazi Jews at 115.

Even using culture-free, unbiased testing designed by Black psychologists, no amount of testing, no amount of wishful thinking, shows any improvement in Black IQ. Raven’s “Progressive Matrices” is completely non-verbal, yet even the brightest of the African Blacks (South African university students) still score only 85 — a whole standard deviation above sub-Saharan Africa but it’s a whole standard deviation below Whites.

The mean intelligence of Blacks is much lower than for Whites. The least intelligent ten percent of Whites have IQs below 81; forty percent of Blacks have IQs that low. Only one Black in six is more intelligent than the average White; five Whites out of six are more intelligent than the average Black. These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. They are reflected in countless everyday situations. “Life is an IQ test.”

Further, only one-in-3.5 million African Blacks has an IQ of 140 or higher (genius level). But one-in-83 U.S. Whites is a genius. Therefore the per capita genius rate for U.S.-resident Whites is 42,000 times higher than it is for African Blacks.

Incidentally, though the average IQ of East Asians is 6 points higher than the average non-Jewish White, the percentage distribution of East Asians with IQ’s above 140 is slightly lower. The reason for this [apparent] anomaly is that the range of cognitive variation among White gentiles is greater than among East Asians. Specifically, East Asians are more clustered around the mean.

As far as Jews go, that’s not the case, but because of the population size differential, the [absolute number] of White gentiles with IQ’s above 140 is much larger than for Jews. In other words, there’s no lack of cognitive talent in the White gentile population. Specifically, no racial population on this planet, including the Jews, exceeds in the absolute number of White gentiles with IQ’s above 140.

Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthal who lived in Europe. Modern humans did not come out of Africa; the African humanoids came out and mated with the Neanderthals and Denisovans to create a composite hybrid that is modern man. Forensic scientists determine race by cranium shape; Blacks have a small frontal lobe and sloping frontal plane and a smaller cranium-to-mandible ratio. Caucasoids have the largest craniums, an almost vertical frontal slope and a massive frontal lobe. The mongloloid is very similar and also more evolved. It is the frontal lobe that seperates our behavior most from the animals and is responsible for language and rational thought.

MRIs show that Blacks have brain size much smaller than Whites, Asians and Jews. This is what caused the increase in cranium capacity. Studies published in the American Psychological Association journal using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) found correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40 and that these racial differences in brain size are present at birth. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster; by adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

Further, this reflects what we observe in real life (including the so-called “acheivement gap”). People have made long-term observations of the different races and reached rational conclusions; the more White a society is the more prosperous, inventive and safe it is. 19 of the 20 poorest countries are African (Haiti). In sub-Saharan Africa the only countries that could be considered sucessful were White-governed, (Rhodesia and S. Africa). To this day they still can’t even feed themselves even though they are the oldest race. In fact they didn’t have a written language until colonization. A Black in America has twice the lifespan of a Black in Africa. It would would be longer except the top cause of death for 16-34 year-old Black males is another Black male killing them. Whites are 17 times more likely to experience violence at the hands of Blacks than the other way around.

IQ distribution by race:

• Ashkenazi Jews = 115
• Asian = 106
• White = 100
• Non-White Hispanic = 86
• American Blacks = 85 (average 30% White mix)
• Sub-Saharan Blacks = 70 (This is considered borderline retarded. Only 2% of Whites score this low)

Blacks have the lowest IQ of any race because they are the only race with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthal who lived in Europe. This is what caused the dramatic increase in cranium capacity (and brain size as MRIs reveal) as humans evolved from Blacks and migrated out of Africa.

National Geographic has a good story about the Neanderthal DNA. The MRI studies are Googleable. For the IQ numbers a good place to start is Wiki because their facts are sourced (Race_and_intelligence and IQ_and_Global_Inequality). But the numbers are well-known and accepted.


152 posted on 08/12/2013 8:07:45 AM PDT by CodeJockey (Freeper, Tea Party Member, Bitter Clinger, Creepy White Cracker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CodeJockey
My favorite line from the article:

Life is an IQ Test

153 posted on 08/12/2013 8:13:37 AM PDT by CodeJockey (Freeper, Tea Party Member, Bitter Clinger, Creepy White Cracker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy; Norseman; Pelham; blam; Black Agnes
Thanks for the ping, Wardaddy. I have great respect for Jason Richwine & somewhat less respect for the Heritage Foundation, for not standing up for him.

