Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You keep making these statements that makes me suspect that you're not comprehending the point about individual variation. Group averages say nothing about an individual.
Regarding the Ron Unz article: many of his points are wrong and he ignores available known science. But... his critiques are based on Richard Lynn's book, IQ and the Wealth of Nations, which is full of badly collected data to begin with. Richard Lynn collected results from numerous IQ tests, many of them not being nationally representative, and often times he even misreported results seemingly based on his own whims. His book is not well regarded, even by others that take a hereditarian stance on IQ.
I want to make a point about average IQ. It isn't static. A group's IQ can rise. In 1970, South Korea had a reported average IQ of 90. In two decades, it went up to 104. Their rise in IQ correlated almost perfectly with their rise in average height. So in a sense, Ron Unz's case that prosperity leads to a higher IQ is partially correct. Good nutrition has a positive effect on IQ. But I should emphasize that just as the South Koreans didn't grow into giants, their average IQ didn't continue to skyrocket. They have peaked out at 105-106.
For Blacks in America, their IQ has been 15 points below the White average for decades. There is no evidence that, as a group, they are severely malnourished. They have access to vitamin fortified food. They don't show stunted growth. Our government already provides them with food stamps as well as free lunch and even free breakfasts in many areas. And yet their average IQ has continuously lagged.
I understand your point about treating people as individuals, I really do. Certainly educators and society should do everything we can to allow children (regardless of IQ and regardless of why their IQ is what it is), to reach their academic potential. I think it's very likely that many very intelligent children of various races are not reaching their potential and this may be especially true with African-Americans for various reasons.
That being said, I think you're being disingenuous if you think popularizing the idea that various races IQs (as groups) are limited by genetics makes no difference. Yes, we ought to treat people as individuals, but we also treat people as members of groups whether it's race or whatever. A young black man interacting for the first time with a rural white southern male is going to recognize the "group" that man is from and make some initial judgements. He may be open-minded enough to withhold his final judgment, but if the white man does things that fit his preconceptions, he will likely "default" to his preconceptions. Likewise, if I am interacting with a young white male with a shaved head and a swastika tattoo, I'll likely have some preconceptions. Perhaps I'll find out he's now a "born again Christian" and a church pastor , but if I'm alone on a street in a rough neighborhood and there are several similar men with him, I probably won't stick around to find out. So the idea that black's IQs (as a group) are limited genetically would inform someone's preconceptions and affect how they treat individuals. If you are black, it would also affect how you view yourself and other blacks.
Most important, however, is that policy is based on groups and not individuals by and large. If the black/white IQ gap is similar to that of the Irish/British IQ gap in the 70's and not "fixed," then policy will be different. In the excerpt from the Uz article, Uz points out how Lynn felt that a eugenics program was the right policy. How wrong he was! Studying how IQ gaps like that closed seems to be a very fruitful research direction. Uz thinks urbanization closed the Irish IQ gap. He may be right, but it could be something else such as smaller families, increased availability of television, older age of the mother at birth---who knows? I think it's very unlikely to be due to improved nutrition as I know of no evidence that the Irish as a group were malnourished at the time. The Uz article has some flaws certainly, but the Irish data is very strong it appears. His critics, from what I can tell, have nibbled as various aspects of his article but the core seems strong.
I think a two pronged approach is necessary regarding various racial IQ gaps in America. The first is to maximize the achievement for every child and the second is to close the gap. (Which may be happening on it's own for Mexican-Americans) That might involve changes in healthcare, ending ongoing discrimination, improving the economic lot of minorities, and yes, perhaps changes in the minorities' cultures (i.e. out of wedlock births, not having children until married, changing attitudes towards education and interaction of parents with infants etc.) The changes in culture would largely have to come from the groups themselves from internal dialogues and minority leaders I suspect.
I said bussing was a statewide thing. Perhaps you are one of those who caused all the disruptions or perhaps you simply dropped out of school as so many do.
"When you have nothing of value to say, attempt to insult".
Yes, but if a student is excited and motivated to learn a particular subject, a teacher with a boring or less than sparkling personality can still teach them well. Teachers should not have to be entertainers to teach their students.
Again, urban black and hispanic culture is not at all conducive to raising children that value an academic education. Children need positive role models and those must be provided by the parents who they most closely identify with.
"Teachers should not have to be entertainers to teach their students."
Who said ANYTHING about being "entertainers"?
If teachers are so ineffective, why are they given an automatic raise when the get their Master's degree? Isn't that superposed to mean that they have attained a better knowledge on how to motivate students?
Sorry, I don't buy into this whole race IQ test theory, sounds more like someone is attempting to degrade an entire race by suggestion they are inherently less intelligent.
They are. It is a fact. Just look at the average scholastic test scores by ethnic group.
I understand your point about treating people as individuals, I really do. Certainly educators and society should do everything we can to allow children (regardless of IQ and regardless of why their IQ is what it is), to reach their academic potential. I think it's very likely that many very intelligent children of various races are not reaching their potential and this may be especially true with African-Americans for various reasons.
