Asian American IQ and income

« The most gorgeous black man in the world

Asian American IQ and income

Tue 25 Jan 2011 by abagond

National IQ estimates from Richard Lynn's "IQ and the Wealth of Nations" (2002)

Some say that Asian Americans are naturally more intelligent than White Americans and therefore make more money on average.

Scientific racists say that it is just North East Asians – the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans – who are like that. Some say it is because only that part of Asia was cold and temperate enough like Europe to evolve higher levels of human intelligence.

This argument goes hand-in-hand with one about blacks: blacks are at the bottom not because of any supposed racism but because they have low IQs. They just do not have what it takes to succeed in a modern, technological society.

The argument does not hold up, not even if you go by the numbers scientific racists use.

Here are the average IQs that Richard Lynn gave in 2002 for different Asian countries. I put in White and Black America for comparison:

106 South Korea
105 Japan
103 White America
100 China
96 Vietnam
89 Cambodia
86 Philippines
85 Black America
81 India

Here are the average temperatures at their capitals in January in Celsius, using the average highs (from weather.com):

1 C: South Korea
1 C: China
9 C: Japan
19 C: Vietnam
21 C: India
30 C: Philippines
31 C: Cambodia

Roughly the same pattern. India and China do better, but that is not surprising: they are large countries with northern capitals. The Philippines is above Cambodia, but their temperatures, like their IQs, are close together.

So we have two kinds of Asians:

Temperate zone Asians: high IQs (100-109): China, Japan, South Korea
Tropical zone Asians: low IQs (80-99): India, Philippines, Cambodia, Vietnam

For comparison, whites come from the temperate zone, as do North Africans, while blacks come from the tropics.

Therefore when Asians come to America we expect to see the Japanese, Koreans and Chinese rise to the top, doing as well as or better than whites. But Filipinos, Indians and Cambodians should all do markedly worse, getting stuck somewhere close to the level of blacks. They just do not have what it takes to succeed in a modern, technological society. The Vietnamese, though, should rise to somewhere between blacks and whites.

So how well do they do in America?

Here are the personal median incomes (from the 2000 US Census):

$26,000 Japan
$26,000 India
$23,640 White America
$23,000 Philippines
$20,000 China
$16,300 Black America
$16,300 South Korea
$16,000 Vietnam
$16,000 Cambodia

Japan, China and Cambodia are roughly where we expect them to be, but the others are way off. Koreans should be at the top – instead they are $300 from the bottom. Indians should be at the bottom, but instead they are tied for the top.

You could reasonably argue that the Vietnamese and Koreans, unlike most of the Chinese, Japanese and blacks, have not been in America long enough to rise to their “natural” positions. But then what about Indians and Filipinos? They should have never passed the Chinese, not even in a hundred years, not if average IQ is what counts most in America. But they did.

Either Lynn’s IQs are way wrong or they are not the main cause of Asian American success and failure. Or both.

See also:

Posted in stuff | 99 Comments

99 Responses

on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 00:58:38 Mel

How many times must people discredit Lynn’s IQ tests before people stop referring to them as authentic?

Here’s Wicherts’ re-testing of the IQ of sub-saharan Africans, that not only discredits Lynn’s test by showing his shady methodology, but also correcting his mistakes.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 00:59:04 Mel

Oops, forgot to add the link:

http://wicherts.socsci.uva.nl/wicherts2009.pdf
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 01:44:24 leigh204

This is kind of funny. When I was in hs, I had fellow classmates (white) look over my shoulder trying to copy my answers. It was so annoying that I would purposely write the wrong answers and then change it afterwards. Mind you, I wasn’t the best student, but I did quite well. Btw, I’m of SE Asian descent (Filipina) so I must’ve been doing something right.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 01:59:09 The Cynic

Using an individually inherited trait and applying it to an entire group of people is nonsense. The 15pt racial IQ gap between blks and whites is no different than the same IQ gap between 1930 white Americans and today’s white Americans. The Burakumin of Japan are the same race/ethnicity as majority Japanese. They are a SOCIAL minority & yet their is an IQ gap of 15pts between them & majority Japanese. It’s the environment dummy! Your height is an inherited trait, but the average height of today is significantly taller than the near past!

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/opinion/09nisbett.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

pg. 308-210
http://books.google.com/books?id=RwMBD5TSMawC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

pg . 270-273(best info)
http://books.google.com/books?id=t9OdPPLIgMAC&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=Burakumin+IQ&source=bl&ots=Llw-ER932p&sig=BQxJaLq4zZ73fpp6h_RPqv-H14c&hl=en&ei=BXwcTNujLIT7lwellMT2DQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CCUQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=Burakumin%20IQ&f=false

Does race exist?
http://www.pbs.org/race/000_General/000_00-Home.htm
http://raceandgenomics.ssrc.org/Lewontin/
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 01:59:16 Randy Garver

Singapore offers an interesting view into IQ and race.

According to a recent chart in The Economist magazine (http://media.economist.com/images/20100703/201027STC756.gif), Singapore has the highest IQ in the world: 108 (average daytime temp: 30C).

This is an amazing feat considering the ethnic demographics:

74.2% Chinese (IQ: 105)
13.4% Malay (IQ: 92)
9.2% Indian (IQ: 82).

Doing the math, the expected IQ of Singapore ought to be just under 98. These numbers are actually a bit generous considering that 20% or so of Malaysians are ethnically Chinese.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 02:22:13 The Cynic

Why do Afro-Caribbeans and Afro Americans have higher IQs on avg than Black Africans if studies have shown Euro admixture does not enhance IQ?

All Brains Are the Same Color
By RICHARD E. NISBETT
Published: December 9, 2007

JAMES WATSON, the 1962 Nobel laureate, recently asserted that he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa”… “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours — whereas all the testing says not really.”

…The first notable public airing of the scientific question came in a 1969 article in The Harvard Educational Review by Arthur Jensen, a psychologist at the University of California, Berkeley. Dr. Jensen maintained that a 15-point difference in I.Q. between blacks and whites was mostly due to a genetic difference between the races that could never be erased. But his argument gave a misleading account of the evidence. And others who later made the same argument — Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray in “The Bell Curve,” in 1994, for example, and just recently, William Saletan in a series of articles on Slate — have made the same mistake.

In fact, the evidence heavily favors the view that race differences in I.Q. are environmental in origin, not genetic.

The hereditarians begin with the assertion that 60 percent to 80 percent of variation in I.Q. is genetically determined. However, most estimates of heritability have been based almost exclusively on studies of middle-class groups. For the poor, a group that includes a substantial proportion of minorities, heritability of I.Q. is very low, in the range of 10 percent to 20 percent, according to recent research by Eric Turkheimer at the University of Virginia. This means that for the poor, improvements in environment have great potential to bring about increases in I.Q.

In any case, the degree of heritability of a characteristic tells us nothing about how much the environment can affect it. Even when a trait is highly heritable (think of the height of corn plants), modifiability can also be great (think of the difference growing conditions can make).

Nearly all the evidence suggesting a genetic basis for the I.Q. differential is indirect. There is, for example, the evidence that brain size is correlated with intelligence, and that blacks have smaller brains than whites. But the brain size difference between men and women is substantially greater than that between blacks and whites, yet men and women score the same, on average, on I.Q. tests. Likewise, a group of people in a community in Ecuador have a genetic anomaly that produces extremely small head sizes — and hence brain sizes. Yet their intelligence is as high as that of their unaffected relatives.

Why rely on such misleading and indirect findings when we have much more direct evidence about the basis for the I.Q. gap? About 25 percent of the genes in the American black population are European, meaning that the genes of any individual can range from 100 percent African to mostly European. If European intelligence genes are superior, then blacks who have relatively more European genes ought to have higher I.Q.’s than those who have more African genes. But it turns out that skin color and “negroidness” of features — both measures of the degree of a black person’s European ancestry — are only weakly associated with I.Q. (even though we might well expect a moderately high association due to the social advantages of such features).

During World War II, both black and white American soldiers fathered children with German women. Thus some of these children had 100 percent European heritage and some had substantial African heritage. Tested in later childhood, the German children of the white fathers were found to have an average I.Q. of 97, and those of the black fathers had an average of 96.5, a trivial difference.

If European genes conferred an advantage, we would expect that the smartest blacks would have substantial European heritage. But when a group of investigators sought out the very brightest black children in the Chicago school system and asked them about the race of their parents and grandparents, these children were found to have no greater degree of European ancestry than blacks in the population at large.

Most tellingly, blood-typing tests have been used to assess the degree to which black individuals have European genes. The blood group assays show no association between degree of European heritage and I.Q. Similarly, the blood groups most closely associated with high intellectual performance among blacks are no more European in origin than other blood groups.

The closest thing to direct evidence that the hereditarians have is a study from the 1970s showing that black children who had been adopted by white parents had lower I.Q.’s than those of mixed-race children adopted by white parents. But, as the researchers acknowledged, the study had many flaws; for instance, the black children had been adopted at a substantially later age than the mixed-race children, and later age at adoption is associated with lower I.Q.

