IQ: HEREDITY OR ENVIRONMENT ?????????????

[Al-Gebra]

Scientists like Richard Lynn, Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein believed that heredity (read race) played a greater role than environment in determining IQ . . .

apparently, some races were created more equal than others.

what do the denizens of the general board think.

try to refrain from using anecdotal evidence (for instance, my best friend is black and he is very well-spoken).

youandme, no one is interested in what you have to say, so don't bother. 

[Al Doggity]

youandme, no one is interested in what you have to say, so don't bother. 

This topic could get pretty contentious. If he's still pretending to be some type of researcher, he may be the only comic relief this thread sees.

Meanwhile, even though this topic is clearly motivated by an agenda, I think it should be interesting. I actually attended college after TBC was published and we had a few interesting discussions about some of the theories it contained, most notably during a social diktyology course.

I've never actually bothered reading the whole thing, though.

[Get Rowdy]

There is evidence that shows IQ is 60% inherited, and 40% from environmental factors.

[Hedgehog]

I think it's been proven beyond any reasonal doubt that IQ is mostly Environment.

Otherwise, the mean IQ score of some African countries wouldn't be in the 60's, while it is in the 110's in Japan, and close to 110 in Scandinavia.

The point is, in countries with high rates of illiteracy, the mean IQ score is low.

And reading is a learned ability.

Not something hereditary.

I've read a few books by authors claiming that certain ethnicities are superior. None of these books have succeeds in explaining how the brain, which we are using less than 10% of, wouldn't have the same capability in certain ethnic groups.

IMO, it's all just hogwash.

[Nordic Superman]

No I don't role with that Hedge.

I'm not saying on the scope of races, but I do believe that if both your parents are intelligent (regardless of race) then you will have a higher probability of high intelligence (regardless of up bringing).

[Get Rowdy]

I think it's been proven beyond any reasonal doubt that IQ is mostly Environment.

Otherwise, the mean IQ score of some African countries wouldn't be in the 60's, while it is in the 110's in Japan, and close to 110 in Scandinavia.

The point is, in countries with high rates of illiteracy, the mean IQ score is low.

And reading is a learned ability.

Not something hereditary.

I've read a few books by authors claiming that certain ethnicities are superior. None of these books have succeeds in explaining how the brain, which we are using less than 10% of, wouldn't have the same capability in certain ethnic groups.

IMO, it's all just hogwash.

Sociology texts pretty much take is as fact that whites are intellectually superior to blacks, due to the difference in IQ's, a 12 point difference even when socioeconomic factors are equal.
However, they don't take into account that blacks do poorly on formalised comparison testing, but do much better when they are told the exercise is not for formal comparison purposes.

[Hedgehog]

No I don't role with that Hedge.

I'm not saying on the scope of races, but I do believe that if both your parents are intelligent (regardless of race) then you will have a higher probability of high intelligence (regardless of up bringing).

Yes, that I can agree on.

My post was mainly a comment on the extreme low mean IQ's of certain African countries.



L

[Al Doggity]

Sociology texts pretty much take is as fact that whites are intellectually superior to blacks, due to the difference in IQ's, a 12 point difference even when socioeconomic factors are equal

This is not true. The average gap between blacks and whites is about 10 points and it's even smaller when  adjusted for socioeconomic factors. 

That was actually one of the biggest flaws with "The Bell Curve". IQs in general have been trending upwards due to improving socioeconomic conditions for all demographics. The racial disparity in IQs is actually shrinking, which also puts the lie to TBC's dismissal of environmental factors.

[Get Rowdy]

This is not true. The average gap between blacks and whites is about 10 points and it's even smaller when  adjusted for socioeconomic factors. 

That was actually one of the biggest flaws with "The Bell Curve". IQs in general have been trending upwards due to improving socioeconomic conditions for all demographics. The racial disparity in IQs is actually shrinking, which also puts the lie to TBC's dismissal of environmental factors.

I don't know which sources your using, but from mine the average gap is 15 and the adjusted gap is 12. (its not an internet source so I don't have it with me at the moment, in case you want to know what it is).  It's true that the average IQ is increasing every year, but if it's from improving socioeconomic conditions, then why aren't the average grades in school increasing aswell? They have stayed the same.