To really understand the deliberate suppression of the evidence of profound differences in human aptitudes of all sorts, but most critically as to different forms of intelligence, one has to address the compulsive aspect of Leftist thought.

See Compassion Or Compulsion? No one--no one--but demagogues & scoundrels benefit from the fantasy world where we tell people that they should blame other people for the aptitudes that they do not have. The Leftist fantasy world hurts every group & every individual, who is induced to blame others, rather than develop whatever talent, in whatever honorable direction, great or limited that, he or she may actually have. The damage done is hardly peculiar to anyone race or sex; but is harmful to all in varying degrees.

The reality should be as clear as day to anyone who ever sat in a classroom, and observed the wide differences in who was good at what. It is insanity to allow the subject of human differences to be suppressed. We do not follow such lunacy in looking at analysis of any other object of interest. (See Footnote on Egalitarianism.) Could there be a clearer demonstration of how wrong is the attitude that Jason Richwine attacks? Think about it!

William Flax

154 posted on 08/12/2013 8:18:36 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: CodeJockey

bump


155 posted on 08/12/2013 10:56:35 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan

bump


156 posted on 08/13/2013 6:59:13 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: CodeJockey
Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthal who lived in Europe

The problem with the theory that interbreeding with Neanderthals made Eurasians smart is that the Neanderthals themselves were probably quite stupid (their brains were larger than ours because their bodies were more massive). Neanderthals were using exactly the same crude stone tools around the time they went extinct 40K years ago as when they originated some 400K years earlier. If Neanderthal genes gave us insightful, creative innovative minds, you'd think that Neanderthals would have had a little more creative insight of their own.

I suspect that a more likely explanation is that people in Africa coexisted and interbred with archaic Homo sapiens (aka H. heidelbergensis) for longer than those who left Africa.

157 posted on 08/13/2013 1:14:29 PM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: CodeJockey
African Blacks average a 70 IQ (only 2% of Whites score this low), American Blacks are 85 (due to mixing with Whites, 20% on average), non-White Hispanics are 87, Whites 100, Asians 106 and Ashkenazi Jews at 115.

I suspect the "Asian" category can be broken down further. Japanese and Koreans have the highest average IQ of any nationalities, probably on par with Ashkenazi Jews. I rather doubt that Hmong would score much higher than sub-Saharan Africans, however. They lived much as neolithic peoples did in their native Vietnam and Cambodia, and behave much like inner city blacks when in America.

American Indians are also descended from Asians, and I doubt that most of them would score very high (e.g. most non-white "Hispanics" are predominantly of Amerindian descent, hence the average IQ in the 80's).

158 posted on 08/13/2013 1:19:20 PM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: ek_hornbeck

http://www.scienceworldreport.com/articles/8777/20130812/neanderthal-tools-reveal-human-intelligence-innovation.htm


159 posted on 08/13/2013 1:24:43 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker
Interesting if true.

Everything I've read said that Neanderthals used the same hand axes and crude spear heads throughout their nearly half-million year history.

160 posted on 08/13/2013 1:31:31 PM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom

Why are you so certain it is only cultural differences, when, for example, the testing gap between the black and white children of socio-economically equally upper-middle class is persistently gaping?


161 posted on 08/13/2013 2:07:50 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Sirius Lee

Obama’s not stupid, but he’s certainly not brilliant.

I’d peg him at about a 110.


162 posted on 08/13/2013 2:08:36 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

PapaBear, you’ve pegged it exactly! The average Mensan is socially inept to a point that it hinders professional success.

Smart people without such handicaps tend to work in law or medicine or finance or IT or creative fields at such a level that they don’t need Mensa to find and spend time with other smart people.

Also, a good chunk of them are, shall we say, ‘chunky’, and there tends to be something of a ‘swingers’ undercurrent or subset to many Mensa chapters.


163 posted on 08/13/2013 2:14:04 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom
I do *not* accept, as liberals do, that lower intellectual performance in some ethnic groups is a hardwired genetic characteristic of those groups. My view is a conservative view: help people to help themselves.

If liberals believe in "hardwired genetic differences," why do they fight so hard to suppress research showing that intelligence is heritable and that there are significant mean differences in intelligence between racial and ethnic groups?

