What exactly is so controversial about race differences in intelligence?
I'm not talking about this book specifically - it's been criticised by a lot of people, whether justifiably or not.
If IQ tests and other standardised tests are culturally biased, as some people say - is there a single example of a test or academic metric where black people outperform whites (not including basketball)?
Other urls found in this thread:
gov.uk
en.wikipedia.org
www1.udel.edu
commons.wikimedia.org
bloomberg.com
slatestarcodex.com
theamericanconservative.com
humanvarieties.org
twitter.com
>What exactly is so controversial about race
Minorities in Britain would hardly be representative of their original ethnic groups (brain drain etc)
Our society is based on the premise that every group is equal, therefor if one group outperform another, it is guilty of cheating and must pay for this crime.
If it was found that this premise is false, it's our entire society that need to be reformed, you can understand why we prefere not to talk about it.
>it is guilty of cheating
oh like the asians
Guess we can't discuss racial intelligence in America then since everyone immigrated there under special circumstances.
Supplementary Questions:
>How do normies interpret racial differences in intelligence?
>Are they even aware of them?
>Have you ever personally discussed this with a normie?
Except the racial gap is well documented among native inhabitants of Europe and Africa. Even in African countries where whites are the minority (and are treated like second class citizens).
Society is full of retards who will pretend genetic inequality justify their agendas.
Whether or not that produces worst results than ignoring the inequalities is the real question.
That's nice but I was talking about racial intelligence among the non-Amerindian populations in America.
>Even in African countries where whites are the minority
Why are whites in Africa representative of their ethnic groups but not colored in Britain?
why do scouts from /pol focus on the black white gap and not on the asian white gap
Because the main point of demonstrating racial IQ differences is to show that diversity quotas are nonsense.
You know why.
Also
>treated like second class citizens
Nowhere outside of Zimbabwe, in the average African country it's quite the opposite. Even in South Africa and Zimbabwe they have only recently been disenfranchised after many decades of forming the elite. Off the top of my head, Rhodesia proportionally spent ten times more on education and welfare for whites than they did for blacks.
Because whites in African countries represent the opposite of the brain drain
They are literally the dregs left behind to fend for themselves, and yet they still outperform blacks on every metric
Also, black people weren't chosen to come to America based on their intelligence. They didn't seek out a better life for themselves so they could send their children to good universities like Indians and Pakis in the UK. Blacks in America are more representative of black in Africa, than any recent immigrant group in the UK is to their original ethnic group.
yes
so is protectionism which is conceptually equal to affirmative action
Eugenics was actually popular with the Progressive Party in the US but then Hitler came along and gave it a bad name. Krauts ruin everything.
The situation in SA has been bad since the end of apartheid.
I'm not defending apartheid, but you can't defeat historical injustice with reverse injustice.
Whites are openly subject to discrimination at all levels of government and civic life in SA now.
>Rhodesia proportionally spent ten times more on education and welfare for whites than they did for blacks.
Will need sauce for that
>Because whites in African countries represent the opposite of the brain drain
"The opposite of the brain drain" doesn't sound representative to me.
>Also, black people weren't chosen to come to America based on their intelligence.
Indeed, in fact a white supremacist argument is that American blacks perform so poorly because they were originally selected to be dumb bipedal livestock, and they come from those shitty half-savage tribes that were conquered and sold off by their more successful neighbors.
That doesn't mean they are "more representative of blacks in Africa".
It's not controversial. It's meaningless.
>it's our entire society that need to be reformed
name some reforms
i think opening the borders for the upper half is the one
Which natives?
North africans who are a mix of african, arab, and european heritage?
English people who are a mix of celtic and germanic heritage?
Finns who are germanic, caucasian, tatar and sami?
Not to mentions the hundreds of subsaharan african ethnicities.
How about the fact that both europe and africa have enormous disparities in wealth, culture, and ethic makeup based on region, to the point that considering either as a whole might be inadequate. Saying "native inhabitants" or looking at "race" leaves many questions too: white vs black is convenient but what about those north africans?
