Posted on 09/22/2021 1:04:27 PM PDT by MtnClimber
It also depends on what kind of IQ test is used. Mensa uses 2 different tests, one is more language based and the other is more logic/pictoral based. The difference between the two tests for the same person can be very marked. Given that most inner city schools are graduating minority students who are barely functionally literate, you could have geniuses failing a language based IQ test.
Then a small group of highly illiterate test takers would drag down the average of the entire group.
IQ does not equate to successful life. There are plenty of high IQ Harvard grads that think communism is great and are doing their best to destroy the free enterprise system. Ethics and hard work count too.
Don’t you find it odd that one race seeks to diminish excellence because they recognize their deficiencies while they cannot consciously admit them? In so doing they have cast aside the nurture side which could improve performance in life, in favor of mediocrity at best. One of the unacknowledged effects of this planned mediocrity is why America has lost the sense of striving for excellence and is floundering in stupidity which breeds crap like Antifa and BLM, with heros like MAxcine Waters and Don Lemon and Jessee Jackasson and Al Dullton.
The IQ test is administered at age 16 or 17. It measures how much one has learned at that age and then is divided by the age. Trying to test beyond those ages is difficult because even though one’s knowledge will grow, it is divided by a higher age and so the IQ is unlikely to grow.
Asians and Jews, who score the highest, have highly motivated parents who keep their children’s scholastic noses to the grindstone.
White who generally score in the middle range have a mix of serious students and those who goof off a lot.
In the black culture, book learning is considered acting white so there are many black students who have learned little by the time the test is administered.
Of course there are many brilliant blacks whose parents took their studies seriously, e.g., Clarence Thomas, Condoleeza Rice and others, but the blacks who are not learning in junior high and high school will score poorly and bring the averages down.
We would all agree that some genetics traits do cause lower IQ, but that agreement appears to be limited to an extra chromosome.
Any other genetics that might affect intelligence seem to be off limit for serious discussion.
This guy seems to be making a good living telling us over and over that blacks have lower IQs than whoever else he compares them to. Getting low on funds? Write another book.
Why doesn’t he write a book comparing poor white Appalachian mountain folks IQs to top Japanese student IQs? At least he could branch out a little.
IIRC the Army did a massive study of IQ half a century ago. It did indeed find that nationally black IQs were lower than white IQs. The interesting finding was that this varied by region. For instance, average black IQs across the industrialized north were higher than average white IQs in the rural south. I don’t remember much else about the study.
Good point! Gates of hell is a prime example ...
Classic SNL skit from the 1970s:
Garrett Morris: Good evening, and welcome to “Black Perspective”. I’m your host, Garrett Morris. Tonight our guest is Mr. Julian Bond, and we’ll be talking about the myths surrounding black I.Q. Specifically, the myth that whites are inherently more intelligent than blacks.
Julian Bond: Good evening, Garrett.
Garrett Morris: Now, Julian, perhaps you could explain something to me. In all these studies comparing black I.Q. to white I.Q., what kind of test is used to measure I.Q.’s in the first place?
Julian Bond: Well, this is the major problem with these studies. The measurements of I.Q. which form the basis of comparison come from tests composed by whites for whites. The tests are culturally biased; it’s not surprising that whites would score better than blacks.
Garrett Morris: Could you give us an example of what you’re talking about?
Julian Bond: Certainly. Here are some questions that have appeared on recent I.Q. tests. Number one: “You have been invited over for cocktails by the officer of your trust fund. Cocktails begin at 4:30, but you must make an appearance at a 6:00 formal dinner at the Yacht Club. What do you do about dress?
A. Wear your blue-striped seersucker suit to cocktails and change into your tuxedo in the bathroom, apologizing to your host for the inconvenience.
B. Wear your tuxedo to cocktails, apologizing to your host for wearing a dinner jacket before 6:00 PM.
C. Walk to the subway at Columbus Circle and take the “A” Train uptown.”
Garrett Morris: Uh.. I guess I’d choose the last one.
Julian Bond: I’m sorry, that’s incorrect.
Garrett Morris: Damn.
Julian Bond: Here’s another: “When waxing your skis for a cross-country run, you should...”
Garrett Morris: [ interrupting ] Well, I think I understand the problem with the tests. But the fact is that people have been saying that white people are smarter than black for hundreds of years. We’ve only had I.Q. tests for 20 or 30 years. How did the idea of white intellectual superiority originate?
Julian Bond: That’s an interesting point. My theory is that it’s based on the fact that light-skinned blacks are smarter than dark-skinned blacks.
Garrett Morris: [ not sure he heard that right ] Say what?
Julian Bond: I said I think it might have grown out of the observation that light-skinned blacks are smarter than dark-skinned blacks.
Garrett Morris: I don’t get it.
Julian Bond: It’s got nothing to do with having white blood. It’s just that descendants of the lighter-skinned African tribes are more intelligent than the descendants of the darker-skinned tribes. Everybody knows that.
Garrett Morris: This is the first time I’ve heard of it.
Julian Bond: Seriously? It was proven a long time ago.
Garrett Morris: Well, I still don’t quite understand. We’re out of time right now, but perhaps you could come back on the show again and explain it further.
Julian Bond: There’s very little to explain - it’s just like I told you.
Garrett Morris: Well, we are out of time. Good night. [ to Julian ] If you could repeat it just once more...
Just not emotionally intelligent
It the push to diminish excellence really coming from blacks? Or are they merely buying into something that originated outside their community?
They may have always been behind in average IQ, but the motivation to excel certainly existed among blacks before the 1960s.
>> genetic destiny
I suspect genetics has much to do with the formation and collaboration of societies regardless of the prevailing intelligence — kinda like a genetic gravity towards the inevitable forms of conduct.
And it doesn’t need to be a racial thing. Consider the Rats.
Average IQ for blacks is 85.
Half of all blacks have an IQ below 85.
Your can’t even be an Army Cook with an 85 IQ because at that level you cannot read and follow directions with sufficient precision.
And there’s nothing anyone in the world can do about it.
The thing about geniuses is that they would figure the literacy code out.
he does, you should read him
“The magnitude of single parent homes with parents that are not involved in the education process only magnifies the problem.”
A kid with an 85 IQ (or below) will never learn long division, fractions or how to make change without a machine.
And even if they can mouth the words in a book, they’ll not understand what it is saying.
No hope.
“but asside from arguing that IQ tests themselves are culturally biased, one could also argue that differences in intelligence are not necessarily intrinsic, but a matter of causation.”
Stupid people actually believe that.
And that’s part of the problem.
How did you remember all that specific dialog?
“ Intelligence is a bell curve with all species of mammaols”
That is true. It is also true for Homo sapiens as a group. If you read the Bell Curve you will note that Ashkanzi Jews and East Asians have the highest IQ (in that order). Just to verify do a Google search for attorneys and doctors and see how many Jewish names pop up. Not bad for a group that numbers less than 20M worldwide out of 7 or 8 billion!
Well that gnarls the nature v nurture issue well enough.
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.