A superior adoption study — and one not discussed by the hereditarians — was carried out at Arizona State University by the psychologist Elsie Moore, who looked at black and mixed-race children adopted by middle-class families, either black or white, and found no difference in I.Q. between the black and mixed-race children. Most telling is Dr. Moore’s finding that children adopted by white families had I.Q.’s 13 points higher than those of children adopted by black families. The environments that even middle-class black children grow up in are not as favorable for the development of I.Q. as those of middle-class whites.

Important recent psychological research helps to pinpoint just what factors shape differences in I.Q. scores. Joseph Fagan of Case Western Reserve University and Cynthia Holland of Cuyahoga Community College tested blacks and whites on their knowledge of, and their ability to learn and reason with, words and concepts…

What do we know about the effects of environment?

That environment can markedly influence I.Q. is demonstrated by the so-called Flynn Effect. James Flynn, a philosopher and I.Q. researcher in New Zealand, has established that in the Western world as a whole, I.Q. increased markedly from 1947 to 2002. In the United States alone, it went up by 18 points. Our genes could not have changed enough over such a brief period to account for the shift; it must have been the result of powerful social factors. And if such factors could produce changes over time for the population as a whole, they could also produce big differences between subpopulations at any given time.

In fact, we know that the I.Q. difference between black and white 12-year-olds has dropped to 9.5 points from 15 points in the last 30 years — a period that was more favorable for blacks in many ways than the preceding era. Black progress on the National Assessment of Educational Progress shows equivalent gains. Reading and math improvement has been modest for whites but substantial for blacks.

Most important, we know that interventions at every age from infancy to college can reduce racial gaps in both I.Q. and academic achievement, sometimes by substantial amounts in surprisingly little time. This mutability is further evidence that the I.Q. difference has environmental, not genetic, causes. And it should encourage us, as a society, to see that all children receive ample opportunity to develop their minds.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 02:42:22 abagond

Mel said:

“Oops, forgot to add the link:

http://wicherts.socsci.uva.nl/wicherts2009.pdf
“

Oh, beautiful!!! I have wanted to do a post on that for the longest time. Thank you!
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 02:43:19 Mel

Nigerian immigrants in the U.S. and Britain have an estimated IQ of 106-110, and they have no European admixture. The

European admixture arguments is only used against blacks. Native Americans have far more European admixture than blacks, and yet no one thinks to suggest their higher IQ–88 is to be credited to white ancestry? Why’s that?Why do Afro-Caribbeans and Afro Americans have higher IQs on avg than Black Africans if studies have shown Euro admixture does not enhance IQ?
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 02:47:50 The Cynic

Traditionally oppressed minorities scoring lower on IQ test is worldwide phenomenon along with the social ills they face(incarceration rates, poverty, lower life expectancies, health, etc.) Some of these groups include: Maori New Zealanders vs Euro-New Zealanders. Israeli Jews outscore Israeli Arabs. Most Japanese outscore the stigmatized SOCIAL minority, the Burakumin(Same race). Those who can hear vs those born deaf(Braden, 1994; Steele, 1990; Zeidner,1990).

It doesn’t have to be contemporary racism causing this per se. It could be a myriad of reasons. Take your pick!

In Table 1- Enrollments by color/race at all levels of schooling – Brazil – 2000 at the 2nd to last page you can see that Blk and Pardo(brown/Mulatto) Brazilians have similar education rates clearly unequal to their White Brazilian counterparts. Yet, genetic studies show Blk Brazilians are only 55%African and 35-40% Euro on avg, Pardos are more Euro than African, and Whites are about 80%Euro, 10% Afro, & 10%Amerindian. Why so much racial inequality in Brazil among non-Whites(Blks & Pardos) and Whites if the non-Whites are Whiter less pure than African Americans?
http://congreso.us.es/cesrea/OKpapers/25%20Rosemary%20DORE%20e%20MOREIRA%20Black%20Movement%20and%20Education%20Brazil.pdf
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2009/11/091102_brazil_black_ap.shtml

So going back to world poverty. Why doesn’t anyone take into account the following: 1)Colonialism. 2)Cold war politics 3)Corruption 4)Multinational corporations and international banking institutions like the IMF and World Bank have exploit the sh*t out of the 3rd world?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0JCJ4pIFEw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdYwAXZh0ME
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/jan/17/patrice-lumumba-50th-anniversary-assassination

Their is a sh*t load of information you can read/watch on this. The first video I posted is the shortest/best explanation of this exploitative system. John Pilger’s, “The New Rulers of the World” is probably the best doc on how Multi-corps & Intl Banks do their evil. I didn’t really believe any of this until my college history teacher confirmed it in a long discussion. This sh*t is NO JOKE. It’s real. Really interesting(and depressing) stuff.

in different eras throughout history different ethnic groups have had golden ages. 25 hundred yrs ago it was the Greeks & Egyptians(currently a 3rd world country), then the Romans. In the eighth and ninth centuries you saw a lot of smart folks in the Arab world; 500yrs ago Northern Europeans and Aztec Indians(fuckin Mexico!), and now East Asia.

How does history explain places like Mexico(where Indians are currently the poorest in society) and Egypt? In the 1960s Japan and West Africa were in the same lvls of development! Difference is they were free to make their own economic decisions(IMF/World Bank!)
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 04:00:23 The Cynic

Oh yeah, while we’re talking about Asians, does anyone want to take a stab at why Koreans have lower IQs within Japanese society?

One of the Google books links I posted(pg270-273) contained this information. Unfortunately they cut off pg272 in the psychology book preview entitled, Race and intelligence: separating science from myth By Jefferson M. Fish. However, on pg 273 it does go on to discuss how Koreans are model minorities in US/Chinese societies(Burakumin also do well in the US), but struggle in Japan where their ancestors were forced laborers under Japanese imperialism. If it can’t be environmental then what is it?

p.s. I really hope anyone that debates me reads every single last link/comment & watches at least a few videos I posted up thread. Especially the links on human genetic variation. Under the ‘Ask the Experts’ tab in the PBS “Race: The Power of an Illusion,” you can ask all the little questions that are bound to come up(aren’t blks better athletes? Can’t you tell race from bones & DNA tests? Sickle cell?) All of that is explained, so don’t ague it out on me.-Damn that was a long post script
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 04:59:23 The Cynic

No takers? Sh*t let me drop a couple of studies on the effects of poverty on IQ.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/opinion/16kristof.html

http://people.virginia.edu/~ent3c/papers2/Articles%20for%20Online%20CV/(38)%20Turkheimer%20et%20al%20(2003).pdf

How To Raise Our I.Q.
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: April 15, 2009

Poor people have I.Q.’s significantly lower than those of rich people, and the awkward conventional wisdom has been that this is in large part a function of genetics.
After all, a series of studies seemed to indicate that I.Q. is largely inherited. Identical twins raised apart, for example, have I.Q.’s that are remarkably similar. They are even closer on average than those of fraternal twins who grow up together.
If intelligence were deeply encoded in our genes, that would lead to the depressing conclusion that neither schooling nor antipoverty programs can accomplish much. Yet while this view of I.Q. as overwhelmingly inherited has been widely held, the evidence is growing that it is, at a practical level, profoundly wrong. Richard Nisbett, a professor of psychology at the University of Michigan, has just demolished this view in a superb new book, “Intelligence and How to Get It,” which also offers terrific advice for addressing poverty and inequality in America.
Professor Nisbett provides suggestions for transforming your own urchins into geniuses — praise effort more than achievement, teach delayed gratification, limit reprimands and use praise to stimulate curiosity — but focuses on how to raise America’s collective I.Q. That’s important, because while I.Q. doesn’t measure pure intellect — we’re not certain exactly what it does measure — differences do matter, and a higher I.Q. correlates to greater success in life.
Intelligence does seem to be highly inherited in middle-class households, and that’s the reason for the findings of the twins studies: very few impoverished kids were included in those studies. But Eric Turkheimer of the University of Virginia has conducted further research demonstrating that in poor and chaotic households, I.Q. is minimally the result of genetics — because everybody is held back.
“Bad environments suppress children’s I.Q.’s,” Professor Turkheimer said.
One gauge of that is that when poor children are adopted into upper-middle-class households, their I.Q.’s rise by 12 to 18 points, depending on the study. For example, a French study showed that children from poor households adopted into upper-middle-class homes averaged an I.Q. of 107 by one test and 111 by another. Their siblings who were not adopted averaged 95 on both tests.
Another indication of malleability is that I.Q. has risen sharply over time. Indeed, the average I.Q. of a person in 1917 would amount to only 73 on today’s I.Q. test. Half the population of 1917 would be considered mentally retarded by today’s measurements, Professor Nisbett says.
Good schooling correlates particularly closely to higher I.Q.’s. One indication of the importance of school is that children’s I.Q.’s drop or stagnate over the summer months when they are on vacation (particularly for kids whose parents don’t inflict books or summer programs on them).
Professor Nisbett strongly advocates intensive early childhood education because of its proven ability to raise I.Q. and improve long-term outcomes. The Milwaukee Project, for example, took African-American children considered at risk for mental retardation and assigned them randomly either to a control group that received no help or to a group that enjoyed intensive day care and education from 6 months of age until they left to enter first grade.
By age 5, the children in the program averaged an I.Q. of 110, compared with 83 for children in the control group. Even years later in adolescence, those children were still 10 points ahead in I.Q.
Professor Nisbett suggests putting less money into Head Start, which has a mixed record, and more into these intensive childhood programs. He also notes that schools in the Knowledge Is Power Program (better known as KIPP) have tested exceptionally well and favors experiments to see if they can be scaled up.
Another proven intervention is to tell junior-high-school students that I.Q. is expandable, and that their intelligence is something they can help shape. Students exposed to that idea work harder and get better grades. That’s particularly true of girls and math, apparently because some girls assume that they are genetically disadvantaged at numbers; deprived of an excuse for failure, they excel.
“Some of the things that work are very cheap,” Professor Nisbett noted. “Convincing junior-high kids that intelligence is under their control — you could argue that that should be in the junior-high curriculum right now.”
The implication of this new research on intelligence is that the economic-stimulus package should also be an intellectual-stimulus program. By my calculation, if we were to push early childhood education and bolster schools in poor neighborhoods, we just might be able to raise the United States collective I.Q. by as much as one billion points.
That should be a no-brainer.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 06:09:18 King

