Race and Intelligence

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
102

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
I say if we define intelligence loosely as the ability to accurately comprehend information then intelligence is not the primary explanation.

This is good. People fail to even agree on what intelligence means even before trying to apply it to a discussion of race and intelligence.
[/quote]

When we speak of “intelligence” in these sort of discussions, we’re talking about what psychometricians refer to as ‘g’ or ‘general intelligence.’ To many, it’s a measurable thing of enormous value, which is why guys like forlife give tests that measure general intelligence. People who score well only heavily g-loaded tests tend to be able to do well at anything academic.

To others, mostly people speaking from the standpoint of having plenty of ‘g’, it’s not a very worthwhile or valuable commodity. People saying such things are usually SWPLs and other liberal and libertarian thinkerati.

103

The utility of general intelligence goes well beyond academic performance. G is, in fact, the single best predictor of success across a wide variety of professions, particularly white collar jobs.

104

[quote]mavrcksurfer69 wrote:
orion wrote:
belligerent wrote:
borrek wrote:
Maybe Africa went to hell because the Europeans were less interested in colonizing, and more interested in scavenging resources.

…or maybe it’s because Africa has always been the most violent continent on Earth since long before a white man ever set foot there.

Hardly.

They do not hold a candle to Europe.

Oh yes they do… the only difference is we know more about European history because they have recorded it for us to look back on. … A sign of a more advanced and intelligent society… BURN!

I mean look at every other continent on this planet… Every society except for Sub Saharan Africans and native Australians have created monuments and recorded history’s that still stand to this day. Native Americans, Asians, Europeans, Arabs, (Hispanics are not included because they are not a race but a mix of too many different races to be counted)… They all have tons of structures that stand the test of time … where as in sub Saharan Africa they still build using sticks and mud. Plus a lack of recorded history… What more proof do you need?

My credentials; Masters in History

… so suck it in advance to any bitch who wants to use the word racist about this post… suck it hard bc I dont give a shit… I state reality. [/quote]

Agreed. Stating facts is NOT racism. How could it be? When I state that 33% of the high school students in Cleveland and 25% of the same in Detroit ever graduate from high school (high school!!), that is simply a statement of fact. Stating that a culture is not geared for success in a modern mathematical world is not racism. It is fact.

Yet to libs, statements of fact ARE evil, and are to be smeared.

Black people have smaller brain size than whites, fact.
Whites have smaller brain size than east Asians, fact.
MRI measurements tell us these things, fact.

105

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
I say if we define intelligence loosely as the ability to accurately comprehend information then intelligence is not the primary explanation.

This is good. People fail to even agree on what intelligence means even before trying to apply it to a discussion of race and intelligence.

When we speak of “intelligence” in these sort of discussions, we’re talking about what psychometricians refer to as ‘g’ or ‘general intelligence.’ To many, it’s a measurable thing of enormous value, which is why guys like forlife give tests that measure general intelligence. People who score well only heavily g-loaded tests tend to be able to do well at anything academic.

To others, mostly people speaking from the standpoint of having plenty of ‘g’, it’s not a very worthwhile or valuable commodity. People saying such things are usually SWPLs and other liberal and libertarian thinkerati. [/quote]

So relate this to the discussion of race and intelligence.

106

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
I say if we define intelligence loosely as the ability to accurately comprehend information then intelligence is not the primary explanation.

This is good. People fail to even agree on what intelligence means even before trying to apply it to a discussion of race and intelligence.

When we speak of “intelligence” in these sort of discussions, we’re talking about what psychometricians refer to as ‘g’ or ‘general intelligence.’ To many, it’s a measurable thing of enormous value, which is why guys like forlife give tests that measure general intelligence. People who score well only heavily g-loaded tests tend to be able to do well at anything academic.

To others, mostly people speaking from the standpoint of having plenty of ‘g’, it’s not a very worthwhile or valuable commodity. People saying such things are usually SWPLs and other liberal and libertarian thinkerati.

So relate this to the discussion of race and intelligence. [/quote]

The argument goes that different races have different average general intelligence levels - different amounts of g. The distribution of intelligence for each race follows a bell curve centered at the average (mean).