Also those "second class citizen" whites are usually wealthy and descended from original colonizers, no wonder blacks dislike them. Even today whites in south africa own the majority of farmland due to an act that stripped blacks of those lands 100 years ago.
The world is complex and oftentimes simple answers based on stereotypes and blanket assumptions are lacking when considering history. its not that racial intelligence work shouldnt be done, its that there is no reputable evidence that it exists (unsurprising since "race" is pretty tenuous at best in terms of evidentiary backing).
Sure, cultures and peoples are different and one of those differences might be intelligence. But I'd be surprised to learn that people with dark skin are generally less intelligent than those with light skin. I'd be less surprised to find that certain long term isolated groups like aboriginals had differences, but thats based on regional separation and time rather than "they are dark"
That still doesn't explain why Africans from Africa are less intelligent than Africans in America.
arabs and north africans are caucasian, the same race as whites
there's 5 'continental' races - caucasians, mongoloids, africans, aboriginals and amerindians
either that or race is completely useless
>But I'd be surprised to learn that people with dark skin are generally less intelligent than those with light skin.
It's because you're determined NOT to believe it, which makes you the opposite of what a scientist should be.
>but thats based on regional separation and time rather than "they are dark
The darker your skin, the more African admixture you have. Africans developed in isolation from Europeans and other races for tens of thousands of years. Hence skin colour is a good metric for intelligence (assuming there is a racial difference in intelligence (PROTIP: there is)).
aboriginals are closer to caucasians than to africans and they are both dark
you don't seem very informed
>aboriginals are closer to caucasians than to africans
Yeah and Aboriginals are dumb as shit
What's your point?
They all evolved in isolation
my point is you don't understand what you are talking about
don't you see how your theory falls apart after that
do i really have to spell it out, read your post, then read mine
i'm starting to wonder what your folks do
No, they really aren't. Protectionism is the only logical policy which is based upon the position of self interest.
>determined not to believe it
I'm determined to believe competently collected evidence, that is reproducible and verifiable and that a consensus of experts who look at evidence in that field agree with based on rational investigation.
When you present that evidence to me I will believe, and until that time I will believe that race and intelligence are not linked any more than foot size and intelligence, hair and intelligence, or any other phenotypical trait and intelligence.
>The situation in SA has been bad since the end of apartheid.
It's pretty weak as far as discrimination in developing and undeveloped countries tends to go, plenty of minorities get a rawer deal in African countries.
The situation in Zimbabwe is incontestably really bad, the situation in South Africa is like "welcome to real life you pampered babies."
I really can't bring myself to care much about SA whites when there is so much injustice out there, especially on that continent.
>Will need sauce for that
Official numbers, though relayed by Unesco. I must admit that the gap in spending closed for those few blacks who did get into secondary and even tertiary, but it was a very small percentage.
Is this government spending or all spending?
I assume whites in Rhodesia sent their kids to private schools that cost them (privately) a lot of money.
aah i see
very logical, i agree self interest trumps intellect every time
skin color has nothing to do with intelligence, it's basically a confounding factor even in their own "redpilled" data
en.wikipedia.org
The literature abounds in studies detailing in excruciating detail the race differences in intelligence. Do your own research.
>he actually found a source
good job
>skin color has nothing to do with intelligence
You're correct
But it just happens to be a fact that people with lighter skin (Europeans, East Asians, Jews) happen to be more intelligent than people with dark skin (Blacks, Abos, Indians (not high-tier immigrant Indians)).
>using university admission as a proxy for a measure of intelligence
>"Heritability estimates range from 0.4 to 0.8 ... indicating genetics plays a bigger role than environment in creating IQ differences"
it's nowhere near 0.8 due to weaknesses of twin studies to control for uterine environment and environment factors in general as well as non-genetic heritability
closer to 0.4
Perhaps it's because one group is getting modern healthcare and more calories than their body knows what to do with and the other one is getting shit-and-worms-laced water and less calories than their brain could consume?