@ The Cynic

The largest collection of HBD numbskull arguments can be found here:

http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/07/04/steve-sailer/

and here:

http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/07/04/steve-sailer/

Happy hunting!
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 06:09:57 tulio

The problem with looking at IQs and income of immigrants to the U.S. and Europe is that immigrants aren’t always a representative cross section of their country. You’re more likely to be granted the right to immigrate if you have an education and job skills. That’s why we hear talk of “the brain drain” effect of the best and brightest in the developing world moving to the West.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 06:23:38 Eurasian Sensation

@ Randy Garver:

These numbers are actually a bit generous considering that 20% or so of Malaysians are ethnically Chinese.

It’s a minor detail, but you are getting mixed up between Malay and Malaysian (a very common confusion). A Malaysian is someone from Malaysia, of any ethnicity. A Malay is someone of a particular ethnic group indigenous to Malaysia. Singapore is 13.4% ethnic Malay.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 06:33:14 The Cynic

When someone is ready to debate MY ARGUMENTS, then I will be ready to reply… actually nvm. I think I have all of the information laid out pretty well. If your too lazy to go through it and seriously ask yourself why their is so much contradictory evidence towards Rushton, Hernnstein, Murray, Jenson et al., then that is your problem. I’ve argued enough over this. At the end of the day this world and all of its societies are going to have the same problems concerning race, inequality, hatred, ignorance. I can go on, but you get the point. It’s a f*cked up world and its not gonna get any better. Too many people are just unwilling to learn
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 06:40:58 Eurasian Sensation

The high performance of Indians in America is based on two things.
Firstly, Indian culture is very aspirational and prizes education and high-status jobs.
Secondly, the Indians who emigrate are disproportionally from a middle-to-high status social class. It’s not representative of the whole Indian population.
These well-to-do classes place the highest emphasis on education, which feeds into the first factor.

Given that it’s easier to stay put in the social ladder than move up, that may explain the difference between Indians and say, the Cambodians and Vietnamese. Refugee immigration often draws from all levels of society, whereas skilled/business/student migration often brings in the best and brightest. I think you’d see a similar difference if you compared Sudanese or Rwandans (primarily war refugees) with Nigerians or Ghanaians, who are migrating on their own terms and are more likely to be comparitively well-to-do in their homeland.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 06:56:58 The Cynic

@Eurasian

Do you have any information on the Indian diaspora that doesn’t hail from a higher social status? I am speaking of places like South Africa, Trinidad & Tobago, Guyana, & all of the Caribbean really. Places where the British migrated Indians for indentured servitude.

I remember reading a Time article that reported Indo & Chinese minorities in Malaysia are wealthier than Malays & other indigenous folk. Here’s a tiny excerpt:

Though the Malays and other indigenous peoples, together known as bumiputra in Malay, make up about 60% of the population, they have traditionally been poorer than the Chinese and Indian immigrants, who have long dominated the nation’s business and trade.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2013695,00.html#ixzz1CP8yVe5G

p.s. I personally don’t know much about the socio-economic history of Malaysia. Didn’t even fully re-read the whole article I just posted.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 07:22:38 The Cynic

@King

I couldn’t find a single piece of information that proved me wrong. This was a pretty useful quote tho…

Nita
The problem with Black people is that we give too much energy to people, places and things that work against us. Like my father use to say, if you see crazy coming cross the street! Just keep putting out positive energy out there. Even if it’s in the form of blogs.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 08:48:25 The Cynic

@King… once again

Sorry. If you couldn’t tell already I had a little bit of trouble figuring out what HBD meant while thinking you might have been one. I tried my best to make my last comment towards you sound as ambiguous and cold as possible(just in case you were an HDBr).
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 09:18:18 abagond

HBD = human biodiversity.

In the post HBDers are called “scientific racists” since that would make sense to more people than “HBDers”.

More here:

http://abagond.wordpress.com/2010/12/29/hbd/
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 10:41:25 Eurasian Sensation

@ Cynic:
I don’t have that info unfortunately. I’m sure its out there.

Regarding Malaysia… it’s a bit complicated, but what you say is basically correct. Chinese are the wealthiest group. Indians as a whole also do well although there are a lot of poor Indians too. (It varies a little between Indian ethnic groups as well.) In the early days of independent Malaysia, Malays were lagging economically, which is why an affirmative action policy was introduced to give them a wide range of benefits. However, today it is an extremely divisive policy, particularly because it was only meant to be a short-term measure until the playing field was levelled, but also because it gives too many benefits to rich Malays who don’t need the help.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 10:51:59 Uncle Milton

To The Cynic:

Oh yeah, while we’re talking about Asians, does anyone want to take a stab at why Koreans have lower IQs within Japanese society?

Sure… I know a little about the Japanese of Korean decent (which my friend considers herself and not a Korean who happened to grow up in Japan..) I see that the data was taken from 1973. At that time people who called themselves Korean often went to entirely separate schools than the general Japanese populace. (A Korean person who assimilates into Japanese society takes a Japanese name and gives up any claims to Korean (North or South) citizenship and would attend Japanese schools and be expected to be Japanese…) Their prime instruction was in Korean and their learning materials often did not run parallel to the mainstream Japanese society. My question would be… was this a true culturally neutral test.. (as far as that goes)? or something more akin the American SAT which presumes a strong familiarity to the American learning system? I strongly suspect the latter. If that were the case I would surprised if there wasn’t a gap.

The claim has also been made about the Northern Ireland Catholics vs. the Protestants.. (Wherein supposedly the Catholics did much worse on IQ tests than the Protestants…this has been blamed on the Protestants as being an oppressive group) but I know in that case… the data came not from actual IQ tests but from A Levels which were specifically designed for the British education system. The Protestants had a British style education system whereas the Catholics had the Southern Irish style education system. There was raging debate in the 1970s in Ireland as to why the Irish school system could turn out so many poets and musicians but so few Engineers like the Northern Irish Protestants. Ireland reformed it’s school curriculum to tun out what they considered more practical degrees.. Engineers, Computer Programmers, and Medical personnel…it paid off Ireland in the 80 and 90s had the one of the fastest growing GDPs in Europe and was dubbed the Celtic Tiger.

So basically I question the data and it’s interpretation that you cited. It’s doesn’t necessarily means it is wrong.. but I don’t feel I have been given enough information to agree with the author’s conclusion and I know of an example (Northern Ireland..) where the same claim was made.. but their data did not come from IQ tests but from a test that was based upon a system that was quite different from the Northern Irish Catholic education system at that time.

That said the authors of “IQ and the Wealth of Nations” at multiple points just basically made up what they thought (by their own admission..) was the national IQ…I mean Huh..? The figures for Vietnam..? they just averaged the countries around it. China..? Their data sample was pathetically small.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 11:07:04 Uncle Milton

To Cynic:

No takers? Sh*t let me drop a couple of studies on the effects of poverty on IQ.

I was surprised that Nisbett used one reference.. his other data might be ok.. but I personally would never cite the Milwaukee project.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milwaukee_Project#Controversy

“Controversy
The Milwaukee Project’s claimed success was celebrated in the popular media and by famous psychologists. However, later in the project Rick Heber, the principal investigator, was discharged from the University of Wisconsin–Madison and convicted and imprisoned for large-scale abuse of federal funding for private gain. Two of Heber’s colleagues in the project were also convicted for similar abuses. The project’s results were not published in any refereed scientific journals, and Heber did not respond to requests from colleagues for raw data and technical details of the study. Consequently, even the existence of the project as described by Heber has been called into question. Nevertheless, many college textbooks in psychology and education have uncritically reported the project’s results.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 11:40:17 Uncle Milton

To The Cynic:

Israeli Jews outscore Israeli Arabs.
True, but in Israel, Ashkenazi Jews (Jews who descended from the Jewish communities of the Europe) have higher IQs than Mizrahi Jews (Jews descended from the Jewish communities of the Middle East, North Africa)

The irony is that Ashkenazi Jews had markedly higher persecution in Europe than Mizrahi Jews had in their host countries of the Middle East and North Africa and hereditarians claim the higher Ashkenazim IQ is related to that persecution.
(By basically being forced into “Brainy” professions such as being merchants, money lending. and conversely restricted from more mundane professions such as farming…)

I would wonder about the Maronite Christian communities of Lebanon versus Lebanese Muslims. Lebanese Christians have outperformed as business people in Latin America (Most notably Carlos Slim (Salem) in Mexico.. the richest man in the world.. and Carlos Ghosn a Brazilian of Lebanese decent who is now CEO of Renault and Nissan..)
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 12:00:42 abagond

Uncle Milton said:

“China..? Their data sample was pathetically small.”