Psychometricians have found different average levels of intelligence for blacks, whites, hispanics, and asians in this country. In the United States the difference between black white average intelligence comes to about 15 IQ points. Some people say that the gap is narrowing. Some say that it’s staying the same.

Ashkenazi Jews tend to have an average intelligence of about 110, or 10 points above the white average. Asians tend to be about 103-107. The white average is 100, which is the same as the global average.

If you look at the different races of people, it’s immediately obvious that we don’t all look the same, that we don’t all have the same average height, amount of muscle mass, etc. It stands to reason that intelligence levels aren’t the same either.

Anyways, people get so up-in-arms about this topic because, depending on who looks at the data, IQ can correlate with income and how one is expected to do in life in other ways, and all races do not score the same on IQ tests. Obviously, guys like forlife are using it as a metric/barrier at certain places of employment through IQ tests. Football players are also given an IQ test of sorts (the Wonderlick), which is used to determine whether they should be given a spot on the team, etc.

107

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Black people have smaller brain size than whites, fact.
Whites have smaller brain size than east Asians, fact.
MRI measurements tell us these things, fact.
[/quote]

You always have to qualify those statements by saying “on average” because they are not true in an absolute sense. Every white person does not have a bigger brain than every black person. There ia significant amount of overlap, and a segment of the black population have larger brains than the average white person.

108

“General” intelligence is just an amalgam of multiple intelligences.

109

Based on the information we have, it isn’t possible to know how much of the IQ difference is due to environment and how much is due to genetics.

Racist assholes choose to believe that the entire difference is due to genetics whereas hippy douchebags choose to believe that it’s entirely due to environmental differences.

The truth is that we don’t know how much (if any) of the IQ differences between races is determined by genetics.

110

[quote]Regular Gonzalez wrote:
Based on the information we have, it isn’t possible to know how much of the IQ difference is due to environment and how much is due to genetics.

Racist assholes choose to believe that the entire difference is due to genetics whereas hippy douchebags choose to believe that it’s entirely due to environmental differences.

The truth is that we don’t know how much (if any) of the IQ differences between races is determined by genetics. [/quote]

We could put together a crack team of Ashkenazi jews and East Asians to research and answer this very question, no?

What? Come on! I’m only joking!

111

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Yet to libs, statements of fact ARE evil, and are to be smeared.
[/quote]

To be fair, conservatives are often guilty of the same bias.

112

[quote]Regular Gonzalez wrote:
Based on the information we have, it isn’t possible to know how much of the IQ difference is due to environment and how much is due to genetics.

Racist assholes choose to believe that the entire difference is due to genetics whereas hippy douchebags choose to believe that it’s entirely due to environmental differences.

The truth is that we don’t know how much (if any) of the IQ differences between races is determined by genetics. [/quote]

No, it is possible. That’s why they do twin studies. And they’ve done them. Right now, it’s believed that IQ is 50-75% heritable. Of course IQ is influenced by environment, but it’s also influenced quite a bit by genetics.

Political Correctness dictates that we must all believe that every race has the same IQ levels, which is why the whole topic has become a liberal creationist myth, though there are neoconservatives who champion IQ equality as well. The problem is, it defies common sense. We don’t all look the same. We don’t all have the same average height. We don’t all perform the same at elite levels in athletics. Why would we all have the same average levels of intelligence?

The last guy to research genes that code for intelligence was Bruce Lam. Once he presented his findings, he was demonized by the PC krowd and stopped researching it.

113

I’m not convinced that IQ tests are a determinant of intelligence because education is so heavily involved.

Case in point, I once took an IQ test where a short story was read at the beginning, and then at the very end after two hours of testing, I was asked questions regarding the short story. On the surface it may seem like an ability to recall is being tested, but if I have not been exposed to the vocabulary used in the story, then my ability to recall is moot. The same goes for pattern recognition. If I am being timed and a faster score equals a higher intelligence, and I am presented with 1,2,3,5,7,… I would immediately answer 11 because in the course of my education I have been presented with that pattern over and over. I immediately recognize the pattern, not because when I see numbers my brain looks for divisors, but instead because of rote memory. One who has not had the same education could just as easily determine those are prime numbers, however time will be wasted and they score lower than me.

