Interesting musings on IQ and the Wealth of Nations

[Heraclitus]

First, clarify what you are saying. Your response to my post doesn't make any sense.

Once upon a time I was a teen that had a thing for Communism.
I believed there was no correlation between inteligence and income.
I was a really really dumb teenager. When I saw how stupid I was I had to admit "capitalism" sucks less than I assumed.

The End.


I wish to see a citation for your claim of a negative correlation between IQ and income. aka inteligence being associated with poverty

[Caligastia]

aneeshm and caligastia (two of the most juvenile pseudoscientists on poly)

Do you hope we get hit by a bus too?

[DaShi]

I wish to see a citation for your claim of a negative correlation between IQ and income. aka inteligence being associated with poverty

LTR, I never said there was a negative correlation.

[DaShi]

Anyway, I should be clearer and say that there is evidence for causation between intelligence and poverty.

[Heraclitus]

LTR, I never said there was a negative correlation.

Ok that explains a bit.

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

****.

Your opening troll had a tiny, tiny hint of style. This- this, little sirrah, is kindergarten stuff.

It's annoying when the neighbor's dog won't stop barking, too, and almost as sophisticated.

I expect a ride in the short bus when I'm dumb enough enough to post here, so I guess I am a ****. But you enjoy sitting in your own filth until they change your diapers, hear?

[KrazyHorse]

I understand. Posting some sort of cogent explanation of your retarded opinions is too much effort, but crafting a sufficiently "literate" insult response is a valuable use of your precious time. It's become obvious that you were caught here posting some self-righteous prattle which you have no idea how to go about defending rationally. Go back to the panda site where the combination of blandness and stupidity allows you to get away with philosophising on every subject under the sun without fear that anybody will ever bring you face to face with the utter banality of your thoughts.

[Elok]

Denial of human biological diversity is nothing short of claiming evolution stops at the neck.

...but that's the thing:

A. Evolution is the adaptation of organisms to best fit their environment, no? Is there something about the environments of Africa or wherever that would make intelligence not valuable for people in those places? What kind of environmental stresses would cause intelligence to be more favored in one place than another?

B. I don't think anyone would deny that people vary in intellectual potential; what's highly debatable is the idea that whole blocs of people are of lower potential than others. Given the mass of environmental factors, it'd be almost impossible to prove, I would think.

C. Given the tremendous diversity within racial groups, even if it were true there'd be no useful practical application, so the denial of it is hardly tragic. Supposing the average black guy is dumber than the average white guy, that doesn't change the fact that Barack Obama is apparently about twice as clever as Sarah Palin. You'll have to deal with individuals either way.

[aneeshm]

Are you postulating a belief in human equality as a "religion," or did you somehow get the impression that Moby is a Christian

Neither. I'm saying that the irrationally closed-minded manner in which the belief in human equality is held (as if it were a core moral percept and part of self-identity) and defended (in defiance of contrary facts, evidence, and all sense) is reminiscent of the vehemence of a religious fanatic.

(Note that here the reference is to equality as a practical matter, not as an ethical abstraction, as Heraclitus correctly pointed out. The latter leads to uniformity in law, a more just society, less unjustified prejudice, and a raft of other useful things. The former leads to a general levelling of humans and abilities, the multitude feeling a diffuse and incoherent feeling of resentment against achievers (manifested in the form of anti-intellectualism or anti-wealthism), the tragically absurd system of schooling we have today, the dumbing-down of the same multitude, the election of incompetents, the effective impossibility of any truly competent person being elected to high office, and everything that follows from the corruption of governance by mediocrity, including a general fall in the level of governance. The most serious consequence is the irreparable loss of accumulated social capital in an orgy of the destruction of tradition and the consumption of both economic and social seed-stock.)

[aneeshm]

There is obviously a significant genetic component to IQ, and IQ obviously correlates strongly with life outcomes. It's not obvious to me that cross-country comparisons are particularly meaningful for establishing a causal relationship between race and intelligence, on the other hand.

There are still some interesting questions on which there isn't yet a consensus. For instance, what is the heritability of IQ?

