Western Countries are Incapable of Resolving the Race/IQ Debate

This post right here is another reason why I believe we should look at race and IQ differently. If race was broken out by region/ethnicity instead of the big 3-5, results would be pretty consistent. Right now, we are grouping people by skin tones and so we see big IQ differences for race. I would be on board with the idea of IQ being genetic if the racial categories change because I believe we would see truly that genes take cues from their environment to make any adaptations needed.

 

Well, what's your explanation to why Poland suffered much more greatly in the 20th century than Greece did, and still suffers from worse poverty, but Poland still manages to beat Greece in both IQ scores, and PISA scores?

My explanations are genetic (obviously)

Not only would environment fall short in such an explanation.

But, Poland is much colder than Greece, which should have put greater pressures on intelligence to survive harsh conditions, and on top of that Greece has lots of more recently African derived E1b1b haplogroup.

Poland does have a larger cranial capacity than Greece does.

Is that not genetic, by egalitarian logic, Greece should have a larger cranial capacity due to better nourishment.

 

Genes take their cues from the environment. If some genes are getting switched off and others turned on to adapt for long cold bouts, for example, then that would make the person intelligent in certain facets (e.g. long-term planning). That intelligence doesn't necessarily translate to the same people doing well in every environment, especially since other genes were turn off.

IQ tests only test for certain types of intelligence and honestly, they're pretty lacking. I usually see the pattern finding, memory, deduction-like questions in those tests. I never see anything testing for emotion, creativity, or violence; things a human needs to survive, live, or enhance life on this planet.

 

I don't think IQ tests are 100% accurate, but it is accurate enough to show that people with down syndrome typically score retarded IQ's, and on the inverse gifted people typically score high IQ scores

 

The test is only an attempt to measure some types intelligence. A group of people can be more intelligent than another group, but that does not necessarily translate to their circumstances being better.

People have to put a lot less stock into trying to explain the human condition through IQ test results. They need to factor in environment, culture, geography, resources, ability to leverage resources, etc.

Egalitarian logic? No, I simply don't see why people care so much about IQ, when other more important factors matter. Poland is more intelligent than the Greeks, yet, according to you, they suffer from worse poverty.

 

There's the EQ for emotion.

Actually for a test that would test creativity, I'd imagine people of African heritage would be closer to being equal.

I for one certainly don't deny that African American contributions to music, which includes, both good, and bad.

 

That's not saying much about IQ tests at all *lol*...

 

Yes, because Greece wasn't as destroyed by WW2 to the extent of Poland, nor was Greece thrown to economic stagnating Communism.

Greece also gained it's independence awhile before Poland did.

 

Creativity would put Europeans above Asians too I think. Asians have very rich cultures, but the engineering schemes of some Europeans...The IQ tests are supposed to measure such potential? Another thing, lot of geniuses did poorly in school. I don't care much about IQ tests the more I think about it.

 

The European intellectual elite has most certainly been more creative than the Asian elite, but I'm not so sure that average Europeans are necessarily more creative, but it might be so.

 

I agree. I think IQs are based on genetics. Environment plays a negative part, in today's education, but it shouldn't.
I believe children should all have IQ tests. The ones with a low IQ should be grouped with others of low IQ; students with average IQ' with others of average IQ's; same for students with above average, high above average, and genius IQ's. All students should be given support and a challenging education commiserate with their intellectual potential. I think it is an abomination to squelch the potential of high IQ'd children by putting them in classrooms with children who have a hard time learning. This is all very PC, but very devastating to both slow and fast learners, and to society in general.

 

What value is IQ actually supposed to measure, except one-sided Western perceptions of "intelligence"? "Intelligence" is a ridiculous concept and akin to calling all fields of study "science" without differentiating between them and taking into account their intricacy, diversity, and varied contributions. The linguistic irresponsibility is certainly the same. If all understanding can be carelessly lumped together under "intelligence" (from the Latin intellegere - to understand) then all knowledge can be lumped as "science" (from scire - to know). The fact of the matter is, "intelligence" is extremely multifaceted and therefore impossible to quantify or generalise; but the notion of "intelligence" as a monolith has become so embedded in our perceptions of humanity that there is no linguistic way in which other notions which do more justice to human cognition can be expressed. Binet acknowledged that IQ was a simplification and was merely meant for psychological use when a simplification of cognition was necessary, but as he expected, the idea has been appropriated by popsci, politicos and racist scum to justify warped and inadequate ideas.

 

I've never understood what IQ is supposed to prove. Some people are smart, some are idiots. Some learn new things fast, others at their own pace.


