IQ differences and racism

[Perfection]

IQ tests are highly dependant on culture, they are only marginally useful for measuring intelligence among people in similar cultures and completly impossible to compare between.

You want some proof take a look at the Flynn effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

 

[A'AbarachAmadan]

Just a quick clarifying question, but isn't IQ inborn? Like it doesn't change with what schools you go to and whatnot, you're either 90 or 120 and it stays that way.

I've read that it doesn't change much, but when I graduated high school (a very, very bad one) I tested with an IQ of 124. When I graduated college I tested with an IQ of 141, high enough to join MENSA. An IQ Test is just that, a test. If you learn, you do better.

 

[Laughing Gull]

IQ means very little. I am living proof of this. My IQ was measured in my early 20's at 162, however, it is obvious to me and others here that I am pretty much a dumbass. word.

 

[Jeff Yu]

And the part that, if you are a decent human being and not a racist bigot, you have been dreading: American blacks average a standard deviation lower in IQ than American whites at about 85. And it gets worse: the average IQ of African blacks is lower still, not far above what is considered the threshold of mental retardation in the U.S. And yes, it’s genetic; g seems to be about 85% heritable, and recent studies of effects like regression towards the mean suggest strongly that most of the heritability is DNA rather than nurturance effects.

This part, at least, doesn't seem to be true. All the statistics and articles I've seen suggest that recent black immigrants on Africa and the Carribean do better than American blacks both financially and in education.

 

[(+) Influence]

Do you have statistics on where the African American with high IQ score grew up? If they grew up in a white town, then it could be that the IQ test is based on culture. This is assuming that if they lived in a white town they began to adopt the white culture, and assuming that the IQ tests revolve around the white culture. If African Americans with high IQ scores are spread around, then my hypothesis won't work as well.

 

[Verbose]

White Europeans (and Americans) have spent the last 200 years or so trying to prove that black people (anybody non-European really) is more stupied than they are.

They obviously still haven't quite managed to make their point. To my mind that indicates that likelyhood that there is something seriously wrong with the project is overwhelming.

If anything, it seems to indicate that white people are the true morons of this world.

 

[aneeshm]

It just fall back on what I said in the first answer of this post : success is much more related to emotionnal drive than intelligence.

Akka , I'd say you need to read the article again . He states that his views are based not on IQ , but on the highest degree common factor common to all IQ tests , which DOES ( and has been proven to ) be a determinant in success .

A link to the relevant study is here .

 

[Akka]

Akka , I'd say you need to read the article again . He states that his views are based not on IQ , but on the highest degree common factor common to all IQ tests

It's the same.

which DOES ( and has been proven to ) be a determinant in success .

A link to the relevant study is here .

Of course, having a high IQ does help success ! I didn't say it's useless, I just say that emotionnal drive is a much more basic prerequisite, and that you can much more be successful with a high self-confidence and willpower, and a low IQ, than with the opposite.

 

[Stapel]

There are huge taboos on racial differences on intelligence and other non-physical differences that might generally be whitnessed. I guess even on physical differences, there are still taboos.
Some people believe that blacks always winning the 100 meter sprint, can 100% be explained by sociological stuff. I find that rather weird.

I, for one, do think that it might very well be that the average black has slighly fewer natural abilities to be succesful in a modern western society, than the average white.
It's still sort of political correct to absolutely deny the possibility.

However, nobody is average, which partly justifies the taboos, as they might indeed be abused for racist purposes (like Anarres pointed out).

 

[Syterion]

I'm going to assume you're joking because in my experience living in Asia you have the same wide spectrums of idiots and geniuses and whatever else that you have everywhere else.

Yeah, but in Asia they kill themselves.

 

[Renata]

"The Bell Curv" is awful science. Half its arguments are completely refutable with just a few seconds' sceptical thought. If anyone who was persuaded by it is interested, they should also read Steven Gould's "The Mismeasure of Man", which describes how 'g' is such a useless concept in the first place, and which contains a short appendix discussing "The Bell Curve".

Both sets of arguments should be considered before attempting to make informed statements on the matter, IMO.

Renata

 

[WillJ]

It's obvious that there are statistically significant differences in IQ between the two genders and among the various races/ethnicities/whatever. And I'm willing to accept that some of this could be due to genetics and other inborn factors (the rest being due to nutrition and social factors), although I'd put less emphasis on inborn differences than this guy, and I'd put less emphasis on IQ in general than this guy.

But even if there are unchangable racial differences in intelligence, methinks this man puts too much stock into people's rationality. Homo economus ain't all that accurate of a model.

It'd be nice to think that if there were no taboos relating to racial differences, your average (and even your below-average) person could objectively look at the facts and decide, as the author says, that it makes sense to look at the individual, but at the same time not expect collective equality among the races.

But in reality, I think people would succeed in realizing the latter, but not the former. These pyschological studies would just be used to fuel racism, as others have said.

Then again, I'm not much of a fan of censorship, and perhaps the suppression of talk about racial differences does more harm than good, fueling racism in its own way. Yes, that's a very real possibility, but I think I'd like us to play it safe and take over-political-correctness and silly affirmative action over no such political correctness and the possibility of reverting back to 1963. [Edit: I'm exaggerating in that last sentence, of course.]