There is unlikely an inherent difference in mental prowess allowed by the genes of one "race" versus another. The time required for evolution to produce such differences is probably much larger than homo sapiens have been around. It's also said that the genetic differences between "races" are much more subtle than the genetic differences between individuals of the same race.

I blame culture. If indeed one "race" is seemingly less intelligent than another, it's because the two "races" are primarily of different cultures. A culture that doesn't value free thought is not likely to produce many philosophers. A culture that doesn't value technological progress isn't likely to produce many engineers and scientists.

Also, IQ tests vary a lot. Effectively, all you can say is "I got a score of X on this test". It's silly to equate that score to some magical, absolute, and non-existent number called "IQ". They're simply not good metrics for intelligence. In fact, nothing is really a good metric of intelligence: The definition of intelligence is debatable. If you can come up with a measurable mental faculty, then you can measure that, but it's still not necessarily okay to call that a measure of intelligence.

Why would evolution require more time to evolve different intelligence levels than it requires evolving different skin color, facial features or any of the other physical differences found between races of homo-sapiens?

Hmm, you do have a point there. I made intelligence out to be more static than skin color, when I have no empirical evidence to suggest that.

However, the average variation in the intelligence of members of a "race" is much greater than the difference in the average intelligence of a race. Racial intelligence differences are hard to measure, and really quite insignificant relative to interpersonal differences.

You seem to be claiming that IQ measures inherent differences and isn't culturally biased. Is that true?

If not, my apologies.

If so, then my post is entirely on point: if IQ scores for a given race vary widely based on nongenetic factors, then it's clear that IQ does *not* measure inherent differences and is, in fact, culturally biased.

__________________
Man up.

True the only iq test to date (the system we all use) was designed for the europeans.

So, does anyone besides me think that it's quite possible for some races of humans to be, on average, more intelligent than other races.

I'm not talking about I tests, I am talking about intelligence.

I've met some really stupid people and their stupidity had nothing to do with inequitable IQ tests or cultural differences. They were just plain stupid.

I do actually think you can generalize to an extent on race and sex, both positive and negative.

__________________
Manu Chao - Bongo Bong

"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious." - Oscar Wilde

"Nothing doth more hurt in a state than that cunning men pass for wise." - Sir Francis Bacon

Intelligence is much more complicated and harder to grade when it comes to survival than physical charactoristics.

There is different types of intelligence and any one of them can evolve, but when an area is hotter, colder, or it requires stronger muscles those traits are required to survive on the long run.

And another thing... When it comes to certain parts of the world I can see how different physical traits would be more desirable, (light skin in cold areas, dark in hot) but there isn't really any place in the world where stupidity would be easier to evolve than other places.

Human beings are all incredibly alike genetically, even more than chimps of the same species, and culture plays such a huge role in every bit of human developement any test between the races is practically impossible to make an conclusions.

Human intelligence allowed us to expand and multiply so quickly that we haven't had enough time to develope different intelligences in different areas, because of our scientifically small gene pool.

Yes there is, in American ghettos.

Not really. I think the genetic differences between races are so small that it has no meaningful effect on average intelligence.

I think specific populations can be smarter or dumber, based on environmental factors -- eat a lot of lead, get stupid; live in a place where survival is easy, stay dumb and lazy. But that has nothing to do with race.

__________________
Man up.