For the record, I actually agree that IQ is largely hereditary and African populations have lower IQs on average than European and East Asian populations even when you control for every factor. I'm just sick of seeing such ridiculously weak and self-serving arguments used to promote or dismiss policies based on the interests of brainlets and the populists who pander to them.
> What exactly is so controversial about race differences in intelligence?
Jews are trying to convince whites that niggers are people too and that we should mix with them. Whites, at least those who don't want to see their race destroyed, reject this. Anyone who thinks that niggers are human can hop on a plane to East St. Louis, Newark, Compton, or any other vibrant vacation spot and keep a travel log.
OK, I'll take your word for it over experts in the field
0.4 it is
why are south chinese smarter than, they are quite brown
why were brown caucasians the center of civilization for large parts of history
persian iq is 85 today
name the experts who think iq is 0.8 genetic, not 0.8 heritable, but genetic
The APA Task Force Report (the reply to The Bell Curve by the APA) confirmed that childhood nutrition has no meaningful contribution to IQ, apart from cases of extreme malnutrition.
Even the most advantaged, high SES blacks are less intelligent than the poorest whites.
Nutrition has nothing to do with it.
Culture and environment certainly does, but genetics is the major cause of IQ differences overall (heritibility 0.4-0.8).
The literature does not abound from my understanding, but I've been wrong before.
Perhaps part of it is scientists being afraid, but that document has (even your own link admits) a fair few problems, including that a number of signatories do not have expert knowledge on race and intelligence.
Please show me a metastudy reviewing these studies if they are so abundant. Or even 3 of them that I can read sometime. Remember from your first year of undergrad that the burden of proof is on the person articulating the claim!
I'm not saying it's a hard rule, it's just an observation
I don't know the names of individual researchers but I know for a fact they exist
post an indian IQ study, IQ
www1.udel.edu
This is a good review of all the literature in the past 30 years (well, when it was published in 2005)
>What exactly is so controversial about race differences in intelligence?
It is immediately followed up by a demand for eugenics
>rushton
>pioneer fund
it's a political organization
people literally create data there
You're a conspiracy theorist
You will be surprised to learn it was the opposite. White education was almost entirely state education while African education was often provided by charitable/missionary private efforts, which largely explains the low costs and quality.
It seems even public schooling required school fees, which blacks typically couldn't afford.
The official policy was also that blacks should be trained in household or agricultural work while whites got access to technical and professional training (that's why the table says "including technical in case of Europeans.")
it would take about 1 generation for white people to catch up with asians
Oh wow so affirmative action mean blacks get into uni easier? WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT! Asians are smarter than whites, and whites are smarter than blacks (at least in their populations in white countries).
It doesn't matter because genetic engineering will turn everybody into pale asian super jews anyway.
>UK
>affirmative action
i think you need some affirmative action
>apart from cases of extreme malnutrition.
You mean like cretinism?
commons.wikimedia.org
In case it wasn't clear, I don't think black Americans can use malnutrition as an excuse at all (lead pollution could be an environmental factor but that's another issue.)
I'm saying you can't compare relatively healthy (if not obese) blacks from America to starving iodine-deficient African wretches hosting enough parasites to qualify as bioweapons.
Also negates the fact that some pupils would have dropped out before they take their gcses, by including only gcse taking students you are selecting for intelligence.
I deficiencies, lead and other things like that can have an effect even without causing cretinism.
Dutch IQ being 85 few decades ago and 100 today speaks to that. They weren't cretins.
True enough, I used cretinism as the most extreme example.
i agree op, redheads, celtics and irish in general should be wiped off the earth
hispanic tier IQ's, together with the darkies
It's mind-blowing that Dutch or Irish IQ a few decades ago was lower than much of the developing world today. This is actually really encouraging for those who hope that other countries can catch up to enjoy decent living standards even if they hit a biological ceiling in IQ.
>This is actually really encouraging for those who hope that other countries can catch up
all countries are generally moving in the right direction with the exception of sub saharan africa which is moving far too slowly - when it comes to things like longevity, poverty, education, income, mortality etc.