Marxist (i.e. modern "liberal") dogma states that the human mind is a blank slate, and that we're all purely a product of culture and economic circumstances. You seem to subscribe to the same view. It's a good thing that people who bred animals and plants didn't think like this, otherwise we would have never bred crops or domesticated wild animals.

164 posted on 08/13/2013 2:19:57 PM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: ek_hornbeck

Michael Jordan is probably the result of such breeding ca 1850 and before


165 posted on 08/13/2013 2:22:10 PM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... Travon... Felony assault and battery hate crime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker
Obama’s not stupid, but he’s certainly not brilliant. I’d peg him at about a 110.

Sounds about right. Obama wouldn't seem stupid if we weren't constantly being told by his supporters how brilliant he is. If people keep telling you that the mediocre is terrific, you're bound to find it terrible (or vice-versa)

I remember reading an article by Alan Greenspan (smart guy, lousy Fed Chair towards the end of his term) where he stated that the two most intelligent Presidents that he ever worked with were Nixon and Clinton. That's probably true when it comes to raw intelligence, which isn't to say that either were good Presidents.

166 posted on 08/13/2013 2:23:17 PM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: ek_hornbeck

So true!

Like meeting the designated brainiac in a dull family—all of the nerd affectations, but no ability to deliver the goods.


167 posted on 08/13/2013 3:08:28 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: grania
"I think they still use a cutoff of "top 2%" on any one of several aptitude tests as the cutoff for admission. That equates to about 132, which by most standards is just about the beginning of the "gifted" range."

I've taken several IQ tests over my lifetime. In school I usually scored somewhere between 134 and 139. (We took several in my High School psych classes.)

I've taken 3 tests over the last 5 years and my score has steadily dropped. My last score was 127.

So, during the Obama administration I am actually getting dumber.

No, I am not joking.

168 posted on 08/13/2013 3:10:46 PM PDT by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawgg
so, during the Obama administration I'm actually getting dumber

Probably that you're getting older. Is the test calibrated for age? After I got a really nice score on my GREs, I never officially took another IQ test. Why mess with success? <^..^>

169 posted on 08/13/2013 3:27:46 PM PDT by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: grania
"Probably that you're getting older. Is the test calibrated for age?"

Yeah all of the tests I've taken are timed AND age is calculated into the test results.

But I can feel my mental faculties slowing.

I think it is due to the meds I need to take to function. Rx pain meds for severe arthritis in my knees and ankles.

170 posted on 08/13/2013 3:33:05 PM PDT by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker
Why are you so certain it is only cultural differences, when, for example, the testing gap between the black and white children of socio-economically equally upper-middle class is persistently gaping?

I would ask how many generations those black kids' families have been in the upper-middle class. Some research has shown that it takes generations--2 or 3, at least--for "disadvantaged" people (for example, immigrants) to catch up to the achievement level of the population. If these black families are new to the middle class, it is very likely that the parents of those kids simply do not know how to effectively stimulate their children intellectually.

I would also ask if the kids in those upper-middle class black families embrace the "black" culture, which is a culture that denigrates achievement.

And so forth.

Environment plays a huge role in intellectual development. Bad nutrition, early childhood disease, and lack of intellectual stimulation all conspire to impair brain development of young children, and once that crucial developmental window is gone, the opportunity to maximize the genetic potential is lost forever.

171 posted on 08/13/2013 3:48:27 PM PDT by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: ek_hornbeck
If liberals believe in "hardwired genetic differences," why do they fight so hard to suppress research showing that intelligence is heritable and that there are significant mean differences in intelligence between racial and ethnic groups?

There is plenty of research into intelligence and the various factors that affect it.

I am not going to pretend that I know why liberals do what they do, but I can tell you that their supposed horror at any measurements that show racial differences in intellect does not reflect their inner beliefs. They do believe that minorities are stupid; they would not support affirmative action otherwise. When people want to stop affirmative action programs and switch to merit-based programs, the liberals always yell racism on the basis that minorities cannot possibly hope to compete on a level playing field. It is very clear that liberal support for lowering the admission standards for minorities stems from their belief that minorities are stupid.

