Warning: This post discusses a forbidden topic and expresses a forbidden viewpoint on that topic.
A few weeks ago, I ran across a YouTube video in which a young white man presented a political world map color coded to indicate average IQ by country. His basic point was that Black people are idiots. He cited no sources, and I dismissed his video as a racist fabrication, as "fake news".
Before I start pissing people off, let me say that in my 63 years of living, I've traveled throughout the continental United States and worked with many African Americans. My own personal experience has been that they are just as smart as anyone else. I am not a racist; I make a conscious effort to "not see color" and to not use race to label or categorize the people in my life.
However, it was not always so. I was raised by two racists. My father, who was born in Texas, was a car dealer during the time that I was a boy. Of perhaps 50 employees, he employed only one "negro", a 40-ish man named Levi Williams, who worked for my father as a janitor. I knew all of the employees, including Levi Williams. One of my many clear memories of my father is of him explaining to me one day that negro boys never become men; they remain boys for life, and it is for this reason that white men have a duty to provide jobs for the negro "boys" like Levi Williams.
(Just so you don't go hatin' on my dead father, shortly before he died, he told me, "Son, people are just people." My father loved people and had filled his life with them, and he eventually discarded the racism that he had been taught in the small Texas town where he had grown up.)
My mother, who was from Michigan, was a racist of a different kind. In her day, white people in Michigan saw negros as hostile invaders who were migrating en masse from the Deep South, who hated white people, and who were ruining the good thing that white people had going in Michigan at the time. For my mother, negros were the enemy that would murder you at the first opportunity; they were to be hated and avoided.
(My mother, who still lives, also discarded her racism in later life, in the sense that she knows that it is inconsistent with her Christian beliefs, and she tries her best to not think racist thoughts. But it is difficult for her. When I turned 50, I visited her and she gave me a birthday dinner. It has been my custom for many years to wear one black sock and one white sock. During the dinner, at a moment when we were discussing something unrelated to race, she pointed to my socks and blurted out, "It's... it's as if you are trying to say that black people and white people should live together!")
When I was a young student at UCLA, circa 1973, I vividly recall sitting in a large bowl-shaped lecture auditorium for a cultural anthropology class. A female professor, standing at the bottom of the bowl, was informing us that early in the 20th century some anthropologists had proposed that intelligence varied by race, and had attempted to make their case with studies measuring brain size. After informing us of this sad moment in the history of her field, she went on to state that such a hypothesis was unacceptable and that the early work that she had referenced was not real science. As I heard this, I put up my hand and kept it in the air until she stopped and called on me. I then objected, saying, "You might not like the hypothesis. But it is a valid scientific hypothesis, and it is entirely acceptable for a social scientist to propose it and then test it empirically." At the time, I did not consider myself to be a racist, and was not motivated by racism. I was simply calling out the illogic of the professor.
So, that's where I am "coming from". Now, here's where I am going: This morning, I searched the Internet and within minutes found a recent scientific article, published in a refereed journal, that basically says that IQ does vary significantly by race, that the cause is genetic, and that the average sub-Sahara African is a moron. (Links below.)
Let's not argue about whether this is true. Assume for this discussion that it is true. What the hell are we supposed to do with this? How do we work for liberty, justice, and the empowerment of everyday people if race is a significant predictor of intelligence? Should we allow employers to consider the race of job applicants? Should we allow police to "profile" suspects? Should white people (or Asians) have children with people from sub-Sahara Africa? How should a young African-American man deal with this to maximize his chance for success in life? Ditto for people who live in sub-Sahara Africa?
As if that's not bad enough, in my search, I also found claims that IQ varies significantly by gender. (Male scores are significantly above female scores.) If that is true, then what do we do with that? Should women really be in the workforce competing with men, rather than at home being homemakers? Should women expect equal pay and equal representation above the "glass ceiling"?
I don't know what the right answer is for either race or gender. I can think of arguments either way. WDYT?
Links:
https://radicalcapitalist.org/2017/07/20/black-vs-white-iq-culture-and-civilization/
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.186.102&rep=rep1&type=pdf
http://aristocratsofthesoul.com/average-iq-by-race-and-ethnicity/
facts are facts.
IQ is a variable..that's a fact..
and the bell curve is a thing.
One of the sources cited argues that prohibiting employers from considering race constitutes discrimination against whites and asians.
Only certain cases of discrimination are prohibited.
Other cases are required.
key word...significant
IQ varies more within races than between them.