China is working on fixing that.
It's not controversial. What is controversial is that IQ =/= intelligence.
because the asian white gap causes little to no societal friction
people look at underperformance by african americans, assuming that everyone is equal, and then scapegoat whites as the cause
which isnt to say that there is no systematic racism in the U.S., just that it looks quite worse than it is if you ignore socioeconomic disparity and iq disparity
Uh, no, China is continuing the work started by the Europeans of taking their minerals and resources and paying off the local strongmen with bribes and guns
Indeed, though even in Africa some regions and groups tend to do better than most and at least efforts and investment are bearing fruit.
There have also been some amazing success stories in the Global South. Sri Lanka running far ahead of India in most metrics was quite surprising to me, it looks like it will actually catch up to the Balkans in HDI in less than 5 years. Malaysia is already there and unless SEA crashes and burns it seems it will meet its goal of equaling Hungary as a high income country by 2020 (it already has the same GDP/capita at PPP.)
race and intelligence are absolutely linked, this is accepted by almost everyone in the field. Do you mean that you think this is a result of various societal pressures rather than genetic? Or do you think all races score the exact same on iq tests on average?
Here is the real problem:
Humans operate on tribes. We catagorize our tribes however we want - our family, our friends, our town, our state, etc. There's nothing wrong with this. Having a tribe in which your purpose is clearly defined and you're assured that you're being helpful to the other members is very validating.
The biggest tribe that there is, is all the human race. It is generally held by our western society that we should all be trying to work together. That's absolute bullshit. If every human was working together, what would we be working towards? It's survival of the fittest against other species and against individuals of our own species, but we beat all the other animals that evolved on earth. All that's left is to compete against one another.
Blacks in America are allowed to call all black peoples their tribe, but white people aren't allowed to call all white peoples their tribe. This shows that the black tribe has gained an advantage over the white tribe, culturally. /pol/acks see this and attribute it to all kinds of retard shit, but they're fundamentally right. There is no reason not to want to advance the white tribe if that's the tribe you choose to define yourself with.
There's other tribes of course, that you reading this may consider better than "the white tribe" as a whole, but if they want to try and advance the cause of white people and you're white, why wouldn't you want that? Wouldn't owning slaves be awesome? Think of all the shit you wouldn't have to do!
tl;dr white supremecy is as equally valid a thing to dedicate your life towards as any other endeavour so long as you're white.
>if they want to try and advance the cause of white people and you're white, why wouldn't you want that?
My "tribe" is the civilized, highly adaptive high-IQ global upper class that has emerged through a combination of luck and merit and my enemies are all the maladapted thugs who want to harm those gentlemen. Plebs can't appreciate their qualities and resent their good fortune or believe they're somehow involved in their own blood feuds against low-IQ neighbors because my good friends happen to have the same skin tone or share some other features since they originate from the same sub-continent, and similarly they try to claim me as an ally because we probably shared ancestors millennia ago.
Even if white trash promised to give me a crown just for tacit approval, I could not bear to see the people I actually care about be unjustly humiliated and brought low, and the idea that they could be forced to serve "us" as slaves only fills me with revulsion.
Of course there is still plenty of room for ethnic tribalism and nepotism even within my tribe, but transracial cooperation is a disproportionately common strategy among us, and in any case there is an even greater divide, a gulf separating me from most groups outside this tribe.
Frankly I expect anyone on Veeky Forums to understand this sort of sentiment. You haven't the faintest clue of our origins but you chose to interact with us rather than visit the nearest pub.
>white supremecy
>asians are actually supreme
there's no doubt in my mind that places like SEA, india will become developed given time, the trends are there
IQ war NOW
Because everyone who does it is a white supremacist brainlet that wants to genocide/enslave the other side.
bloomberg.com
Also, it's the genes that matter, not the race. If you create a nation with only white, asians or jews you are still gonna get a lot of dumb people in it (less than with blacks, but still the overwheming majority). The average white/asian/jew is far from the exceptional individuals that make those races thrive over the others.