Can you elaborate on that or point me to a source? His IQs for the Chinese always struck me as pure snake oil.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 12:40:20 Uncle Milton

To Abagond:

Can you elaborate on that or point me to a source? His IQs for the Chinese always struck me as pure snake oil.

I’ll see if I can find it again.. as I remember…they actually cite their sources in the book.. since the book is $102.95 on Amazon.. I was not inclined to buy so I am sure it on a blog somewhere. Rob Lindsay and I were having an argument about the book for about 4 weeks.

From Wikipedia there is this (which you may have seen…)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations#National_IQ_estimates

For 104 of the 185 nations, no studies were available. In those cases, the authors have used an estimated value by taking averages of the IQs of neighboring or comparable nations….”

So in other words.. over half the time they were just guessing…

In some cases, the IQ of a country is estimated by averaging the IQs of countries that are not actually neighbors of the country in question. For example, Kyrgyzstan’s IQ is estimated by averaging the IQs of Iran and Turkey, neither of which is close to Kyrgyzstan—China, which is a geographic neighbor, is not counted as such by Lynn and Vanhanen. This is presumably because the ethnic groups of the area speak Iranian and Turkic languages, but do not include Chinese.

Apparently the people of Kyrgyzstan genetically (Since the premise of the book is heavily weighted toward the idea that IQ is genetic..) are basically a mix Mongols and Uzbeks.. so assigning them an IQ that is an average of Iranians and Turks.. seems ridiculous.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 14:14:33 Giveaway

Most learned friends explain this to me, I have an iq of 112 andiam in line to inherit real estate and agriculture esate worth .$ 432 000 000 . But aim not following in the family business and. Have given up my shares and benefits , aim a missionary in south east Yemen preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. Have I made the best decision . Is their not more to life than the accqumulation of wealth and status
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 15:54:33 Randy Garver

Eurasian Sensation,

We’re actually on the same page here, I think.

I was poking fun at the HBD model of IQ using Singapore as the example. In that paradigm, the expected IQ of Singapore should actually be lower than 98 because the IQ number for Malaysia also includes the allegedly smarter Chinese along with ethnic Malays, so the fraction of Singaporeans who are ethnically Malay would then contribute a lower IQ than that of Malaysians as a whole.
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 20:57:05 The Cynic

@Uncle Milton

Are you saying that you believe these test were cultural biased against Korean descended Japanese and Irish Catholics?

Do you know anything about the Burakumin in Japan? They are the same race/ethnicity than majority Japanese. A social minority that aren’t visually different than majority Japanese, however, they still face discrimination. I’m not sure if this is still done know, but their have been cases where employers have hired detectives to figure out if prospective employees were Burakumin or not. Here is a link on their plight along with a two short excerpts:

A 35-year-old study in Japan found that buraku children had lower I.Q.’s than non-buraku children in the same public schools. Scholars who examined the data say the differences reflect general apathy and lack of self-esteem, a result of discrimination and contempt from society as a whole.

Yet Japan has not overcome its divide. For if the three million burakumin, amounting to a bit more than 2 percent of the population, are now rarely burdened by overt discrimination, they face the same problems as some minority groups in America: disproportionate poverty, high crime rates, low education levels, many single mothers, dependency on welfare benefits and resentment from a public that believes they are getting special help.

The issues are those that Americans associate with race; in Japan the burakumin are not a different race at all.

They are an occupational minority group rather than a racial one. Indistinguishable in appearance from other Japanese, they were discriminated against simply because they were the descendants of people whose jobs were considered ritually unclean, like butchering animals, tanning skins, making leather goods, digging graves and handling corpses.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01E7DB1139F933A05752C1A963958260&fta=y&pagewanted=1
on Sat 29 Jan 2011 at 22:32:27 The Cynic

@being merchants, money lending.

To me all this means is that they had economic control of their own destiny. Of course Ashkenazim were subject to PERSONAL racism, but luckily they weren’t subject to economic discrimination, and the social ills that arise from that form of oppression, like so many other traditionally oppressed minority groups around the world. Unfortunately for the Ashkenazim they didn’t have much political control during Hitler’s Germany. I don’t think I have to go in to how that ended up. Question is, are they subject to institutional racism in Israel? Who controls all of the powerful institutions(schools, gvmnt, businesses, courts) there?

Feel free to take all of what I stated and apply it to the Jewish diaspora in America(not in an antisemitic way plz).
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 04:24:18 Uncle Milton

To The Cynic:
Are you saying that you believe these test were cultural biased against Korean descended Japanese and Irish Catholics?

What I know about the Irish data is that it was taken from A levels and not IQ tests. EG they were testing knowledge…the Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland had substantially different school systems and the Protestant schools were geared for the A levels whereas the Catholic schools were not. I suspect the same would apply to the situation with Koreans in Japan (A test based upon knowledge geared for the mainstream Japanese and not the Koreans who had a separate school system am most of their instruction in Korean, not Japanese..) but I do not know that for sure since the study is from 1973 and does not clarify how they collected the date.

(not in an antisemitic way plz).
My father was born Jew but converted to Christianity, also I have a daughter who is an observant Jew, so I am disinclined to make anti-semitic remarks.

To me all this means is that they had economic control of their own destiny. Of course Ashkenazim were subject to PERSONAL racism, but luckily they weren’t subject to economic discrimination..

There is a more than 1000 year history of Jews in Europe wherein Jews were alternately welcome and condemned over time…I could go on … but it would be rather off topic ..
suffice to say Jews, depending upon the time and country, were restricted from certain employment, living quarters, and even the number of children they could have.

I’ll provide these links and move on:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_Europe_(Middle_Ages)#The_expulsions_from_England.2C_France.2C_Germany.2C_Portugal_and_Spain
http://www.ushmm.org/research/center/church/persecution/medieval.html

Do you know anything about the Burakumin in Japan?

Only the few articles I have read… the article cites one study from 50 years ago. (since the article you pasted from the NY Times is from 1995 and is citing a study from 35 years before..) We are not told what the sample size of the Burakumin were.. if they were actually given culturally neutral IQ tests, nor if there were controls for the family income levels of the Burakumin vs the non-Burakumin.
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 04:25:03 Uncle Milton

“My father was born Jew but converted to Christianity”

should read as

“My father was born a Jew but converted to Christianity”
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 04:36:18 Uncle Milton

To The Cynic:

A superior adoption study — and one not discussed by the hereditarians — was carried out at Arizona State University by the psychologist Elsie Moore, who looked at black and mixed-race children adopted by middle-class families, either black or white, and found no difference in I.Q. between the black and mixed-race children. Most telling is Dr. Moore’s finding that children adopted by white families had I.Q.’s 13 points higher than those of children adopted by black families. The environments that even middle-class black children grow up in are not as favorable for the development of I.Q. as those of middle-class whites.

I found that the study covered 23 White and 23 Black families… what I am curious about was why White families could raise Black children to have IQs that are 13 points higher than Black families. Ms. Moore described the families (Black & White) as being Middle Class so issues of poverty shouldn’t matter. What is happening in the White households that drives the IQs of Black children so much higher…? Note also that Black and White children’s iqs are fairly close when they are young but the gap widens as they approach adulthood. (this study was done when the children were between 7 and 10..) I would hope Ms. Moore will be doing a follow up on the children when they hit 21.
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 04:52:57 Uncle Milton

To The Cynic:

Question is, are they subject to institutional racism in Israel? Who controls all of the powerful institutions(schools, gvmnt, businesses, courts) there?

I don’t have a good answer to that question… I have read a few articles that claim that there is prejudice against Mizrahi Jews whereas other Mizrahi state that it is over blown and point to a 40% intermarriage rate. In Israel Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews out number Ashenazi Jews by about 20%. However Ashenazi have incomes, on average about 30% than Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews and it is often easy to tell Mizrahi and Ashenazi jews apart by both name and appearance.
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 05:11:08 Uncle Milton

“However Ashenazi have incomes, on average about 30% than Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews..”

should read

“However Ashenazi have incomes, on average about 30% higher than Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews”
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 05:41:27 The Cynic

@Uncle Milton

-Please don’t think I am trying to make the Jewish experience in Europe seem less harsh than it already was. I am just saying that in Germany one of the reasons they were resented is bc they were perceived as having a disproportionate amount of control in banks & other businesses. If they faced any past discrimination in the workplace it seems as if they overcame this prior to the Holocaust.

-They face the same problems as some minority groups in America: disproportionate poverty, high crime rates, low education levels, many single mothers, dependency on welfare benefits and resentment from a public that believes they are getting special help.

I think it is okay to assume Burakumin have lower IQs on avg than majority Japanese…

-”what I am curious about was why White families could raise Black children to have IQs that are 13 points higher than Black families.”

My guess was cultural differences when it comes to an emphasis on education. You’ve heard of Amy Chua’s controversial “Tiger Mom” article right? Although another important question to ask would be what kind of neighborhoods did the Black & White families live in.