What if it isn’t a sequence regarding prime numbers, but instead the Fibonacci Sequence? For one who is uneducated it would take savant-like abilities to pick out that pattern in any reasonable amount of time, but one who has studied sequences could do it with almost zero thought. Education is being tested just as much as “intelligence”

My problem here is with the few idiots in the thread who think that studies on race and IQ mean anything other than their face value. IQ is not a determinant of “intelligence” any more than BMI is a measure of health. There simply are no conclusions to draw from these studies. It’s like pointing to scientific research that shows bodybuilders have BMIs on par with obese individuals, therefore bodybuilders are fat. As a matter of fact, that thread probably exists on a crossfit forum somewhere, and is equally retarded to this one.

114

oops, I meant to say Fibonacci primes in following with the prime theme.

115

Says the liberal white guy with plenty of it.

“Education” is not heavily involved in IQ.

This is not an IQ test.

116

Intelligence is another one of those things that may be somewhat difficult to exhaustively define, but I know it when I see it. One thing I learned long long ago is that most of the time people, of any race, are not wrong because they’re stupid. They’re wrong because they’re unduly captive to the subjectivity of their own experience, are intellectually lazy and undisciplined, just plain prideful and stubborn in their refusal to reconsider a position once taken or any combination therein.

Of course there are less intelligent people who are people nonetheless. I’ve met some who know that and do the best with what they have. Their wisdom can easily exceed those more gifted, but suffering from the shortcomings listed above.

Generally, just about everybody, including myself, probably fancies themselves a bit more cerebrally muscular than they actually are.

Who the hell knows how to put all that into a chart and who the hell cares?

117

[quote]borrek wrote:
I’m not convinced that IQ tests are a determinant of intelligence because education is so heavily involved.
[/quote]

I don’t know how anyone can be impressed by educational influences, especially in a world in which most education is more geared toward socialization than actual learning.

118

[quote]Regular Gonzalez wrote:
Based on the information we have, it isn’t possible to know how much of the IQ difference is due to environment and how much is due to genetics.
[/quote]

The answer can be inferred. If you believe in Darwinian evolution then you have to believe that all human abilities have a predominant genetic component. If organisms are so plastic that they can achieve just any level of ability with training then there would be no need for natural selection. Not to mention that I, and not Usain Bolt, would be the world’s fastest man right now.

119

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Who the hell knows how to put all that into a chart and who the hell cares?[/quote]

Precisely.

Studying IQ does not seem to add much benefit to science or society. We have the bell curve on IQ’s, what is the point of dwelling further? It only feeds people with bad agendas and media dogs. People should be free to study what ever they want and draw their own conclusions, but the IQ debate just reeks of superiority and pointless assumptions about nurture. The obsession in this area is odd.

Testing familiarity is a huge reason why education is a big part of IQ.

120

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Who the hell knows how to put all that into a chart and who the hell cares?

Precisely.

Studying IQ does not seem to add much benefit to science or society. We have the bell curve on IQ’s, what is the point of dwelling further? It only feeds people with bad agendas and media dogs. People should be free to study what ever they want and draw their own conclusions, but the IQ debate just reeks of superiority and pointless assumptions about nurture. The obsession in this area is odd.

Testing familiarity is a huge reason why education is a big part of IQ.[/quote]

The inquiry is far more important than you realize. Current social policy is based upon the idea that all races are genetically similar and that differences in achievement are therefore due to racism. James Watson, probably the greatest living scientist in the world, recently lost his career for stating the obvious on the issue of racial diversity. Francis Collins, the head of the human genome project, and also the retarded asshole who is the leading advocate of intelligent design, announced that there are no genetic racial differences and now that intellectual diarrhea is widely accepted as fact. Absolutely nothing good can ever come from denying reality regardless of what race you are a member of.

121

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
Studying IQ does not seem to add much benefit to science or society. We have the bell curve on IQ’s, what is the point of dwelling further? It only feeds people with bad agendas and media dogs. People should be free to study what ever they want and draw their own conclusions, but the IQ debate just reeks of superiority and pointless assumptions about nurture. The obsession in this area is odd.

Testing familiarity is a huge reason why education is a big part of IQ.[/quote]

As I pointed out earlier, intelligence is the single best predictor of success in a wide variety of professions. Organizations would be foolish not to use this information to select the most qualified candidates for these roles.