I agree. Brainlets are brainlets, no matter how white.
Truly what we need is a crispr fellow to make the IQ genes dominant so they replace the dumb genes over time, and seed candidates in all populations. Then the problem solves itself via reproduction in due time with no bloodshed
SA is a big fat mess and a racial civil war is brewing
dont say such stupid things
>this toothpaste company did a study which showed their toothpaste is best, thats a little fishy
>this political organisation ran a study which backed up their political view, better just believe it
>being a literal conspiracy theorist
Not all ethnic groups are in Africa just to exploit them, china is doing a lot of good work over there and dont deserve to be tarred with the brush as Europeans
>is there a single example of a test or academic metric where black people outperform whites (not including basketball)?
The argument is that black people get inferior education and/or upbringing in general. So they would likely do worse on all metrics (on average).
You could maybe go to some tribal Africans and have them school you about nature stuff which they have mastered. That's perfectly valid imo.
for some reason people think that racism is bad but xenophobia is good
even though you get to pick none of them at birth
normalfags being normalfags, muh feels, following social norms and being scared of taboos
just look at trump and nigel farage (UKIP) in UK, both are xenophobes but they're not racist at all
farage has managed to convince that the indians who bathe in their own shit, in a river where their relatives corpses float and decompose, are okay but europoor immigrants arent'
so, xenophobia is cool, racism is not, that's it, no point arguing norms that are set by illogical normalfags, because there is absolutely no logic backing them up
>Hitler has managed to convince Germans and Slavs that the bucktoothed yellow monkeys who eat raw fish and want to steal whitey's asian colonies are okay but the farmers or cobblers in town who had a grandfather with a Jewish-sounding name are not.
Honestly it's not just "racism bad, xenophobia okay", it's a more general phenomenon at work:
slatestarcodex.com
I wouldn't say there's no logic behind it either, it's perfectly self-serving and perhaps even rational from a game theory perspective.
You're looking for a generalized answer in which blacks are retarded but the evidence doesn't exist because standardized intelligence quotient exams aren't common in Africa and the majority of the black population in first world countries don't pay for the test so any test data would be skewed severely unless you paid for 30 blacks and 30 whites of equal educational background to take the same IQ test.
Evolution works more by trial and error than you might think
Every kid takes GCSEs unless they do not attend their exams.
How does that make sense for a population distribution
There could be 1,000 "educated" whites and 100 "educated" blacks and you'd be picking 30 from each to "control" and basically learn nothing about how intelligent the average person is from each general population
I think the word you're looking for is "breed".
There are 5 breeds of humans.
its always amazing when I see another example of people like you.
you ever taken a stats class?
Isn't neural complexity also connected to time it takes to reach maturity(size of the body is also a factor)?
Are you joking? /pol/ loves to post SAT scores while pretending those are psychometric
where can i see the IQ map of decades ago?
Check old test results.
Spoiler: the ""modern"" IQ map based on Lynn & Vanhanen is mostly built on decades-old data too.
Given your question, I'm afraid you don't quite realize how little national IQ data is available, so please check these articles if you want to understand the sort of data we have to work with.
theamericanconservative.com
humanvarieties.org
I love how the Bell Curve talks for 90% of the book about things other than race and when it does talk aobut it, it just leaves the question open without giving any explanation, but people get so buttblasted about even just the possibility of there being psychological innate differences between population that they associate the book with a strenuous defense of racialists hypotheses.
Also, lmao at the usual dude posting GCSE of highly selected immigrant groups as if they prove anything.
Becaue SAT scores do correlate with IQ scores by around .8
>who go on to university
>not a standardized test
full retard
Because it's education that makes people smarter.
Education helps people achieve their full potential but your IQ is largely genetically determined. A lack of education can result in a stunted IQ just like a lack of nutrition in childhood can, but assuming you have basically unlimited food and access to knowledge (as in all Western societies) then the cap on your achievement is your genes.
>you have basically unlimited food and access to knowledge (as in all Western societies)
You'd be surprised actually.