For instance, one study of 1,450 Virginia schools found that schools w/ a lot of poverty-lvl children often have less qualified teachers. Even after controlling for poverty, having less qualified teachers predicted lower achievement scores.

I also remember a report last year that claimed that even White families similar in jobs, social class, and wealth are five times richer than their Blacks counterparts.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/17/white-people-95000-richer-black

I’m not sure if that might have something to do with the study, but I might as well through that out there.
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 05:44:31 The Cynic

@Uncle Milton

*I also remember a report last year that claimed that even White families similar in jobs, social class, and INCOME are five times richer than their Blacks counterparts.

Excuse my mistake
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 07:14:10 sam

Are the americans for real with this IQ test crap? Still believe in it? That is so funny. Check out what that test tests and come back to talk about its meanings and implications, cultural connotations and such. Funny indeed.

Like I said before, the signifigance of IQ test is big only in US because you have so much racists over there. They need a tool to operate.

And one funny thing about that map: Australia seems to be on top class. Well, since there is no explanation for that other than the fact we must conclude that aborginals, who are black by the way, are on this top IQ class too! Right, you racist summovabetzes??
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 20:17:53 Uncle Milton

To Sam:

Are the americans for real with this IQ test crap?
Like I said before, the signifigance of IQ test is big only in US because you have so much racists over there.

The book being discussed in this thread (which I would agree has many issues..) was written by an Irish man Richard Lynn and his coauthor Tatu Vanhanen, a Finn who is the father of Matti Vanhanen who was the Finnish prime minister from June 2003 to June 2010. So it would appear, Finnish Sam, such notions are not just an American phenomenon.
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 21:26:55 Mel

This is not shocking. I am not surprised that biracial people who are the most successful tend to be raised by their white family members in white neighborhoods. Case in point: Pres. Obama.

I think cultural influences may be a factor. The so-called “black” culture of the U.S. is not really positive or conducive to education/learning. White families are more likely to encourage eating healthy, music lessons, dance lessons, etc among children than black families, for example. All these things contribute to higher learning outcomes in students. Most telling is Dr. Moore’s finding that children adopted by white families had I.Q.’s 13 points higher than those of children adopted by black families. The environments that even middle-class black children grow up in are not as favorable for the development of I.Q. as those of middle-class whites.
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 21:53:36 sam

@uncle milton:
Tatu Vanhanen, yeah. The guy is known here as the nutty professor. He also said that africans are stupid because they thicker skulls and other such scientific gems. His son, the prime minister who is now under investigation in the biggest corruption scandal in the history of Finland, did his best to distance himself from his scandalous racist dad when old man opened his mouth.

So good try uncle, but does not work. Nobody up here took this guy or his “work” seriously. We know that americans and some boers did, though.

And like I said, if that map is true, then aborginals are among the geniuses because they live in Australia too !!
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 22:07:51 FG

Here’s a little bit of informal research on the international popularity of “HBD”:

http://www.google.com/insights/search/#q=the%20bell%20curve%2C%20Charles%20Murray%2CRichard%20Lynn&cmpt=q

Based on the search volumes for these phrases, HBD is most popular in the US, but also has a significant following in the rest of the Anglosphere.
on Sun 30 Jan 2011 at 23:52:01 Herneith

His son, the prime minister who is now under investigation in the biggest corruption scandal in the history of Finland, did his best to distance himself from his scandalous racist dad when old man opened his mouth.

The genius son outsmarted himself! You see, there is advantages to being dumb!
on Mon 31 Jan 2011 at 01:07:29 Uncle Milton

To Sam:

So good try uncle, but does not work. Nobody up here took this guy or his “work” seriously. We know that americans and some boers did, though.

Well Sam, I have encountered a number of Europeans who love to point fingers at the US while ignoring their own nutty people, as you say, within their home countries. The fact remains that the coauthor was the father of a man who was elected Prime minister by the Finnish people more than once. We have no present equivalent in the US. Offbeat websites notwithstanding I don’t think most Americans think about IQ and race very often nor do I believe that’s the case for Finns.

That said I think it’s quite reasonable to debate the drawbacks of IQ tests. I suggest we stick with that instead of insulting each other’s countries.
on Mon 31 Jan 2011 at 02:01:21 Uncle Milton

To The Cynic:

My guess was cultural differences when it comes to an emphasis on education. You’ve heard of Amy Chua’s controversial “Tiger Mom” article right? Although another important question to ask would be what kind of neighborhoods did the Black & White families live in.

For instance, one study of 1,450 Virginia schools found that schools w/ a lot of poverty-lvl children often have less qualified teachers. Even after controlling for poverty, having less qualified teachers predicted lower achievement scores.

Yes I have read reviews of Amy Chua’s book and her blog post on the Wall Street Journal (and almost brought it up in a previous post on this thread..) and have read her previous book, World on Fire, which discusses market dominant minorities (which is the flip side of our discussion about the Burakumin and Koreans in Japan..) and their relationship with their host countries. I am not sure what I think of her parenting methods, I would have to read her book, but some of her actions seem quite harsh and a bit self serving. On the several Asian blogs that I follow there was a collective groan about her book and a great deal of ambivalence and some angst about the book. It should be noted that Ms. Chua has stated that she doesn’t know how to relax and enjoy life. (On the other hand when I see parents treating their children like friends or basically being their taxi service to soccer etc… I basically groan inside..)

Since I am White, I don’t think I am qualified to discuss whether Black families and neighborhoods are holding back Black children intellectually. I can say that West Virginia Whites, who place last in the nation on standardized tests compared to Whites in every other state, have a pretty strong resistance to “book learning”. As for Jews, who generally outperform…. well .. against all other Whites.. have a very strong culture of learning. There’s also tremendous pressure to succeed academically and/or financially. My paternal grandmother (who was my closest grandparent..) started crying at a Thanksgiving dinner in front of 10 of my relatives (who all stared at me..) when I told her I was not going to pursue a graduate degree or Med school. The message was basically that by stopping at a 4 year college degree I was failing the family. Successful drop outs like Larry Ellison (founder of Oracle..) are given a pass.
on Mon 31 Jan 2011 at 08:45:35 sam

@uncle milton: no disrespect intented. My target is racists, not americans on the whole. Like I’ve said, been there and lived there twice etc. Love the food, music, land, cities, some women, liked the people mostly etc. It is some politicians and dumbs I do not like. But it same over here. We have our dumbs and dumbers too, like this Tatu Vanhanen and hi son and then some.

His son, Matti Vanhanen, was not elected twice by the people. His party chose him as a replacement after the previous primeminister from the same party was forced to resign after a poltical scandal. He lead the party to an elections defeat but party held its place among the biggest parties so he retained his place. Actually during his role as the party leader, his party lost both national and municipal election everytime, albeit the losses were small enough fot him to remain in position. He resigned because of all the corruption accusations and suspicions, police investigations etc. He claimed that his leg hurt! For real…
on Mon 31 Jan 2011 at 10:08:12 Uncle Milton

To Sam:

uncle milton: no disrespect intented. My target is racists, not americans on the whole.

Fair enough.. sorry for misunderstanding you.
on Mon 31 Jan 2011 at 10:15:35 Uncle Milton

To FG:

Based on the search volumes for these phrases, HBD is most popular in the US, but also has a significant following in the rest of the Anglosphere.

I don’t know if you would classify this under HBD but China’s government is funding a project to determine how much genes are a part of IQ:

http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/post.aspx?bid=354&bpid=26101

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/27/AR2010062703639.html

Then there is this:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/08/03/china.dna.children.ability/

Given the information that is available in English I would wonder about discussions on Chinese language blogs and bulletin boards.
on Tue 1 Feb 2011 at 14:03:14 JOE

So the people with the lowest IQ are joint leaders in the median pay stakes! No wonder America is slipping economically.
on Thu 3 Feb 2011 at 02:41:31 Dr. Grzlickson

“Like I said before, the signifigance of IQ test is big only in US because you have so much racists over there.”

*significance*. So *many* racists. I can see why you dislike IQ tests.
on Thu 3 Feb 2011 at 03:54:19 FG

Many on this blog argue that the US is fundamentally a white/non-white society. Being white or not is the most important distinction and only those of essentially pure European stock are considered socially mainstream. Others say that the fundamental division is between blacks and everyone else. Those who are at least part black (or of African American slave ancestry) suffer a stigma that prevents them from assimilating into mainstream culture as everyone else does.

Though there is truth to both these perspectives, it seems to me that the reality is more somwhere in between these extremes. For whatever reason (immigrant selectivity, culture, etc), large segments of the Asian population are capable of competing successfuly against whites in the educational sector and the economy. Consequently, Asians are viewed by many whites as being on the same social plane as them and this leads to high rates of intermarriage. On the other hand, blacks and Hispanics are nowhere near as successful in educational and career endeavors and are looked down upon by whites for this reason (especially blacks).
on Thu 10 Feb 2011 at 15:23:50 Doug1

Abagond–

Scientific racists say that it is just north-east Asians – the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans – who are like that, because only that part of Asia was cold and temperate enough like Europe to evolve higher levels of human intelligence.

No what race realists say is that NE Asians have higher IQ’s because that’s what IQ tests have shown. BTW, the advantage is entirely in math/visiospatial abilities, not verbal/logical. Some tests show them coming in slightly lower the Euro origin people/whites on verbal/logical in fact.

