[RD] Discussion on IQ (split from effect of white people on America)

[Bootstoots]

A certain subject has come up a couple of times in this thread (edit: originally here), and I know there are people who want to discuss it. It's the only subject I know of where there's a strong argument to ban all discussion outright. But I have decided to make a bold and unilateral move, against my better judgment. If it goes bad, it can and will be shut down easily and quickly. So here goes:

Moderator Action: The following is provisional and applies only to this thread. It may be revoked at any time, by myself or any other moderator.

Within narrow confines as described below, discussion about race and IQ is allowed in this thread.

You may link to scientific papers that touch on this issue, as well as discussions of the history of this subject.

It is not allowed to post links to websites that talk extensively about race and IQ, or which involve a political agenda that depends on this subject. It is also not allowed to suggest that races should be kept separate, or that nations should declare themselves white ethnostates, or that immigration by non-white people constitutes "white genocide", or anything else that suggests white nationalism or white supremacism.

Posts related to this issue will be held to an RD standard. No insults or name-calling will be tolerated. This includes saying, directly or indirectly, that your opponent is a racist, fascist, Nazi, white nationalist, white supremacist, anything related to the KKK, etc. Or, for that matter, similar right-wing slurs about leftists.

Moderator Action: Split into its own thread.

 

[Berzerker]

My God who cares if the races are not equally intelligent? The people who do care - racists - aint exactly the smartest people around anyway. Reminds me of something Christopher Hitchens said: have you seen some of these people claiming they're made in God's image? From what I've read Ashkenazi Jews score well on intelligence tests. Can we acknowledge that without the politically correct crowd having a fit? But intelligence is relative, how would an Ashkenazi Jew survive if he's stuck in the Kalahari? He'd be dead in no time unless one of those 'less intelligent' Bushmen saved his behind.

Besides, religion skews displays of intelligence... Many religions preach austerity and humility, even the Bible casts our 'primitiveness' in a favorable light. An Incan legend claims they did develop writing but a series of natural disasters convinced the priesthood the new technology offended the gods so they continued using the quipu system of strings and knots.

 

[Bootstoots]

I had a good think last night, about Sam Harris, Charles A. Murray and their ilk. they're the avant garde of racism. they scientifically legitimize notions of IQ measuring a persons worth for society, they basically plow the land for the racists to sow their seeds. this kind of IQ-as-end-all-be-all/productivity/western civilization(®) movement could be extremely harmful if it gathered more steam.

Again my impression from it was that Harris isn't a scientific racist, just a credulous idiot who can't recognize scientific racism when it dances naked in front of him, because he's almost totally ignorant of the relevant history.

Now that I've abused my moderator powers to open up the discussion, could either or both of you talk a little more about this? That is, why our society is reducing people's value to their IQ, what effects this has, how to discredit IQ-based scientific racism, and how the history of scientific racism plays into it.

I have this suspicion that our society is moving in a direction where IQ - that is, abstract reasoning skill by itself divorced of any context - is turning into pretty much the only thing that is assigned value. This is a really big problem, because people have almost as little control over their abstract reasoning/IQ/g as they do their skin color. I've been worrying about IQ discrimination* for a while now; it is far from obvious to me that treating people with IQs of 85 as disposable surplus humanity is any less abhorrent than doing it by race or gender, except of course that lowish-IQ people don't produce as much value in a 21st century economy.

It's impossible to take IQ and attendant differential outcomes seriously without paying attention to the fact that black, Hispanic, and American Indian people in North America really do have lower IQs than white, South Asian, and East Asian people, taken as population averages. I deeply hope this is entirely due to the long and sordid history of discrimination and the social dynamics this generates, rather than anything genetic. But here's the thing - differences in IQ-driven outcomes drive differences in racial outcomes, for as long as there's any significant difference in average IQ, no matter what is causing it. It's not impossible that the difference won't go away, and we have to think about what to do if that's the case.

I have no idea what to do about any of this, besides supporting a strong welfare state with a UBI and hoping for the best. But I think it makes for an interesting discussion that nobody is really having, and I think it's a discussion we really need to have.

*Or just "IQ-driven differences in outcomes"

 

[Narz]

I'd be curious to see statistics on IQ and employment, I'd be willing to bet that people with IQ above 120 have more trouble with steady employment than people with IQ between 100 and 120. Just a hunch. Being smart in no way guarantees an easy life or that one will be an asset to their family or community

 

[Berzerker]

Danny Noonan:
I've always wanted to go to college.