Marxist (i.e. modern "liberal") dogma states that the human mind is a blank slate, and that we're all purely a product of culture and economic circumstances. You seem to subscribe to the same view. It's a good thing that people who bred animals and plants didn't think like this, otherwise we would have never bred crops or domesticated wild animals.

I have not said that at all. What I said is that environment has a huge effect on whether an individual is able to develop the full potential of their genetic background. I also said that on the level of the population, there is no reason to think that the distribution of intelligence genes is different between racial groups. Let me try to simplify that. If, in the population, 50% of the people have a gene for blond hair, 50% have a gene for brown hair, and 100% have a gene for black hair, the distribution of hair color genes will always remain 50:50:100. (Remember, each person has two sets of genes.) So, without speaking of an individual's chance of being blond or brunette, I can still discuss the distribution of blond/brunette/black hair genes in the population. This is what I am doing with intelligence. Every person's intellect is a product of both environmental and genetic factors. There is a wide range of IQs seen in any group of people from the same environment.

172 posted on 08/13/2013 4:14:14 PM PDT by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy
Environment is only capable of improving on or not....on what is there to begin with

Take an average kid, and rear him in an environment that's as close to exactly the environment that Albert Einstein or Steven Hawkings grew up in, and I strongly doubt you will wind up with a Nobel-prize-level physicist.

There is NO amount of environment and training that would have turned Danny DiVito into an NBA All-Star player.

Environment can serve to bring out the genetic potential (or not) but it cannot compensate for what's not there.

173 posted on 08/13/2013 4:39:09 PM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Last time I looked; we wuz all a bit different from one another. Arguing about WHY is about as useful as the old Angels on a Pinhead ‘debate’.

I disagree. The "WHY" is critically important in making policy decisions.

Currently, the accepted wisdom is that statistical group differences in performance is entirely due to environment, and that by sufficiently improving the environment of the lower-performing group, the group differences can be eliminated. The perceived duty is then to spend as much as needed to eliminate the differences.

If statistical differences in average group performance has a primarily genetic basis, then NO amount of spending will erase the difference.

This is why there is such hysterical upset whenever genetics is mentioned -- too many people would lose money and power if we stopped spending money on something that will not get fixed.

174 posted on 08/13/2013 4:49:17 PM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom
I'm not denying that environment plays a role. A bad environment can certainly stifle a great potential. But there isn't much the best environment or education can do when the person is stupid to begin with.

And just as there are differences in ability among individuals, there are differences in ability across ethnic groups as well. If you had a strictly merit-based system, "minorities" (i.e. blacks and hispanics) probably would still under-perform compared to whites and asians. Liberals don't want to admit this, so they push affirmative action and quotas. That way anything that contradicts their egalitarian dogma and blank-slate model of the human mind can be swept under the rug.

175 posted on 08/13/2013 4:53:07 PM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625
This is why there is such hysterical upset whenever genetics is mentioned -- too many people would lose money and power if we stopped spending money on something that will not get fixed.

Head start programs and busing are cases in point. Liberals insisted that by dumping more money into various social programs and by moving inner city black kids into schools with middle class white kids, their academic performance would improve. It didn't. All it did was spend a lot of money and resources that could be better spent elsewhere, all the while creating problems for those kids who were actually learning.

176 posted on 08/13/2013 4:55:31 PM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Norseman
And if social circumstance is not the premier cause of poor behavior, what is? Skin color, perhaps? Or maybe you don’t consider being born to bad parents a “social circumstance” from the point of view of the child?

What makes the parents bad? Part of it is the welfare state, where mothers are paid for having children, but have no financial incentive to raise them to be productive and law-abiding?

Behavior can also be influenced by genetics. For example, blacks have a 15% higher testosterone level than whites, which will influence aggressive behavior.

177 posted on 08/13/2013 4:57:55 PM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: ek_hornbeck
And just as there are differences in ability among individuals, there are differences in ability across ethnic groups as well. If you had a strictly merit-based system, "minorities" (i.e. blacks and hispanics) probably would still under-perform compared to whites and asians. Liberals don't want to admit this, so they push affirmative action and quotas. That way anything that contradicts their egalitarian dogma and blank-slate model of the human mind can be swept under the rug.

The differences between ethnic groups result from a mixture of cultural and environmental factors. Cultural--the "black culture" ostracizes successful people--ever hear the term "Uncle Tom"? That is the black culture derogatory term for anyone who dares to step out of the ghetto to try to make anything of him or herself. That culture is actually quite similar to the poverty culture I grew up in. It's hard to overcome, and many people never do get past that.