As to the theory that the reason for the difference is colder temperatures, that’s only one theory for why the differentiation occurred from tropical peoples, who do tend to be less intelligent.

Another is early agriculture, cities and role specialization. Keep in mind that until very recently, with birth control and high costs of raising kids, the well off had a good lot more children who themselves survived long enough to have children. I’m sure you and your gathering are smart enough to understand the evolutionary impact of that.
on Thu 10 Feb 2011 at 15:50:44 Doug1

Abagond—

Ever since IQ tests have been given in the US, the black average has been 85—a full 15 points [or one standard deviation] below the white average.

There is a lot of overlap, of course, and some blacks are smarter than most whites. But while 50 percent of whites have IQs over 100, only 16 percent of blacks do. Likewise, whites are 20 times more likely than blacks to have IQs of 130 or higher.

One of the best-established facts in the social sciences—and something that is obvious to everyone—is that people with high IQs tend to do better in school and better in life than people with low IQs.

Clapping and chanting in church has nothing to do with it.

The evidence that racial differences in IQ are at least partly genetic is overwhelming, despite the outraged shrieks that greet anyone who points this out. (As the James Watson affair shows, the shrieks have become so hysterical we can be sure the guardians of orthodoxy are less sure of their position than ever.)

There is something else the hand-wringers should think about: regression to the mean, or the tendency for natural phenomena to draw back from extremes towards the average.

***

Francis Galton noted in the 1860s that geniuses’ children are smart, but they usually aren’t geniuses. Likewise, dummies tend to have children smarter than themselves.

Regression is only a tendency, however. Occasionally parents at the extremes produce children who are even more extreme. But that is rare. The more extreme the parents are, the stronger the pullback towards the mean. [Regression to the mean is clearly a genetic phenomenon.]

***

Among blacks, IQ regresses to a mean of 85 rather than 100. So a black who has a high enough IQ to be comfortably middle class—say 120—is much further out toward the IQ extreme for his group than a white with an IQ of 120. Which means the pull towards the mean is much more powerful for the children of smart blacks than it is for the children of equally smart whites.

Put differently, if you match black parents and white parents for IQ, the black-white IQ gap for the children increases sharply as the parents’ IQs go up.

And that, Mr. O’Connell, is why the black-white test score gap is greater for the children of rich parents than it is for poor parents. It may be a rotten shame, but it is just plain harder for middle-class blacks than for whites to pass on their intelligence—and therefore their social status—to their children.

In his book, The g Factor, [Page 471] Arthur Jensen gives a striking example of regression to the mean. He collected the IQ scores of all the elementary school students in one California school district. He then picked out all the students—both black and white—with IQs of 120, a score well above the white mean but even further above the black mean. He found that the average IQ scores for the brothers and sisters of these children was 113 for the white children and 99 for the blacks.

It was to be expected that siblings have lower IQs than the hotshots. But these figures show just how much more freakish it is for black than white children to have IQs of 120. These very smart blacks were, on average, 21 points ahead of their brothers and sisters; the whites were only seven points ahead.

http://www.vdare.com/taylor/071113_stumped.htm

The theory that minds are blank slates and that all differences in intelligence arise out of environmental and cultural differences, first said to mainly be related to the social and economic status of the parents, is Marxist in origin and has NEVER been well supported by the scientific evidence. Instead it’s been an ideological claim, that was made into a politically correct moral demand taboo to challenge, by the New Left aka cultural Marxists, in the 60s.

Yes culture does have some bearing, especially at extremes of deprivation, all hereditarians agree. But genes likely account for 50-80% of both individual and group differences in intelligence, based upon studies that have addressed this issue. (Note the vast preponderance of research has tried to find the environmental/cultural factors which could account for the differences, largely unsuccessfully.)
on Fri 11 Feb 2011 at 06:12:12 The Cynic

“But genes likely account for 50-80% of both individual and group differences in intelligence, based upon studies that have addressed this issue.”

This statement is false. If genes accounted for 50-80% of GROUP IQ differences White American intelligence would not have grown as much as it has over time.

“If genetic influences help explain individual diversity traits such as aggressiveness, can the same be said of group differences between men and women , or between people of different races? Not necessarily. Individual differences in height and weight, for example, are HIGHLY inheritable; yet nutritional rather than genetic influences explain why, as a group, today’s adults are taller and heavier than those of a century ago. The two groups differ, but not because human genes have changed in a mere century’s eyeblink of time.

As with height and weight, so with personality and intelligence scores: Heritable individual differences need not imply heritable group differences.”(Myers 138-139)

Myers, David G. Psychology 9th Edition In Modules. New York: Worth Publishers, 2010. Print.
on Fri 11 Feb 2011 at 08:11:49 abagond

@ The Cynic:

Excellent example. Thanks.

@ Doug1:

You said:

“No what race realists say is that NE Asians have higher IQ’s because that’s what IQ tests have shown.”

This shows not just a profound misunderstanding of White American racism, but even of human nature.

Sure, there are some honest souls in America who move from fact to belief when it comes to race. There are even those whose experience and knowledge is not wide enough to question what they have been told by parents, friends, teachers, CNN and Jared Taylor. Like 17-year-old girls and sheltered white men. But MOST whites proceed from the racism they have been brought up in to whatever facts seem to support it, not the other way round. It is not just racism – most beliefs work the very same way.

I am no different in that regard. The only reason I question White American racism is not because I read some book or government study, but because it works to my disadvantage.
on Fri 11 Feb 2011 at 08:50:19 abagond

Doug1:

1. I do not know of anyone who believes intelligence is 0% genetic. So rants against that position are beside the point.

2. Given the Flynn Effect, it is laughable to argue that the observed differences in IQ scores between races are mostly genetic.

If white people or North East Asians or anyone truly had some kind of genetic edge in intelligence, then they would have been the most advanced humans not just for a few hundred years here and there in history, but throughout the past 5,000 if not 30,000 years.

Africans were the last ones to have that kind of edge. Only we do not call them Africans: we call them Homo sapiens. They are us.
on Fri 11 Feb 2011 at 09:34:28 The Cynic

@Doug1

Just in case you didn’t understand that example, this is what I want you to do. Put 1930 Euro Americans in one group and then put today’s Euro Americans in another. Now ask yourself, why the group difference? According to your claim that 50-80% of group differences in intelligence are bc of genetics the only logical explanation is that their genes changed in such a short amount of time.
on Fri 11 Feb 2011 at 10:12:27 abagond

Doug1 said:

“As to the theory that the reason for the difference is colder temperatures, that’s only one theory for why the differentiation occurred from tropical peoples, who do tend to be less intelligent.”

Thanks for the correction.
on Fri 11 Feb 2011 at 15:50:58 Doug1

The Cynic–

As with height and weight, so with personality and intelligence scores: Heritable individual differences need not imply heritable group differences.”(Myers 138-139)

This is logically possible but very unlikely.

Or it’s logically possible at a distance, when you don’t know much about genetics and evolution.

So effectively, applying scientific standards, not that’s not true.
on Fri 11 Feb 2011 at 15:55:55 Doug1

abagond

@Doug1:–1. I do not know of anyone who believes intelligence is 0% genetic. So rants against that position are beside the point.

Then you don’t know very many elite intellectuals. Tons of them, especially for public consumption, claim that mental differences between individuals baring unfortunate accidents of defect and especially between racial groups are not at all biological, but instead entirely historical, cultural and environmental (wealth, nutrition, schooling, etc.).

Or at least they say this for public consumption. Most don’t tend to actually entirely believe it.
on Fri 11 Feb 2011 at 16:13:50 Doug1

Abagond, Cynic–

Basically the Flynn effect is the ONLY piece of evidence the radical environmentalists/culturalists have going for them. Other bits of evidence they’ve trotted up have been debunked, such as the small study of the illegitimate children raised in Germany of allied solders, “black” and white and white German women, during the occupation.

There is evidence that the Flynn effect has stopped. It seems to operate more on the lowest IQ segment of developed country populations. They may have been helped by better nutrition. Vitamins and essential nutrients such as iron and trace amounts of iodine for preventing cretinism. As well the greater complexity and choices of modern life, and teaching more to solve puzzles than memorize lots of material may also have contributed.

Yes these are all environmental effects. But the black white gap in IQ in the US hasn’t narrowed over the last 100 years, or has only narrowed by 2-3 IQ points around the 70s to the current 15 different. (Note the left often claims that IQ is still narrowing lots by mixing ages at which IQ tests are taken. The gap is narrower at younger ages. For one thing blacks mature more quickly than whites, who mature more quickly than NE Asians.)

When I said that I thought 50-80% of the black/white IQ gap was genetic in origin, I could have elaborated and said under current American environmental conditions. (Endless elaboration becomes cumbersome. I tend if anything to do it too much.) Our poorest poor have TV’s and phones and decent nutrition, if they aren’t addicted to something they allow to suck most of their money.

If environmental deficits are severe enough, they’ll account for way more than 50% of a stupid person’s gap in IQ from the average. However people misunderstand what matters the most. Yeah some nutrients matter a lot. Being locked in a room or steel box, or growing up as a wild child in a forest and somehow surviving in solitary confinement from a young age or worse before leaning to speak is devestating for intelligence.

So too are certain genetic defects.