Secondly, I don't think anyone is postulating a causal relationship between race and IQ, or citizenship and IQ. Race comes into it only because the racial constitution of different countries is not identical. The results could be postulated even if the entire world consisted of a single "race" but with an unequal distribution of IQ among different countries.

Much of your speculation in this thread smacks more of confirmation bias than a serious investigation. It's unsurprising that you've managed to attract aneeshm and caligastia (two of the most juvenile pseudoscientists on poly) with your nonsense.

Some part may be confirmation bias. But a large number of the observations are too significant to be dismissed as such. KH, you may find this summary of the current consensus within the field interesting. It contains a sufficient number of references in case you want to verify the source of each claim.

[aneeshm]

B. I don't think anyone would deny that people vary in intellectual potential; what's highly debatable is the idea that whole blocs of people are of lower potential than others. Given the mass of environmental factors, it'd be almost impossible to prove, I would think.

Again, this. It's a succinct summary of the current research.

C. Given the tremendous diversity within racial groups, even if it were true there'd be no useful practical application, so the denial of it is hardly tragic. Supposing the average black guy is dumber than the average white guy, that doesn't change the fact that Barack Obama is apparently about twice as clever as Sarah Palin. You'll have to deal with individuals either way.

True at the individual level. But you have to deal with "threshold" effects when dealing with groups and countries.

What if there exists a "threshold" IQ which is required to create a class of institutions? What is some other "threshold" is required to sustain it? This question has massive implications for how we see the world, and how to approach solving a country's or group's problems.

Secondly, there is one effect which is being neglected here. A large part of our culture assumes that humans are born with equal abilities, and structures its institutions accordingly. A recognition of statistical differences in inherited traits in different groups/races should lead to a corresponding re-structuring. For instance, nobody would be overly exercised over black under-achievement in some tests, or their under-representation in certain professions, as long as this disparity is congruent (within reasonable error) with what the data would predict it would be. To take a contemporary example, very few today lament the under-representation of whites in basketball.

Attempts to make the entire populace college-educated would stop after it is realised that most are not capable. The school system would no longer be afraid of competition. People, instead of being led up the garden path of the egalitarian dream and then off the cliff of the limits of their abilities, can instead be honestly told what they are good at, what they aren't good at, and what they will excel at if they apply themselves - the final decision being, of course, their own choice.

And so on. These are just some of the changes we can expect this re-structuring of ideas and institutions. It affects all aspects of life.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Again, this. It's a succinct summary of the current research.

Written by the foremost proponent of inherent racial influences on IQ.

[aneeshm]

Written by the foremost proponent of inherent racial influences on IQ.

I don't like the use of "political" language, such as 'proponent', in discussions like this. If you have a problem with his research or his claims, I'd request you to state it outright, instead of resorting to cowardly tactics such as these.

(The reason I posted this particular piece was because it gives a source for every single claim it makes; these are sources you are free to check the veracity of.)

[Caligastia]

Given the tremendous diversity within racial groups, even if it were true there'd be no useful practical application, so the denial of it is hardly tragic. Supposing the average black guy is dumber than the average white guy, that doesn't change the fact that Barack Obama is apparently about twice as clever as Sarah Palin. You'll have to deal with individuals either way.

That's true. And I don't think there necessarily needs to be a practical application. What I would like to see is an end to the widespread assumption that an equal environment would yield equal outcomes for all racial groups. It undermines equality under the law.

[Caligastia]

Secondly, there is one effect which is being neglected here. A large part of our culture assumes that humans are born with equal abilities, and structures its institutions accordingly. A recognition of statistical differences in inherited traits in different groups/races should lead to a corresponding re-structuring. For instance, nobody would be overly exercised over black under-achievement in some tests, or their under-representation in certain professions, as long as this disparity is congruent (within reasonable error) with what the data would predict it would be. To take a contemporary example, very few today lament the under-representation of whites in basketball.

Attempts to make the entire populace college-educated would stop after it is realised that most are not capable. The school system would no longer be afraid of competition. People, instead of being led up the garden path of the egalitarian dream and then off the cliff of the limits of their abilities, can instead be honestly told what they are good at, what they aren't good at, and what they will excel at if they apply themselves - the final decision being, of course, their own choice.

Exactly, well said.