Race and intelligence

Sparky · 03-21-2012, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anticipation

A more important question; if you recognize the relationship between evolutionary necessity and the influence that social relations and environment have on the developing human mind, why are you still trying to judge books by their covers?

I think this kinda sums up the thread in a nice way

midnight rain · 03-21-2012, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anticipation

A more important question; if you recognize the relationship between evolutionary necessity and the influence that social relations and environment have on the developing human mind, why are you still trying to judge books by their covers?

I'm not judging, I'm challenging an often avoided scientific query. To be controversial and all that.

TUИEZ · 03-21-2012, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phantom Limb

Don't jump to conclusions. He's not racist, he's curious.

Reading his comments, I don't believe I am the one making conclusions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuna

No, it's not. And life isn't fair. If evolution was equal, you wouldn't see people with different skin colors. Or disparities in height among different countries. My point is that if there's height differences, why not intelligence differences necessarily? Probably because, if true, it would bother a lot of people (again understandably).

I rest my case right here. Saying that people are better/worse or smarter/dumber based on height or weight or color is the most asinine thing I have heard lately.

**Janszoon** · 03-21-2012, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuna

It depends on how specific you want to get. Look, I gave you my definition of race for this thread, as you asked. You are basically telling me that my definition of race is wrong. Maybe next time rather than asking a question of me that you would accept no answer for, you should save me the time and dictionary.com it.

I'm not telling you it's wrong, I'm just asking for a clear definition. You do understand that even your beloved dictionary.com offers several definitions, right? It would be helpful to know which one you are going by.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuna

Ok first of all you are getting way too attached to my use of the word neanderthal. I'm sorry if I may have used it incorrectly in the first place. How about substituting "homo erectus" in for it from here on out.

This just better illustrates my point anyways. The homo erectus is on the left, neanderthal in the middle, sapien on the right. One can clearly see the evolution away from the homo erectus here, and the movement towards more neotenous traits.

How so? Again, keep in mind that the neanderthal skull isn't necessarily the middle of the story here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuna

Kids I believe?

Right. How does that square with what you're saying about neoteny?

hip hop bunny hop · 03-21-2012, 11:33 PM

Well, if you're all curious, here's some numbers:

Quote:

The Bell Curve (1994) stated that the average IQ of African Americans was 85, Latino 89, White 103, Asian 106, and Jews 113. Asians score relatively higher on visuospatial than on verbal subtests. The few Amerindian populations that have been systematically tested, including Arctic Natives, tend to score worse on average than white populations but better on average than black populations.[47]

link

To put that in perspective; if we take the average IQ to be 100, that would mean only 10-15% of black Americans have an IQ exceeding 100.

If we look at the PISA reading scores, we see similar results:

USA Asians; 541
USA White; 526
USA Total; 500
USA Hispanic; 466
USA Black; 441

From an international standpoint, you'll find that (north) East Asians dominate; Finland is a notable exception, although that may have something to do with having less than 5% of its populace being born abroad.

midnight rain · 03-21-2012, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TUИEZ

I rest my case right here. Saying that people are better/worse or smarter/dumber based on height or weight or color is the most asinine thing I have heard lately.

Phew. It's a good thing I didn't say that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

I'm not telling you it's wrong, I'm just asking for a clear definition. You do understand that even your beloved dictionary.com offers several definitions, right? It would be helpful to know which one you are going by.

This one I suppose most fits with my view:

Quote:

3.
Anthropology .
a.
any of the traditional divisions of humankind, the commonest being the caucasian, Mongoloid, and Negro, characterized by supposedly distinctive and universal physical characteristics: no longer in technical use.
b.
an arbitrary classification of modern humans, sometimes, especially formerly, based on any or a combination of various physical characteristics, as skin color, facial form, or eye shape, and now frequently based on such genetic markers as blood groups.
c.
a human population partially isolated reproductively from other populations, whose members share a greater degree of physical and genetic similarity with one another than with other humans.

Quote:

How so? Again, keep in mind that the neanderthal skull isn't necessarily the middle of the story here.

No I agree it's not. The neanderthal skull is just in that picture, I wasn't saying the transition. But clearly you can see the human skull is more neotenous than the homo erectus, it's form of evolution away from the homo erectus species.

[/quote]Right. How does that square with what you're saying about neoteny?[/QUOTE]
It doesn't really apply I think. The meaning of neoteny is the retention of child-like features in an adult. Could you stop beating around the bush and come out and tell me what you're getting at.

midnight rain · 03-21-2012, 11:39 PM

Oh and here's how neoteny and intelligence are connected Jans:
Facilitating factors in the evolution of intelligence. A unit of: Using science fiction to study the evolution of intelligence

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...more-infantile

Unknown Soldier · 03-22-2012, 05:31 PM

Most people know Americans aren't very intelligent, not that I share that view for one minute, but just thought I'd mention it.

On a more serious note, HHBH's chart would seem to indicate that those with the greatest brainpower are of Asian origin, I always thought Howie Il Duck was a damn sight smarter than the rest of us.

~~someonecompletelyrandom~~ · 03-22-2012, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop

Well, if you're all curious, here's some numbers:

link

To put that in perspective; if we take the average IQ to be 100, that would mean only 10-15% of black Americans have an IQ exceeding 100.

If we look at the PISA reading scores, we see similar results:

USA Asians; 541
USA White; 526
USA Total; 500
USA Hispanic; 466
USA Black; 441

From an international standpoint, you'll find that (north) East Asians dominate; Finland is a notable exception, although that may have something to do with having less than 5% of its populace being born abroad.

I think those numbers might reflect standard of education more than they do capacity for intelligence.

jayshreddz · 03-22-2012, 05:41 PM

i find generally that everyone i've met from different races were all smarter than the other races in there own way. some of them just have "street smarts" and others have "book smarts."

03-21-2012, 11:39 PM	#27 (permalink)
midnight rain Music Addict Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,711	Oh and here's how neoteny and intelligence are connected Jans: Facilitating factors in the evolution of intelligence. A unit of: Using science fiction to study the evolution of intelligence http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...more-infantile Last edited by midnight rain; 03-22-2012 at 12:12 AM.

03-22-2012, 05:41 PM	#30 (permalink)
jayshreddz Groupie Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: somewhere awesome Posts: 112	i find generally that everyone i've met from different races were all smarter than the other races in there own way. some of them just have "street smarts" and others have "book smarts."