[Al Doggity]

I believe your source is a book called "The Bell Curve". Al-gebra referred to the guys who wrote that book in his opening post. The numbers they used (which match up with the numbers you used) were controversial because they contradicted several other prominent studies at the time. A lot of criticism surrounding that book was related to the fact that a lot of people believed they were misinterpreting data and ignoring anything that was in opposition to their theories.

Average grades in schools are increasing.

[Al Doggity]

explaining how the brain, which we are using less than 10% of, wouldn't have the same capability in certain ethnic groups.

I think your post is solidly reasoned, but I just have to point out something about this statement because so many people repeat it. It's not true. We use our entire brains.  That claim is largely a factual misinterpretation of the adaptive power of damaged brains that was perverted by the ad industry in the 20s and 30s and later co-opted by shyster psychics. 

[Get Rowdy]

I believe your source is a book called "The Bell Curve". Al-gebra referred to the guys who wrote that book in his opening post. The numbers they used (which match up with the numbers you used) were controversial because they contradicted several other prominent studies at the time. A lot of criticism surrounding that book was related to the fact that a lot of people believed they were misinterpreting data and ignoring anything that was in opposition to their theories.

Average grades in schools are increasing.

My source is university readings for an exam, so it covers a number of studies, and it does also point of the flaws in "the bell curve".

[WOOO]

both























monster genius post 

[Al-Gebra]

I think it's been proven beyond any reasonal doubt that IQ is mostly Environment.

Otherwise, the mean IQ score of some African countries wouldn't be in the 60's, while it is in the 110's in Japan, and close to 110 in Scandinavia.

well, in addition to there being environmental differences b/w sub-saharan africa and scandinavia, there are also racial differences.

[powerpack]

I also think both factors influence IQ

[Hedgehog]

well, in addition to there being environmental differences b/w sub-saharan africa and scandinavia, there are also racial differences.

It's not like we up here in Scandinavia (mean IQ 104) are 90% smarter than people in Equatorial Guinea (mean IQ 59).

BTW, the correct terminology isn't racial. It's ethnological.

[Al-Gebra]

It's not like we up here in Scandinavia (mean IQ 104) are 90% smarter than people in Equatorial Guinea (mean IQ 59).

BTW, the correct terminology isn't racial. It's ethnological.

you're driving at ethnological differences, I'm not.  Ethnological variation is certainly relevant . . . scandinavian education, for instance, prepares one for IQ-type tests much better than education in the sudan.

However, my focus is on studies that indicate that there is a difference based purely on "racial" features (category used by researchers like Weinberg & Scarr) . . .

[Camel Jockey]

It's both environmental and genetics.

Why haven't certain civilizations contributed anything useful? A lot of things have come from Greece, North Africa, Europe, India, China and even the polynesians. The west is easily on top these days and I don't think as a whole some people will be able to catch whitey; genes and environment being the factors.

What's come out of western africa?  Why are some people there like 2,000 years behind? 

It ain't poltically correct, but it's the truth.

IMO, IQ is hard to measure for developing nations.. I mean someone who's not fed can't develop a fucking brain to do algebra and learn to read and write.

(In the time of the British Raj) Wasn't there some indian guy who got ahold of a british algebra book, but was totally uneducated in the laws of math prior, but wrote like complex equations and stuff after reading the book? This was back during the british raj, and I can't recall his name.. He was supposedly poor and had no educational background, yet he learned complex math on his own. He was mentioned in the movie Good Will Hunting, I think. Anyone hear of him? I'm mentioning him because that shows how genes can overcome certain enviornmental factors.

[WOOO]

It's both environmental and genetics.

that's what i said 

[Al-Gebra]

It's both environmental and genetics.

Why haven't certain civilizations contributed anything useful? A lot of things have come from Greece, North Africa, Europe, India, China and even the polynesians. The west is easily on top these days and I don't think as a whole some people will be able to catch whitey; genes and environment being the factors.

What's come out of western africa?  Why are some people there like 2,000 years behind? 

It ain't poltically correct, but it's the truth.