So extreme deficits on either the environmental or genetic side will by way more than 50% part of the lowered IQ.

Capiche?
on Sat 12 Feb 2011 at 07:21:02 The Cynic

@Doug1

“Other bits of evidence they’ve trotted up have been debunked, such as the small study of the illegitimate children raised in Germany of allied solders, “black” and white and white German women, during the occupation.”

You claimed this has been debunked, yet you provide no proof. The children were half African American and half German. Even if that one study was found to be incorrect I still provided plenty of other evidence that destroys the admixture argument and puts a dent into this entire race & IQ theory. Please explain Caribbean Blks and AAs have higher IQs than continental Africans? Why Mulattoes are poor w/in Brazilian & Cuban society, but are rich w/in the Caribbean? Why Blk & mixed brazilians are so poor and uneducated even though they have substantial European ancestry. I could easily give you an answer based on environment, but I really want to hear you out.

- If European genes conferred an advantage, we would expect that the smartest blacks would have substantial European heritage. But when a group of investigators sought out the very brightest black children in the Chicago school system and asked them about the race of their parents and grandparents, these children were found to have no greater degree of European ancestry than blacks in the population at large.

-Blood-typing tests have been used to assess the degree to which black individuals have European genes. The blood group assays show no association between degree of European heritage and I.Q. Similarly, the blood groups most closely associated with high intellectual performance among blacks are no more European in origin than other blood groups.

-The closest thing to direct evidence that the hereditarians have is a study from the 1970s showing that black children who had been adopted by white parents had lower I.Q.’s than those of mixed-race children adopted by white parents. But, as the researchers acknowledged, the study had many flaws; for instance, the black children had been adopted at a substantially later age than the mixed-race children, and later age at adoption is associated with lower I.Q.

-A superior adoption study — and one not discussed by the hereditarians — was carried out at Arizona State University by the psychologist Elsie Moore, who looked at black and mixed-race children adopted by middle-class families, either black or white, and found no difference in I.Q. between the black and mixed-race children. Most telling is Dr. Moore’s finding that children adopted by white families had I.Q.’s 13 points higher than those of children adopted by black families. The environments that even middle-class black children grow up in are not as favorable for the development of I.Q. as those of middle-class whites.
on Sat 12 Feb 2011 at 07:24:45 The Cynic

@Doug1

In Table 1- Enrollments by color/race at all levels of schooling – Brazil – 2000 at the 2nd to last page you can see that Blk and Pardo(brown/Mulatto) Brazilians have similar education rates clearly unequal to their White Brazilian counterparts. Yet, genetic studies show Blk Brazilians are only 55%African and 35-40% Euro on avg, Pardos are more Euro than African, and Whites are about 80%Euro, 10% Afro, & 10%Amerindian. Why so much racial inequality in Brazil among non-Whites(Blks & Pardos) and Whites if the non-Whites are Whiter less pure than African Americans?

http://congreso.us.es/cesrea/OKpapers/25%20Rosemary%20DORE%20e%20MOREIRA%20Black%20Movement%20and%20Education%20Brazil.pdf
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2009/11/091102_brazil_black_ap.shtml
on Sat 12 Feb 2011 at 22:57:51 Doug1

Cynic–

You claimed this has been debunked, yet you provide no proof.

See page 27 of the pdf

http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf

The whole PDF is a good summery of why the large preponderance of the evidence is on the side of heredity accounting for around 50% or more of the difference in IQ between individuals and groups.
on Sat 12 Feb 2011 at 23:12:59 King

“The whole PDF is a good summery of why the large preponderance of the evidence is on the side of heredity accounting for around 50% or more of the difference in IQ between individuals and groups.”

The entire PDF is a good example of why two psychologists should not try and write a paper on genetics and heredity when they are far from qualified to do so.
on Sun 13 Feb 2011 at 01:40:50 Doug1

King–

Wrong. You know nothing about the area.

Most of the evidence doesn’t come from genetics – yet. It comes from various social science studies.
on Sun 13 Feb 2011 at 03:45:27 Calculator

Doug1 said, “You know nothing about the area.”

That’s an ad hominen fallacy. You blame the person, rather than the argument or idea at hand. I’d suggest that unless you have a Ph.D you should also stop spewing out words.
on Sun 13 Feb 2011 at 03:51:25 Calculator

Doug1 said:

“As to the theory that the reason for the difference is colder temperatures, that’s only one theory for why the differentiation occurred from tropical peoples, who do tend to be less intelligent.”

There you go again, making mistakes. What you wrote was NOT a theory! It’s something called a hypothesis. Common people with no scientific background often make this mistake.
on Sun 13 Feb 2011 at 05:59:20 The Cynic

@Doug

Why did you ignore ALL of my studies that I posted about the admixture theory?
on Sun 13 Feb 2011 at 06:24:18 The Cynic

@Doug1

From the Rushton & Jenson pdf. Section 8 on admixture. The only “evidence” against the culture-only position on admixture and IQ they provided was the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study.

–The closest thing to direct evidence that the hereditarians have is a study from the 1970s showing that black children who had been adopted by white parents had lower I.Q.’s than those of mixed-race children adopted by white parents. But, as the researchers acknowledged, the study had many flaws; for instance, the black children had been adopted at a substantially later age than the mixed-race children, and later age at adoption is associated with lower I.Q.

Now you can have fun responding to all of the other anti-admixture arguments I provided. And while your’re at it go ahead and tell us why their is a 15pt IQ difference between Burakumin in Japan and majority Japanese when they are only a social minority(same race/ethnicity/genetics).

*note the Burakimin IQ difference with majority Japanese disappears when the immigrate to the US. All of these sources were provided upthread
on Sun 13 Feb 2011 at 07:06:25 Uncle Milton

To The Cynic:

Most tellingly, blood-typing tests have been used to assess the degree to which black individuals have European genes. The blood group assays show no association between degree of European heritage and I.Q. Similarly, the blood groups most closely associated with high intellectual performance among blacks are no more European in origin than other blood groups.

Blood types and race..? Huh..? At first glance it would seem Richard Nisbett is wrong here… Blacks have somewhat higher levels of Blood Type B and O than Whites but not substantially. I have never heard of being able to conclusively determine admixture or even race by blood type. (unless it is a rare type or an isolated population..)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_genetics#Blood_groups
on Tue 26 Apr 2011 at 05:08:14 wisetongue19

i think its safe to say all those IQ’s were “estimates” and not based on facts. you can absolutely NOT get the “Average IQ” of indians, theres a billion of us and even conducting the census takes over 1.5 years.
its nonsense, branding indians as 82 average IQ. that means we’re retarded!!
as is with any other society, the upper and middle classes are significantly more intelligent and they are the ones who migrate to the west and east and settle down. the lower classes simply dont have time to “be intelligent” and “get a good IQ”. for them, survival is most important.
i disagree with the findings of that man, but i agree with the article.
on Tue 26 Apr 2011 at 05:19:13 King

@ wisetongue19

It’s just a statistical projection. Obviously there are many variables that leave room for error and misinterpretation.

IQ testing itself is an ever changing science. The trouble is that race dummies take these figures as gospel, and then assume that genetics plays a huge part in the outcome.
on Tue 26 Apr 2011 at 06:52:35 abagond

@ wisetongue19:

I agree. Most of Asia and Africa has never been properly tested and, in any case, it is the well-to-do who come to America from India, not the poor.

To see just how bad or dishonest Lynn is, look at how he comes up with his numbers for Africa:

http://abagond.wordpress.com/2011/03/08/the-average-african-iq-is-70/
on Thu 30 Jun 2011 at 18:59:07 Mark. A. Smith

In an IQ wealth study co-authored with James Thompson of University College London, shortly published this month in Psychological Science, Rindermann has demonstrated a strong IQ-wealth link. Researchers analyzed IQ test scores from 90 countries and found that the intelligence of the people – especially the smartest 5 percent – made a big contribution to the strength of their economies. For each one-point increase in a country’s average IQ, the per capita gross domestic product (GDP) was $229 higher. For the smartest 5% of the population in each country – the cognitive elites – it made an even more dramatic difference to salary: for every additional IQ point in that group, a country’s per capita GDP was $468 higher. This study is summarized in this blog:

http://www.iqmindware.com/i3/highest-iq/iq-wealth-iq-income/
on Thu 30 Jun 2011 at 19:10:50 King

@ Mark Smith

Was it their intelligence that made them wealthy, or was it the benefits of their wealth that contributed to their intelligence?
on Tue 24 Jan 2012 at 06:00:23 David

Dear Abogond,

You forgot to add one piece of puzzle in your argument. Indian and Filipinos were occupied of English speaking nations for a long time. India was colony of British Empire and Philippines was occupied USA Empire. One of the by product of being colony is that the natives learn the language of occupiers. Therefore, many, not all, of these immigrant from these nations spoke English when they arrived at USA. Well, the logic goes, if you speak English, better jobs. It does not matter whether one is an Astrophysicists: no Engreeshy, wash dishes for minimum wage.
on Mon 12 Mar 2012 at 01:34:41 Jacqueline Carmel Dyson

It is regrettable that the Negro race has an average IQ of between 78 to 85 (meaning that most Negroes fall under the category of ‘mentally retarded’), but scientific analysis should not be subject or subservient to political and social considerations. It is clear that the darker your skin, the less intellect you are predisposed to. That is why Negroes and Indians from India score so lowly on IQ tests as to be classified mentally retarded. The North East Asians, Europeans and the Ashkenazi Jews score highly because our ancestors had to endure the bitter cold of the high latitude countries and we are reaping the rewards for it. Negroes and Indians have no one and nothing to blame but their ancestors and the climate.
on Wed 11 Apr 2012 at 00:59:28 Rooboy

There are several flaws in Lynn’s shallow analysis. The iQ test that Indians were supposed to have undergone was completed in 1968 among children in rural india. The iq test that is supposed to be a measure of china was taken in early 2000′s and was taken by Shanghai (one of the most advanced Chinese cities). Moreover in countries where no iq tests were completed, the median of neigbouring countries were taken. Again Lynn and Co’s research just goes to to show that you can hardly call their research academic.
on Tue 17 Apr 2012 at 07:55:58 JM

@Rooboy

In their book IQ and Global Inequality, Lynn and Vanhanen address the argument made by critics of the invalidity of the estimates of national IQs from the measured IQs of neighboring countries. They show that there is a correlation of 0.91 between the estimated IQs for 32 countries given in their first book (IQ and the Wealth of Nations) and the measured IQs for the same countries given in their new book. This establishes their case that the estimated IQs were remarkably accurate.