Cite your source, please. That graph conflicts with the following, which claims that the overlap between the two distributions is small:
"The least intelligent 10% of Whites have IQs below 80 (low functioning) while 40% of Blacks fall below this level.
"Only one Black in six is more intelligent than the average White; five Whites out of six are more intelligent than the average Black.
"About 2.3% of Whites have an IQ of at least 130 (gifted), 20 times greater than the percentage of Blacks who do; only 0.00044% of African Blacks have an IQ over 130. 80% of gifted American Blacks have White admixture.
"Geniuses by Race (IQ 140 or higher):
• African Blacks 1:3,500,000 (0.000003%)
• American Blacks 1:218,000 (0.0004%)
• Whites 1:83 (1.2%)
"The per capita genius rate for Whites is 41,000 times higher than it is for African Blacks. If all Whites in America were replaced by Blacks, the number of geniuses in the country would fall from about 2.4 million to only about 1,000."
The above is clipped from the Radical Capitalist article, which cites the refereed article. I have not yet read the refereed article, which is 60 pages long, but plan to do so to verify that the other article is citing honestly.
But my question remains, WHAT IF? Rather than argue whether the difference exists, we should first confront what the implications would be if it is true and whether we are capable of admitting that it might be true. If we cannot admit that it might be true, then we cannot hope to be able to reason impartially about whether it is in fact true.
Rather than argue whether the difference exists, we should first confront what the implications would be if it is true and whether we are capable of admitting that it might be true
ya think? When has the truth ever mattered?
I was hoping for a serious discussion. I guess no one here has the guts to tackle this forbidden topic. :(
if the discussion doesn't go in the direction that you want it to then it's not serious?
ok..
gotcha.
Hey, give me the benefit of doubt! Remember, the standard deviation for whites is higher, which is why there are so many morons like me who can't understand your cryptic posts. :P
words mean things.
what does standard deviation mean?
is the bell curve taller or flatter?
f
Fun Fact:
nuther fun fact
100 IQ IS the mean.
fifty percent of the population has an IQ lover than 100...fifty percent higher.
source
I just noticed a second suspicious fact in your graph. According to the nonrefereed article, the IQ standard deviation for Asians is much lower than it is for whites. In your graph, the Asian standard deviation appears to be noticeably higher. (In your graph, the Asian curve is lower and broader than all of the other curves.)
I suspect that your graph comes from one particular study, while the refereed source that I cite is a survey article that reviews thirty years of research.
the IQ standard deviation for Asians is much lower than it is for whites
really?
In statistics, the standard deviation (SD, also represented by the Greek letter sigma σ or the Latin letter s) is a measure that is used to quantify the amount of variation or dispersion of a set of data values.[1] A low standard deviation indicates that the data points tend to be close to the mean (also called the expected value) of the set, while a high standard deviation indicates that the data points are spread out over a wider range of values.
kinda like this?
is it right to say that males are more likely to score better than females in math, when it's also true that they're more likely to score worse?
Exactly. Here's another quote from the unrefereed Radical Capitalist article: "Asian IQ scores cluster around the mean; thus, the cognitive variation among Whites produces more geniuses, but also more morons."
"Asian IQ scores cluster around the mean;
in my not so humble and somewhat uneducated opinion (math is hard and I only took one stat class)
that is a non sensical statement.
perhaps there is good reason that the article was not refereed...they found math to be hard also...
I agree that they express the idea imprecisely, but if you read the quote in its context, the meaning is clear. Increase the standard deviation for a given mean and you would get both more geniuses and more morons. They are clearly claiming that the standard deviation for Asians is lower.
Such a claim is plausible on genetic grounds. I read that one out of five Asians have a common ancestor, according to their DNA, and that common ancestor is hypothesized to be Gengis Khan, who reportedly copulated with a different woman each day for decades of his reign.
math is fun
just guessing..but it would seem that the size of the population matters.
You need to refer back to what is IQ? what does IQ check? For example you can say that IQ is only checking the left side of the brain functions. We now know that IQ is only one kind of intelligent and there are many different intelligence - for example - emotional intelligence. So IQ only measures one aspect of our lives. Might be that men are more logic than women but women are better in logistics or other things. I wouldn't go to work places etc', as work places in need for different kind of intelligence..
https://blog.adioma.com/9-types-of-intelligence-infographic/
I've been telling people that for decades, after seeing something about "9 kinds of intelligence" in the Los Angeles Times, I think, when I was young. 1983 might fit the time frame of my memory. Thanks for not only making a great point but also letting me finally know the origin of the idea.