Judge Smails:
Well, the world needs ditch diggers, too.

digging ditches takes some smarts., my buddy is a ditch digger and he aint stupid

 

[yung.carl.jung]

@Boots

Thanks for the inquiry and I 100% agree. We (I don't mean the three of us, I mean the scientific community, maybe humanity as a whole) desperately need to have this discussion. Everyone should ponder this, really. I am thinking it may be worthy of a separate thread however, even if it is related to the topic. I'll collect my thoughts and then make a big post and hopefully spurn some discussion. Thank you for sharing your thoughts!

 

[Mark1031]

Interesting turn for this thread, the original point of which no one addressed BTW. I know the Harris/Murray/Klein debacle and something about the science of complex genetic traits. The science is:

1. IQ is a real measurable trait that has some predictive value for educational achievement which has some predictive value for economic advancment. But apparently not that much. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...elligence-careers-james-heckman-a7880376.html

2. IQ has apparent genetic heritability determined by standard techniques: ie. Greater correlation in mono-vs di-zygotic twins. (est. to be 50-80%).

3. IQ has an environmental component although we don’t know good ways to enhance it by direct environmental intervention (ie. a government program) however I believe I read that an enhanced head start like program did give a significant sustained enhancement of like 5 points (don’t have the reference). There are lots of correlations with environmental differences-eg socio economic status.

4. IQ measurements differ between populations by socially defined race categories-which may not track well with genetically defined categories.

5. The genetics is complex. Ie many genetic variants giving tiny tiny tiny contributions to the trait difference.

I believe these points are agreed upon by most scientists.

The conclusion that is contentious and absolutely cannot be made (even Harris/Murray admit this) is that group differences by race are accounted for by genetic differences in the races. Eg. it is quite possible that the 15 pt IQ difference between white and black Americans is due to blacks having a genetic makeup that gives them on average a 5 point advantage to whites and an environmental -20 point disadvantage. The problem is that while they may formally admit this, they do not believe it and the general tone of their communication will leave the average listener thinking science proves blacks are genetically inferior to whites in IQ and it is only PC culture that prevents them from speaking the forbidden truth. A “truth” which also does the work of literally providing scientific support for white supremacy if you are so inclined, or for the less vile person providing an explanation for the economic/educational disparities in this country which absolves them and their history of any potential responsibility.

 

[Lexicus]

Now that I've abused my moderator powers to open up the discussion, could either or both of you talk a little more about this? That is, why our society is reducing people's value to their IQ, what effects this has, how to discredit IQ-based scientific racism, and how the history of scientific racism plays into it.

I don't think this discussion will be particularly fruitful because I'm not an IQ realist. That is, I think IQ measures how well people take IQ tests.

 

[Narz]

From what I understand Harris never said he agreed with Murray he just gave him a platform which was admittedly a dumb decision.

 

[Berzerker]

I'd be curious to see statistics on IQ and employment, I'd be willing to bet that people with IQ above 120 have more trouble with steady employment than people with IQ between 100 and 120. Just a hunch. Being smart in no way guarantees an easy life or that one will be an asset to their family or community

Just my perception, but I think smarter people are also more prone to problems... Like Sheldon, really smart but still afflicted with a variety of instabilities less common in 'the regular folk'.

 

[Mark1031]

I think you have no way of knowing what Harris and Murray think on the topic, and are just supplementing what they're actually saying with assumptions that are based on nothing but your opinion about them.

My opinion of what they think is based on listening to Harris/Murray and Harris/Klein podcasts for 4 hours. If you have done the same and come to a different opinion fine but I would say that it is hard to come away thinking Harris communicated the notion that the current science cannot rule out the blacks are genetically superior to whites in IQ, yet this is the science. Harris is not an expert in this field but a communicator/popularizer. To so thoroughly fail to communicate clearly on a topic that is so potentially and historically misused for toxic ends and to have a hissy fit when criticized for this failure has greatly diminished my view of Harris who I like in general.

 

[Narz]

Just my perception, but I think smarter people are also more prone to problems... Like Sheldon, really smart but still afflicted with a variety of instabilities less common in 'the regular folk'.

Yeah, there's a reason there's a YouTube channel called "It's ok to be Smart". Even at eight years old I remember thinking life would be easier if I was just some regular schmuck (not that I'm some great genius by any means but the run of the mill kids in public school were dumb as bricks).

