Tuesday, December 4, 2007

Race-Based Intelligence Researchers Are Genetically Predisposed Towards Inanity

I'm going to agree with Matt here, you should read Steven Metcalf's take-down of Will Saletan's series of pieces about race and intelligence in Slate.

The long and short of it is that there really doesn't appear to be a strong basis for claiming strict racial heritability of IQ differences. I really like this analogy Metcalf discusses, which I had never heard before but seems pretty strong to me:
Imagine two wheat fields. Now imagine two genetically identical sets of seeds. (The analogy was first made famous by the Harvard evolutionary biologist and geneticist Richard Lewontin.) Now imagine each field is planted with these two identical seed stocks. Field No. 1 is given the best possible inputs: sunshine intensity, rain, soil nitrates, etc. Field No. 2 is given much less of all of the above. Within each field, inputs are kept uniform. Inevitably, the first field grows a healthier supply of grain than the second. But here is the rub: Within each field, the variation in outcomes is entirely hereditary. Between the two fields, the variation in outcomes in entirely environmental.
There are many, many problems to tackling questions of race and intelligence. As far as I am concerned, you get bogged down in your original definitions and it's pretty much impossible to really get beyond that. For one thing, what do you mean by 'race'? It's, at best, a poorly-defined concept, and I'm unaware of a really convincing definition of it anywhere out there.

For another thing, and one which is much more crippling to the discussion, what do you mean by 'intelligence'? You can talk about IQ tests, and that's all well and good, but I have very little faith in their ability to measure much beyond your ability to do well on, well, IQ tests.

There are more interesting, and complicated, definitions of intelligence out there, but there's still no real agreement about what intelligence is, what its hallmarks are, or how one can measure it.

Note: for a good summary of the debate so far (so far being 1996 or thereabouts, by virtue of its publication date) check out Steven Gould's The Mismeasure of Man. It's an interesting look at the history of intelligence measures, and in particular how they always seemed to be designed, by white scientists, to measure white folks as being more intelligent than people of other races. Convenient, that. I don't know how Saletan is somehow shocked, shocked! to find out that most of the scientists who he was relying on for his questionable conclusions have some very large, and not particularly savory, skeletons in their closets.

1 comment:

True Newspaper said...

First,
Jewish people are the most intelligent. They win almost 40% of the Nobel Prize's and they have a small population of only 14 million. So by far they exceed the other races in intelligence. The other races having huge numbers and such small contributions.

Second,
IQ tests, test intellectual conformity, not creativity and originality. This would explain the Asian high IQ's. They as a people are the ultimate conformists.

In IQ tests there is typically only one answer to the problem. That problem being a social conformity to reason. But everyone knows that Genius's and all of the greatest developments in the world are not the product of conformity. Conformity never breeds creativity. We can see this in the lack of influence the Asian population has had on Science. China used to be called the "sick man" of Asia. Their population is massive and their contribution to innovation is almost nil. We can see this lack of originality in their adoptation of European philosophies, I.e. Communism.

Friedrich Nietzsche and other Philosophers have critized Asians. Nietsche used the words "Pallid osification" to describe Orientals.

Pallid: lacking sparkle or liveliness.

Osification: The process of becoming set and inflexible in behavior, attitudes, and actions. Inflexible conformity, rigid unthinking acceptance of social conventions.

The reality is Asian people have yet to understand that laws and rules are arbitrary. Europeans make the rules and Asian's follow them.

It also doesn't make sense that Asian's are considered smart because of the fact that they have destroyed their own countries. This is due to over-population and their basic lack of enviromental understanding.

It is also common scientific fact that women who have many children are ignorant, and those who have less children are more intelligent. This has already been proven in studies. So it seems strange to say that Asians are smart when the obviousness of their backwards countries, and medieval lifestyle makes them contrary to that premise.

Europeans have the most advanced civilizations and every other race has yet to meet these levels other than the Japanese. The Japanese only being good at copying other people's inventions and making them better. Other than that their original creativity is lacking as well. They took American cars and made them better. They took the German camera and made it better. And they took German steel and made it better. Otherwise the greatest advances still come from Europeans and Jews. Other than that the Orientals have yet to produce an Einstein or a Thomas Edison.

When it comes to Black people. It makes sense that they have low intellectual comformity, I.e. IQ tests. They are far too creative to be trapped in this unoriginal form of conditioning. You can tell their creative capacity in their athletics, music, dance, and the way they talk. They by far exceed the Asiatic races in these areas. Being better singers, musicians ect. Blacks far exceed Asians in emotive expression. In all of North America there is only one or two famous high-paid Asian actors.

Reality, Europeans rule the world and they have allowed others to exist only out of desire for economic bennifet. They, (Europeans) are also the physically strongest, winning the Strongest Man competitions again and again.

The greater the conformity, the weaker the race. Thus we see the races as they are today. The wild animal being bred out of man, and the physically impotent, conformist thriving.

Otherwise "Group psychology" is the most destructive thing in the world. All these stereotypes are false when it comes to the individual. Individualism is the most important thing for this time. All countries, Religions, groups need to dissolve for man to live in peace.

www.truenewspaper.blogspot.com