In their book, Lynn and Vanhanen also responded to critics who attacked the reliability and validity of their national IQ data. To address this question the new book presents results of 71 countries for which two independent measures of IQ have been obtained and show that the correlation between these is 0.95, which is a very high reliability. To establish the validity of national IQ’s they present the results of national scores from tests of mathematics and science. These correlate with their national IQ data from between 0.79 to 0.89, which indicates a very high degree validity.

Anyone can quibble with one data point, but there seems to be little question as to the validity and reliability of the trend.
on Mon 12 Nov 2012 at 22:01:04 reynaldo s. castro, jr.

asians prioritize hard work, high education and luxury living later on
on Mon 12 Nov 2012 at 23:14:12 Franklin

“Yes” Jacqueline, you’re correct. Which is why Inuits (Eskimos) are driving around in flying cars and have teleportation technology.

Wait…
on Thu 22 Nov 2012 at 04:44:50 Bill

Filipinos (IQ 85) earn more in the US than Koreans (105) is just not so. Bear in mind employment in the US depends upon fluency in English. Filipino immigrants are fluent in english whereas Korean immigrants can’t speak any english. More accurate to compare third generation Filipinos with third generation Koreans. Korean Americans outearn Filipino americans. Filipinos are unique among asians as they are christians with a history of Spanish and American colonization. Filipinos are Asian as much as Mexicans are European.
on Thu 22 Nov 2012 at 12:36:17 javen

@Bill

the average income was based on korean americans and filipino americans….so much ignorance
on Thu 22 Nov 2012 at 13:20:39 abagond

@ Bill

Throwing out facts that do not fit your world view is the beginning of delusion.
on Thu 22 Nov 2012 at 16:26:25 Jefe

@Eurasian

Secondly, the Indians who emigrate are disproportionally from a middle-to-high status social class. It’s not representative of the whole Indian population.
These well-to-do classes place the highest emphasis on education, which feeds into the first factor.

Yes, I think this explains a lot of it — we should expect immigrants who came for higher education (and who came from families with either higher education background or money), immigrants who came as economic migrants and those that came as refugees to have very different economic results in a new homeland.
on Thu 22 Nov 2012 at 16:54:06 Jefe

Africans were the last ones to have that kind of edge. Only we do not call them Africans: we call them Homo sapiens. They are us.

YES, indeed. Africans that migrated to the Middle East and Europe even to SE Asia and did indeed overtake the local Homo floresiensis, Denisovans and Neanderthals, in some cases, absorbing some of their DNA before they were wiped out.
on Thu 6 Dec 2012 at 02:31:53 joshua ari

you should list the average iq of jewish israel
on Fri 7 Dec 2012 at 08:07:00 Bill

@Javen and Abagond

The devil is in the details. Don’t believe the numbers. Most are politically motivated. For example, do you really believe in general Filipinos Americans make roughly the same as whites? Absurd. Especially if you break the white group into its ethnic groups (English, German, Scandinavian, French, Spanish, Middle eastern, Greek, Italian, etc.). Its rare to see a Filipino employee. Usually he/she is at the mid- level or below in the corporation and upper management is virtually all white.
Since Filipinos (like Blacks) are predominately employed by Whites versus self employment, the inference is valid.

In fact, I question the “data” that “Asians” earn more than “Whites”.

I question published “data” like Black women earn more than White women. Absurd. If you have one black woman earning $60,000 and 9 White women earning the spectrum from $80,000 (director) to $30,000 ( Admin Assistant), the Black womans average income is $60k and the White womans is $55k. Therefore Black women earn more than White women. Total “White” wash of the truth.

A widely published “fact” is Blacks live 5 years less than Whites. Yet, I know regularly of black people dying in their 30s and 40s. When I hear of White people dying it is usually someone in their mid70s or above.

Above all, remember, the numbers you post are averages.An average is not reality.

White America gains by publishing flattering Asian data to maintain the illusion of “Asian” progress so they don’t have to give more to struggling Asians.
on Fri 7 Dec 2012 at 12:55:25 abagond

@ Bill

I agree that certain statistics about Asian Americans, like household income or Chinese American IQ on outdated tests, are pushed because they seem to confirm racist ideas (model minority, Bootstrap Myth) while others are overlooked because they do not, like unemployment and poverty.

That said, the income numbers do make rough sense: those who have been here longer, would have known English in their own country and came here by choice tend to do better. Filipinos know English and come here by choice, but have not been here as long as most Japanese, for example. Cambodians had little choice, fleeing war, and are way less likely to know English, so they do poorly. Koreans come by choice but are less likely to know English than Filipinos, so they are in the middle. And so on.

The IQ numbers, on the other hand, are completely bogus.
on Mon 21 Jan 2013 at 16:55:59 guy paris

How can you explain that a poor country like Vietnam produce more winners than India and China at international maths olympiads
and despite the lack of education, produce people like ngo bao chau (2010 maths field medal), trinh xuan tuan (famous astrophysicist), philip roesler (a surgeon who is also the present (2013) vice german chancellor), etc… ??
I have many vietnamese friends who are brilliant in sciences, not only at high schools, engineer schools and famous Universities, but also in professional career, in Europe and in the US.
In some forums about IQ, people write that only NE asians have very high IQ (japaneses, chineses, koreans), while SE Asia (Thailand, Laos, Kampuchea, Filipin, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam) has lower IQ around 90-95. You forget that Vietnameses don’t have the same ethnicity than other SE Asia who are Melanesian, Australoid, …with some mixture. Actually, Vietnameses come from the East part of China in a long past.
on Thu 31 Jan 2013 at 06:50:47 Bill

In general higher IQ people tend to have higher income. So why do Filipinos have higher income than Koreans in the US. Easy virtually ALL Filipinos speak fluent English. Many Koreans if they speak English is poor and not employable in White America. Same for East Indians – low IQ BUT fluent in English.
Income Hierarchy in US 1. Fluent English & High IQ
2. Fluent English & Low IQ 3. High IQ & poor English 4. Low IQ & Poor English 5. Low IQ & can’t speak English.
on Thu 31 Jan 2013 at 11:58:16 abagond

@ Bill

Right, but that does not tell us why East Indians, who have the lowest IQs of all, do better than both black and white Americans, who are both fluent in English. Filipinos, only one IQ point higher than blacks, also do far better than expected.
on Thu 31 Jan 2013 at 14:05:48 Churchs

East Indians may average 81 but the average Indian doesn’t immigrate to the US. Most Indian immigrants are professionals ie. doctors, engineers, programmers, etc. So the average IQ for East Indians in the US is 112 and their income does match their IQ.

This demonstrates the mistake of assuming immigrant IQs match the average for the country they’re from. It’s called “self selection bias” and a similar thing happens with other groups as well. For example, a lot of African immigrants have much higher IQs than the countries they’re from. It even happened with blacks who migrated north in the 1920s. So that black IQ of 85 isn’t distributed evenly. The average IQ for blacks in the north is actually 90 and the average IQ for blacks in the south is 80.

I didn’t look into the other groups but most people end up where they belong by the second generation.
on Thu 31 Jan 2013 at 14:23:48 King

Of course, once you begin to accept Intelligence Quotient numbers as accurate and static representations of intellectual aptitude, then you’re already barking up the wrong tree.
on Wed 6 Feb 2013 at 03:24:12 don

Read Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle-john J Ray-various interesting analysis
on Wed 6 Feb 2013 at 04:01:56 King

No, the Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle is pretty much an explanation for dimwits who can’t reason from cause to effect. You should begin with Harvard professor Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences and continue researching fhe science on the matter from there. He is by no means the only source.
on Sat 1 Jun 2013 at 05:13:08 mltqwan

In fact, South Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia and Chinese immigrants are much more likely to be refugees than Japanese, Filipino and Indian immigrants.
on Sat 1 Jun 2013 at 05:26:19 mltqwan

@guy paris

Cumulative results of IMO Gold by country: China 126 among 158 participants, Vietnam: 46 among 216 participants, India 11 among 144 participants.