Still, culture is only part of the picture.

Environment plays a huge role. Things like lack of maternal nutrition during pregnancy, and malnutrition and illnesses within the first few years cause permanent and irreversible impairments of brain development. The black and Hispanic poverty cultures typically have very non-nutritious diets. A fetus can have the best combination of intellect genes possible, but if his mother only eats junk food while pregnant and only feeds him junk food during childhood, his brain simply will not develop to its full potential. Infectious diseases also prevent the brain from developing fully (because the body is spending so much energy to fight the disease, it has none to spare on brain development); some infectious diseases cause direct brain damage. In addition, the brain of a child who is not intellectually stimulated during infancy and toddlerhood will also not develop to its potential. All of these environmental factors exist in poor neighborhoods, which also tend to have a large minority population. (The whites living in those same neighborhoods also have the same issues.) These environmental factors lower IQ permanently.

Until those culture and environmental factors are addressed (which takes time, money, and hard work), minorities will not do as well on a merit based system. The way I see it, affirmative action is a quick and easy "fix" which does nothing about the problem, but gives liberals the illusion that they *are* doing something--and liberals are all about show, not substance.

178 posted on 08/13/2013 5:32:05 PM PDT by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom
Environment plays a huge role. Things like lack of maternal nutrition during pregnancy, and malnutrition and illnesses within the first few years cause permanent and irreversible impairments of brain development. The black and Hispanic poverty cultures typically have very non-nutritious diets. A fetus can have the best combination of intellect genes possible, but if his mother only eats junk food while pregnant and only feeds him junk food during childhood, his brain simply will not develop to its full potential. Infectious diseases also prevent the brain from developing fully (because the body is spending so much energy to fight the disease, it has none to spare on brain development); some infectious diseases cause direct brain damage. In addition, the brain of a child who is not intellectually stimulated during infancy and toddlerhood will also not develop to its potential. All of these environmental factors exist in poor neighborhoods, which also tend to have a large minority population. (The whites living in those same neighborhoods also have the same issues.) These environmental factors lower IQ permanently.

From The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 2009:

For both blacks and whites, family income is one of the best predictors of a student’s SAT score. Students from families with high incomes tend to score higher. Students from low-income families on average have low SAT scores. Because the median black family income in the United States is about 60 percent of the median family income of whites, one would immediately seize upon this economic statistic to explain the average 200-point gap between blacks and whites on the standard SAT scoring curve.

But income differences explain only part of the racial gap in SAT scores. For black and white students from families with incomes of more than $200,000 in 2008, there still remains a huge 149-point gap in SAT scores. Even more startling is the fact that in 2008 black students from families with incomes of more than $200,000 scored lower on the SAT test than did students from white families with incomes between $20,000 and $40,000.

The above was also noted in the book, "The Bell Curve". Read the bolded part above again. The average black child, raised in a top-income household, has a lower SAT score than the average working-class white child.

Affirmative action in higher education does not primarily help the black child from the ghetto. It primarily gives an advantage to the children of upper-income blacks over working-class whites. It means that the child of a black professional will be more likely to be admitted, and likely get a better financial aid package, than a smarter working class white kid.

Where is the fairness in that?

179 posted on 08/13/2013 6:25:22 PM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625
The above was also noted in the book, "The Bell Curve". Read the bolded part above again. The average black child, raised in a top-income household, has a lower SAT score than the average working-class white child.

And I would still ask the question: how many generations removed from the ghetto are these black children, on average? That environment can take generations to overcome in terms of child development. Furthermore, what is the culture within the family? Is it still "black" poverty culture? Also, were those kids in the upper middle class families born into that class, or did their families fight their way there during their childhood?

The bottom line is that we're still talking environmental and cultural factors, here. Those need to be fixed before we see real improvement.

180 posted on 08/13/2013 7:10:23 PM PDT by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

The map you posted does not give any reasons for the disparate IQs seen in different countries. It does not give methodology for how it came up with “average” IQ.