That being said, I think you're being disingenuous if you think popularizing the idea that various races IQs (as groups) are limited by genetics makes no difference. Yes, we ought to treat people as individuals, but we also treat people as members of groups whether it's race or whatever. A young black man interacting for the first time with a rural white southern male is going to recognize the "group" that man is from and make some initial judgements. He may be open-minded enough to withhold his final judgment, but if the white man does things that fit his preconceptions, he will likely "default" to his preconceptions. Likewise, if I am interacting with a young white male with a shaved head and a swastika tattoo, I'll likely have some preconceptions. Perhaps I'll find out he's now a "born again Christian" and a church pastor , but if I'm alone on a street in a rough neighborhood and there are several similar men with him, I probably won't stick around to find out. So the idea that black's IQs (as a group) are limited genetically would inform someone's preconceptions and affect how they treat individuals. If you are black, it would also affect how you view yourself and other blacks.
You've raised a valid concern. Most people don't even understand the concept of averages. When I write about averages for any group, I will inevitably get hit back by a bunch of responses from others disagreeing by pointing out exceptions to the average. Most people seem to think average = everyone. I understand it's a touchy subject, but if it can be solved, it won't be solved by ignoring it. Where I'm from originally, the government is heavily invested in studying the national IQ and takes measures to raise it, such as iodine supplementation, monitoring toxins and promoting the importance of prenatal care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RiddleyWalker
Most important, however, is that policy is based on groups and not individuals by and large. If the black/white IQ gap is similar to that of the Irish/British IQ gap in the 70's and not "fixed," then policy will be different. In the excerpt from the Uz article, Uz points out how Lynn felt that a eugenics program was the right policy. How wrong he was! Studying how IQ gaps like that closed seems to be a very fruitful research direction. Uz thinks urbanization closed the Irish IQ gap. He may be right, but it could be something else such as smaller families, increased availability of television, older age of the mother at birth---who knows? I think it's very unlikely to be due to improved nutrition as I know of no evidence that the Irish as a group were malnourished at the time. The Uz article has some flaws certainly, but the Irish data is very strong it appears. His critics, from what I can tell, have nibbled as various aspects of his article but the core seems strong.
I think a two pronged approach is necessary regarding various racial IQ gaps in America. The first is to maximize the achievement for every child and the second is to close the gap. (Which may be happening on it's own for Mexican-Americans) That might involve changes in healthcare, ending ongoing discrimination, improving the economic lot of minorities, and yes, perhaps changes in the minorities' cultures (i.e. out of wedlock births, not having children until married, changing attitudes towards education and interaction of parents with infants etc.) The changes in culture would largely have to come from the groups themselves from internal dialogues and minority leaders I suspect.
The lowest reported IQ score in Lynn's book for the Irish comes from a college thesis paper and the data isn't verifiable because the paper was never published. His book is full of sloppy research. The rise in Irish IQ wasn't as dramatic as reported. There has been a steady rise in IQ for most people; it's called the Flynn effect. In every country that goes through industrialization, average IQ has risen, but improvements are only on certain parts of the IQ test. The reasons for the rise are debatable, but good nutrition, especially higher protein consumption, has been a major factor.
Maybe, the Black IQ will rise closer to the White average, but I find it unlikely given all the steps we have taken to make that happen so far. At most, we may have minor improvements.
@ Suprachai Well, I don't know about the Irish data coming from a college thesis paper. The quality of the data is always the main point in these sorts of analyses. I haven't seen Lynn dispute the legitimacy of the 1972 Irish average IQ of 87 in 1972, and apparently he was convinced enough that this was legitimate (according to Uz), that he thought a national eugenics program was the way to address this.
I guess I'm still not sure exactly what IQ testing measures and how much of that is genetic. For those reading along, I do agree that IQ measurements between different ethnic groups is real, but I'm not sure what that's measuring. I do agree that higher IQ in our modern world correlates to greater academic success and therefore economic achievement, but I'm not entirely sure what component (or components) of "intelligence" it's measuring.
As this thread is dying out, my hope is that minority readers see that IQ is very likely not strongly dependent on inherited genetics but dependent on things like prenatal care, early childhood interaction with parents, and a stimulating environment and quality education. Just like the Irish, so-called "fixed) intellectual gaps can be closed. There is hope for disadvantaged minorities--and not just hope, but examples of people that have done far more than the pessimists would say they could-(and you know this already). Push your children, make them strive for excellence, don't accept less than their best efforts--it's worked for my kids…. (End of Rant)
Last edited by RiddleyWalker; 09-05-2014 at 09:03 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, but if I'm alone on a street in a rough neighborhood and there are several similar men with him, I probably won't stick around to find out. So the idea that black's IQs (as a group) are limited genetically would inform someone's preconceptions and affect how they treat individuals. If you are black, it would also affect how you view yourself and other blacks.
How wrong he was! Studying how IQ gaps like that closed seems to be a very fruitful research direction. Uz thinks urbanization closed the Irish IQ gap. He may be right, but it could be something else such as smaller families, increased availability of television, older age of the mother at birth---who knows? I think it's very unlikely to be due to improved nutrition as I know of no evidence that the Irish as a group were malnourished at the time. The Uz article has some flaws certainly, but the Irish data is very strong it appears. His critics, from what I can tell, have nibbled as various aspects of his article but the core seems strong. 