IMO, IQ is hard to measure for developing nations.. I mean someone who's not fed can't develop a fucking brain to do algebra and learn to read and write.

(In the time of the British Raj) Wasn't there some indian guy who got ahold of a british algebra book, but was totally uneducated in the laws of math prior, but wrote like complex equations and stuff after reading the book? This was back during the british raj, and I can't recall his name.. He was supposedly poor and had no educational background, yet he learned complex math on his own. He was mentioned in the movie Good Will Hunting, I think. Anyone hear of him? I'm mentioning him because that shows how genes can overcome certain enviornmental factors.

ramanujan . . .

[suckmymuscle]

I think it's been proven beyond any reasonal doubt that IQ is mostly Environment.

Otherwise, the mean IQ score of some African countries wouldn't be in the 60's, while it is in the 110's in Japan, and close to 110 in Scandinavia.

  Utterly false. The reason why the mean I.Q in Japan is 105 while only 75 in Africa is due to environment and genetics. Blacks in the U.S, with good nutrition and access to good schools, still score an average of 85. Higher than they do in Africa, but lower than Caucasians and East Asians. Poor East Asian children, without access to good schools, still score higher than typical White children.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Al Doggity]

However, my focus is on studies that indicate that there is a difference based purely on "racial" features (category used by researchers like Weinberg & Scarr) . . .

I wanted to post something about these researchers, but I couldn't remember their names. They figured prominently in "TBC". Sloppy interpretation of their data shows just how dangerous  statistics can be in the wrong hands.

For anyone who isn't familiar with them, they did a study on adopted kids of black,white and mixed backgrounds in the 70s and a followup in the 80s. You can check it out on Wikipedia. The basic results are that the blacker a kid is, the lower its iq is likely to be. The researchers were actually trying to disprove the theories of a guy who had claimed that headstart funding should be cut because it was wasted on blacks due to genetic factors.


There was, however, a flaw in the study's control. More of the mixed and black children had been in the adoption system longer. There was a significant difference in IQ between black children based on how early they'd been adopted.
When there was an adjustment made for kids who had all been placed early in life, the iq differences based on race were statistically negligible.

[Al-Gebra]

I wanted to post something about these researchers, but I couldn't remember their names. They figured prominently in "TBC". Sloppy interpretation of their data shows just how dangerous  statistics can be in the wrong hands.

For anyone who isn't familiar with them, they did a study on adopted kids of black,white and mixed backgrounds in the 70s and a followup in the 80s. You can check it out on Wikipedia. The basic results are that the blacker a kid is, the lower its iq is likely to be. The researchers were actually trying to disprove the theories of a guy who had claimed that headstart funding should be cut because it was wasted on blacks due to genetic factors.


There was, however, a flaw in the study's control. More of the mixed and black children had been in the adoption system longer. There was a significant difference in IQ between black children based on how early they'd been adopted.
When there was an adjustment made for kids who had all been placed early in life, the iq differences based on race were statistically negligible.

yeah, i remember there was some controversy over their study . . . do you have the source handy? (not wikipedia, please, people like adonis are editors there).

[Camel Jockey]

  Utterly false. The reason why the mean I.Q in Japan is 105 while only 75 in Africa is due to environment and genetics. Blacks in the U.S, with good nutrition and access to good schools, still score an average of 85. Higher than they do in Africa, but lower than Caucasians and East Asians. Poor East Asian children, without access to good schools, still score higher than typical White children.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Epic truth.

To outsiders of the US, it may seem as though black people are screwed.. But anyone living here and with a tint of common sense knows the truth. Black people in general have better access to many things over asian immigrants, yet still score lower, and these low scores have a correlation to negatives(crime rate being an example). Don't listen to Jamal when he claims poverty while wearing $200 sneakers. And fuck anyone who doesn't agree.

[Camel Jockey]

Could anyone explain to me how some african civilizations today could be lesser developed than civilizations over 2,000 years ago?

The Romans and Greeks were doing their thing, so were the orients.. Indians created the numerical system and were also doing their thing. Near Easterners were doing their thing, and etc.. It's tedious to name everything.

How come the only decent part of africa(north) just happens to be the least black?

hahahahaha