Does it really make a difference what race they are when every race has members on both ends of the spectrum?

 

Polish, Italians, and Ashkenazi Jews who all arrived in America very poor, and very uneducated in the early 20th century, went onto see their IQ grow a lot.

But, the average African American of today has it much better today than they did, and still score a lower IQ than those newly arrived groups.

 

One sided Western view of intelligence?

Yet, the IQ of East Asians is generally higher than that of Europeans.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think many people deny that there's some smart Blacks, like Neil Tyson DeGrasse, or Thomas Sowell.

However, there's definitely a big ratio differences among the races in smart, and dumb individuals.

 

This is a complicated and dying world. We need students who are critical thinkers to be given access to subjects--like STEM subjects. These students typically have high IQ's, and therefore more likely to find new sciences to help us out of the mess we find ourselves in--like finding ways to contain fusion power, like anti-gravity science for space travel. Without cultivating the potential of all students--even those of low to average IQ, we are wasting opportunities No one is talking about race as far as I could tell in the few posts I read. ALL students, black, red, yellow, pink, brown, etc should be challenged to be their best, and hopefully in the process we stumble on some genius science, and brilliant ideas to save us from ourselves.

 

East Asian societies often adhere to the Western values (or, should I say, Prussian values) represented by the IQ test and other models rooted in that specific view of epistemology and education. South Korean schools look more similar to the old Prussian military schools than modern German schools do.

 

The book the Bell Curve showed that IQ has a lot to do with life outcomes, with people with lower IQ scores being more likely to not complete college, more likely to make lower incomes, more likely to go to jail, more likely to get divorced etc.

This does seem to fit with the patterns in our society.

Even though many Liberals call this all outrageous.

 

Well, I certainly think that all students' potential should be cultivated (and our education system is failing miserably at that), but the link between IQ and "critical thinking" - itself a vague concept - is tenuous at best. Nor can IQ reliably measure STEM ability. Something like the Cattell test, since it is verbally-oriented, has little to no bearing on someone's mathematical reasoning skills. And even the Culture Fair test (spatially-oriented) is not a solid indicator. My score on that test was awful, but I've always been quite good at science.

 

IQ doesn't test knowledge so much as it does problem solving ability.

PISA scores are the ones which test knowledge.

But, I do some what agree, that being intellectually ambitious is part of the battle.

But, if someone is stupid, they won't gravitate towards intellect as well, with a lot of stupid people being turned off by intellect.

Asians tend to take education seriously, however I don't think that's just all culture.

I for one believe that culture is also a reflect of the kind of people it has in it.

I also think Asians like intellect, because they tend to be good at it.

 

It's the PISA tests which test science, not the IQ tests.

But, when looking at PISA scores, and IQ scores we still see similar patterns of intellect.

 

Are there? I know probably as many folks with African ancestors as European. I don't see a lot of difference in them.

How do you define smart? Or dumb? If you met my older brother and didn't know better, you would think he is a total moron. But he has a PhD in Aerospace Engineering and while he has "issues" with remembering things like History or the basic trivia most people just seem to know, he is without a doubt "smart".

And if we look at the aboriginal people of almost any undeveloped area, most people would automatically assume they were stupid. But take those same people who look down their "smart" noses at them and see if they could survive in the same environment. The aboriginal people would then be considered the "smart" ones because they knew how to live in that enviroment.

 

Sure, but IQ tests and their questions tend to be pretty linear and reward a correspondingly linear - and again, Prussian - mode of thought.

What is stupidity? What is intellect? What are the origins of these phenomena, and how are they determined?

Cultural differences are certainly a reflection of something else - you're right about that. But I think it can easily be traced back to economics. The economies of SE Asia (and South Asia to an extent) are industrialising and becoming more capitalist and open, and this phase in a country's socioeconomic development often corresponds to an education system which blends the old religious and hierarchical rhetoric with meritocratic ideas. Northern Europe was going through this phase when its education system was most similar to that of current SE Asia. This resulted in the epistemological ideas and student mindsets of the two societies being remarkably similar.

What do you mean by "the kind of people"? What is the essence of a person?

 

I've seen the differences they tend to be less intellectually interested, more belligerent, and obnoxious.

 

I think you are being a tad bit dishonest. Tell me this. If you had a job and it included reviewing entrance qualification for students to enter into a STEM class, and you had NOTHING to go on but IQ tests, who would you choose--one with a high IQ, or one with a low IQ. Your job depends on you picking students who are most likely to succeed in the STEM classes. Picking one who fails and drops out means the end of your job. Can you honestly tell us that Intelligent Quotients don't matter?