 

[Yeekim]

is due to blacks having a genetic makeup that gives them on average a 5 point advantage to whites and an environmental -20 point disadvantage.

I don't think it makes sense to speak of "genetic advantage" as if it could be somehow "independent" of environment?

I would suppose that most of the 15-point difference disappears after controlling for SES and any possible remaining difference would be in the tune of maybe 2-3 points, i.e. completely irrelevant in practice?

 

[Lexicus]

My opinion of what they think is based on listening to Harris/Murray and Harris/Klein podcasts for 4 hours. If you have done the same and come to a different opinion fine but I would say that it is hard to come away thinking Harris communicated the notion that the current science cannot rule out the blacks are genetically superior to whites in IQ, yet this is the science. Harris is not an expert in this field but a communicator/popularizer. To so thoroughly fail to communicate clearly on a topic that is so potentially and historically misused for toxic ends and to have a hissy fit when criticized for this failure has greatly diminished my view of Harris who I like in general.

At one point (2000s) I got a huge kick out of Harris.

For our lefty friends on the forum there is an email exchange between Harris and Noam Chomsky floating around on the internet that makes for quite hilarious reading.

 

[Mark1031]

I don't think it makes sense to speak of "genetic advantage" as if it could be somehow "independent" of environment?

I would suppose that most of the 15-point difference disappears after controlling for SES and any possible remaining difference would be in the tune of maybe 2-3 points, i.e. completely irrelevant in practice?

Unfortunately this is not true. The difference has been narrowing but is still double digits when controlling for SES. The problem is that SES is not really the same between races. Harris points out that if you just compare white and black families of equal upper SES income they still differ and assumes that accounts for all environmental variables. Klein points out that a black family making 100K will live in a community making on average 30K. But not only that, the richest black people are still subjected to all the little and big slights and stereotypes of a racist culture. If you tell people they will not be good at something they will actually not perform as well. Now imagine what the effect of growing up in a society that tells you your not good academics and not only that its probably a genetic flaw. It is just impossible to control for possible environmental effects in the current culture but it is not that hard to imagine what they might be.

 

[Yeekim]

If you tell people they will not be good at something they will actually not perform as well. Now imagine what the effect of growing up in a society that tells you your not good academics and not only that its probably a genetic flaw. It is just impossible to control for possible environmental effects in the current culture but it is not that hard to imagine what they might be.

Sounds reasonable.

 

[Mark1031]

To get away from US. Why are the Nigerians crushing the white Brits at math and english? And what's with the Portuguese, are they white?? If it is genetic then Nigerian are pretty purely black and the white brits I know are pasty blindingly white. WTF. Anyway a nice look at immigrant groups of different skin hues and their academic performance in different countries and how this undercuts a strong genetic argument to a dumb question that I fear is driven by highly motivated reasoning. http://www.unz.com/article/the-iq-gap-is-no-longer-a-black-and-white-issue/

 

[Bootstoots]

@Mark1031 - Chanda Chisala is my single favorite commentator on race/ethnicity-IQ issues. I don't feel awake enough for a whole post but I just wanted to thank you for posting one of his best articles.

 

[luiz]

To get away from US. Why are the Nigerians crushing the white Brits at math and english? And what's with the Portuguese, are they white?? If it is genetic then Nigerian are pretty purely black and the white brits I know are pasty blindingly white. WTF. Anyway a nice look at immigrant groups of different skin hues and their academic performance in different countries and how this undercuts a strong genetic argument to a dumb question that I fear is driven by highly motivated reasoning. http://www.unz.com/article/the-iq-gap-is-no-longer-a-black-and-white-issue/

Pretty good argument against race-based AA.

 

[Yeekim]

Anyway a nice look at immigrant groups of different skin hues and their academic performance in different countries and how this undercuts a strong genetic argument to a dumb question that I fear is driven by highly motivated reasoning. http://www.unz.com/article/the-iq-gap-is-no-longer-a-black-and-white-issue/

Thanks, this was an interesting article.
However, I'm not sure what conclusions to draw from it, apart from what we actually know already: "black" is not a useful category in an analysis involving heredity, since, iirc genetic diversity in Sub-Saharan Africa is larger than in rest of the world combined.
The underperformance of African-Americans (and their children) vs more recent African immigrants (and their children) seems also difficult to explain solely with environment. If anything, it seems these factors should be stacked against later arrivals.
The fact that neither group represents "perfect" samples of an ethnic group, but have actually been selected - and selected on a very different basis - likely has an impact.