I am blogging about this mainly to test tolerance for speech here and want to make sure that you know that, @limma.
I think that the truth is somewhere in the middle. When I was a boy, it was all about ranking. "So and so is smarter than so and so." "He is a retard." "He is gifted." Total competition. Pecking order.
Then society became too extreme the other way. It became all about sensitivity and motivation and avoiding making anyone feel bad. The whole "9 kinds of intelligence" meme emerged as part of that. Everything became about cooperation and tolerance, with competition, ranking, pecking order completely banned from thought.
It seems to me that the "9 kinds of intelligence" meme contains an element of dishonesty in that it redefines the meaning of the word "intelligent" to mean something so broad that no one is left out, no one ends up at the wrong end of the pecking order.
As I've expressed elsewhere, I think that life is intended to be essentially cooperative for women and essentially competitive for men. If so, then silencing the original meaning of "intelligence" oppresses men by suppressing the ranking and pecking order competition that is essential to men living to their full potential as men.
I agree partly with it. Yes, I agree that "society became too extreme the other way". Looking at the bigger picture - sometimes that is the only way change can happen - you go from one extreme, to the other, to get to the middle in the end.
Another thought about IQ tests and the gender differences - You must know that although there are biological differences between girls/boys men/women - we are social creatures and there is also gender expectation and education that affects us. For example - if a boy is expected to be good at math because he is a boy- his parents will encourage him from young age to do so, they will give him more support etc'. If a girl is not expected to be good at math because she is a girl, - she will get less support etc'. Yes, there is a level of intelligence we all born with, but also, as the brain is a like a mussel - it also depends on how much we exercise the mussel and how the surroundings give us the opportunity to do so. This is another reason why I think the gender difference in IQ tests not really say much about the real potential. This goes back to - equal opportunities and the importance of it in society.
I am reading the refereed article and am 1/3 into it (20 pages of 60). This particular article reviews studies of mean IQ difference across race but not gender. One of the three unrefereed articles claims that there is a gender effect, but it did not cite a source and I haven't yet looked into it.
For race, the refereed article looks at two competing views: nature+nurture versus nurture-only. "Nature-only" isn't in the competition; everyone agrees that nurture plays a role. The question is whether nature (genetics) plays a significant role (say 50%) or no role (0%) the Black/White difference.
All of the studies reviewed by the survey article allow for nurture (parenting style, nutrition, etc.) For example, just now I was reading about how a study looked at adopted children who were all half Black and were adopted and raised by two White parents, some of whom thought mistakenly that their adopted child's biological parents were both Black. No statistically significant difference in IQ outcomes was found, which was interpreted as evidence that lower parenting expectations (the child is 100% Black so he's going to be a dumb-ass no matter what we do) does not explain the lower IQ outcomes.
My guess is that you are going to find articles and researches that contradict each other. In the question of Nature+Nurture or Nature only - I feel that nurture can change but Nature is stronger - I would say 70% - 30% for nature. This is from my own experience. However it means that there are still 30% that can make a big different. Very interesting topic.
This topic might become the focus of my blogging for a while. I see a variety of benefits from exploring this, ranging from developing tolerance for speech to exposing how saturated our thinking is by government propoganda to what-if policy questions. If what is being suggested is true, it also means that white males are the true oppressed group, which is shocking! Basically, if the hypothesis is true, it will overturn the world view that dominates Western culture, and who knows where that would lead.
BTW, your idea that nature (genetics, not environment) is 70% responsible for sub-Sahara African IQ being around 80 (which is very low) would be viewed as racist by the PC crowd. The counterclaim is that it's all environment; genetics plays no role.
I don't really see how you got to your first conclusions - "white men true oppressed group". Even if it is true that western white man statistically have higher IQ than the rest of the groups, we are going back to what is IQ - do you believe that people it higher IQ are better than other people? what about all the other intelligence? Also why do we need someone to be the dominate? and if anyone is still dominating the world right now, financially and in other ways - it is the western white men! oppressed ?? sorry, I really lost you on this one..
As for the second part - I am pro freedom of speech (I am the one who used to go out with Danny Shine.. I am not afraid of being not politically correct. However don't forget that my 70/30 assumption is based only on my experience as a western white women with white children (not my own), comparing to other white children.