What I see on that map is that there is a high correlation between countries where everything about the environment—malnutrition, infectious disease, lack of early childhood enrichment—inhibits proper brain development, and the average IQ (however it was determined). I also see little correlation between the racial composition of various countries and their average IQ. For example, all of the countries across the north of Africa and the Middle East, as well as India, are all majority populated by Caucasians. But they aren’t doing so well, either—therefore, it must be the culture and environment working to suppress the effect of the genetic components of IQ.

I seriously question the placement of China and Mongolia among countries with the highest average IQ score. I suspect that there is some misinformation involved, because the government of China has a strong interest in presenting a good public image.


181 posted on 08/14/2013 4:08:12 AM PDT by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625
I disagree. The "WHY" is critically important in making policy decisions.

Indeed!

But; since the 'WHY' has NOT been defined (to everyone's liking) then it is all a useless exercise; being engaged in for, as you've pointed out, "making policy decisions".

182 posted on 08/14/2013 4:08:27 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: ek_hornbeck
It didn't.

True; it dropped like a rock - for BOTH races!

So; did the GENETICS suddenly change for these kids; or did something else?

Did the CULTURE change for these kids - or something else?

183 posted on 08/14/2013 4:10:59 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom
--the "black culture" ostracizes successful people--

Only partially correct; for in fact it IDOLizes successful people: in the BLACK culture!

Just don't go off the reservation to 'get ahead'.

184 posted on 08/14/2013 4:12:40 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Zeneta
“We live in a culture where the left and the media fight for equality.”

Can you explain the redundancy?

185 posted on 08/14/2013 4:25:06 AM PDT by billhilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Elsie; exDemMom
But; since the 'WHY' has NOT been defined (to everyone's liking) then it is all a useless exercise; being engaged in for, as you've pointed out, "making policy decisions".

In which case, the government has no business spending $billions, and forcing businesses to incur untold $billions in costs, on enhancement programs and affirmative action, unless we can be sure they will have results.

So far, they haven't. Therefore they should be shut down until we DO have evidence that they will fix things.

186 posted on 08/14/2013 4:55:43 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom
I also see little correlation between the racial composition of various countries and their average IQ. For example, all of the countries across the north of Africa and the Middle East, as well as India, are all majority populated by Caucasians. But they aren’t doing so well, either—therefore, it must be the culture and environment working to suppress the effect of the genetic components of IQ.

Perhaps you should compare the average academic and economic achievements of Indian and east Asian children of immigrants to the (non) achievement of the children of mestizo or African immigrants. In both cases, the children experience poverty and "outsider" status. In the first case, they generally climb out of it in a single generation. In the latter cases, they typically stay there or sink ever lower.

187 posted on 08/14/2013 7:42:46 AM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom
The bottom line is that we're still talking environmental and cultural factors, here

Why is it a matter of dogma for you that all differences are due primarily to culture or environment? Is it really your contention that some people aren't born with innate talent, while others are born innately incapable?

For instance, I have zero musical ability, not due to lack of trying. If I was adopted at birth by a virtuoso musician couple and immersed in music, there's no doubt I'd still be terrible at it.

Similarly, a black child with an IQ in the 80's adopted by a wealthy, educated family and given every opportunity in the world will still have an IQ in the 80's. He might do better socially because he won't be drawn into a life a crime (or is less likely to be), but he won't become talented by osmosis.

188 posted on 08/14/2013 7:49:38 AM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625
In which case, the government has no business spending $billions,...

True; but our leaders spend gazillions on all KINDS of stuff that, if put before the American public for a VOTE; would NEVER get spent!

189 posted on 08/14/2013 7:50:17 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
My Harvard Ph.D. dissertation contains some scientifically unremarkable statements about ethnic differences in average IQ, including the IQ difference between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites...when it was unearthed in the midst of the immigration debate, I experienced the vilification firsthand.

Indeed. None of the advocates of amnesty and liberal immigration policy, Democrat or Republican, want the public to realize what it's really all about: importing people with literally room temperature IQ into the US by the millions.

190 posted on 08/14/2013 8:23:04 AM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
True; but our leaders spend gazillions on all KINDS of stuff that, if put before the American public for a VOTE; would NEVER get spent!

Translation: you're fine on spending $gazillions on ineffective affirmative action and welfare programs.

191 posted on 08/14/2013 9:08:22 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Here's why busing was an abject failure: when you take low-performing black kids from inner city schools and bus them to middle class white schools, those inner city students don't do any better academically than they did in their own schools.

