The “IQ” measurement system itself is a mere human guess at ascribing one number to a list (one dimensional vector) of characteristics. This is not a fair measure of all the things a human brain is good for. It can even leave out important things like a sense of kinesthetics. Did Negro peoples adapt to what it took to live in Africa? Probably so, and probably better than white peoples could. Watson could have included a giant caveat about the entire “IQ” measurement system in his comments.
I think most folks know that.
Did Negro peoples adapt to what it took to live in Africa? Probably so, and probably better than white peoples could.
Did white peoples adapt to what it took to live in Europe and (parts of) Asia? Probably so, and probably better than negro peoples could.
When IQ tests were first developed and applied on a wide scale in the 1920s, it was found that newly arrived East European Jews and their children did poorly on the tests. This led to wide concern that genetics meant had left Jews were intellectually impaired. Yet within a generation, Harvard and the rest of the Ivy league imposed quotas limiting the admission of Jews. Now, similar quotas are covertly applied to limit the numbers of Chinese students and to protect the admission preference for the children of graduates and major donors. Whatever the influence of genetics on intelligence may be, surely IQ tests also measure something else that is even more important: the determination to excel in school.
Are we living on the plains of Ahfreekah?
I must have missed that!