Meanwhile, academic standards at the schools they're bused to are lowered, and more resources have to be spent on discipline and law enforcement, so those students (the white, middle class kids) who actually were learning something are handicapped and short-changed in the process.

192 posted on 08/14/2013 9:19:28 AM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

bump


193 posted on 08/14/2013 9:21:32 AM PDT by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything -- Buddhist monk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

I consider the welfare state to be a “social circumstance.” As for your comment on testosterone levels, I guess if you’re looking for reasons to conclude that there’s no hope for blacks to succeed in America, you’ll find them somewhere.

Doesn’t mean your wrong, but it also doesn’t mean you’re being objective. Look hard enough for excuses to believe something, you will find some.


194 posted on 08/14/2013 9:33:55 AM PDT by Norseman (Defund the Left-Completely!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom

“What I see on that map is that there is a high correlation between countries where everything about the environment—malnutrition, infectious disease, lack of early childhood enrichment—inhibits proper brain development. . . . “

What I see is someone in denial.


195 posted on 08/14/2013 9:36:41 AM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (RINOS like Romney, McCain, Dole are sure losers. No more!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: ek_hornbeck; exDemMom; Elsie
Why is it a matter of dogma for you that all differences are due primarily to culture or environment? Is it really your contention that some people aren't born with innate talent, while others are born innately incapable?

I think exDemMom is not as exDem as she thinks.

It is an article of faith among marxists/leftists that Man is malleable and perfectible, the notion first being promoted by 18th Century precursors of Marx, like Rousseau, Saint-Simon, Hegel, and others. If people are malleable and perfectible, then the only reason why they are not currently perfect is because of an imperfect environment. If the environment is made "perfect", though the action of the State, then a society of perfect people will result.

The alternative viewpoint is that people cannot be made perfect by environment.

People may strive to improve, and thus improve themselves within limits. Environments can be improved to allow individuals to reach their potentials. HOWEVER, we reach a point of diminishing returns, where spending ever more money on improving the environment produces ever less increments of improvement in the people targeted.

196 posted on 08/14/2013 9:48:36 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian; exDemMom
“What I see on that map is that there is a high correlation between countries where everything about the environment—malnutrition, infectious disease, lack of early childhood enrichment—inhibits proper brain development. . . . “

Or, turning it around, an environment full of people of low ability, will be an environment with malnutrition, infectious disease, and lack of early childhood enrichment.

Back in 1992, a research study was done regarding interracial adoption, of black/mixed kids adopted by upper-middle-class couples (Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study). This is about the most extreme environmental fix you can have, being adopted into stable upper-middle-class households, father average IQ 120, mom average IQ 118. The kids were tested around age 7 and again around age 17. Take a look at PDF page 7 at the link above. Kids whose bio parents were both black, when tested at close to adulthood, tested with an average IQ of 89.4, versus 105.6 for adopted white kids.

197 posted on 08/14/2013 10:11:59 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625
...you're fine on spending...

Your mindreading decoder box seems to be out of calibration.

198 posted on 08/14/2013 10:57:12 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

bkmk


199 posted on 08/14/2013 10:57:55 AM PDT by riri (Plannedopolis-look it up. It's how the elites plan for US to live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625
It is an article of faith among marxists/leftists that Man is malleable and perfectible, the notion first being promoted by 18th Century precursors of Marx, like Rousseau, Saint-Simon, Hegel, and others. If people are malleable and perfectible, then the only reason why they are not currently perfect is because of an imperfect environment. If the environment is made "perfect", though the action of the State, then a society of perfect people will result.

The alternative viewpoint is that people cannot be made perfect by environment.

To me, the difference between these viewpoints define the essential difference between the Left and the Right. The Left believes that human beings and society can be engineered to "perfection" if only we had the right social programs. Conservatives recognize that people are unequal and flawed, and that no amount of social engineering can erase these innate flaws or inequalities, whether within or between groups.

I have one minor disagreement with your remarks about Marx's precursors, however. While Hegel's philosophy was an inspiration to Marx, his politics definitely were not. Hegel was a supporter of Imperial Prussia and believed that hierarchies of wealth and social class were not only necessary but desirable.

200 posted on 08/14/2013 11:11:12 AM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-217 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson