Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence: Causes of International Differences in Cognitive Ability

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by Phill, Mar 27, 2016.

?

What do you think is causing racial/national differences in cognitive ability tests?

  1. Culture and Environment only

    42.9%
  2. Genes only

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Mostly Culture and Environment

    21.4%
  4. Mostly Genes

    14.3%
  5. Genes and Culture/Environment

    21.4%
  6. Unsure

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. EgalitarianJay Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    110
    Continued....


    The statements of Graves and Reznick show us that there is no scientific basis for the evolutionary arguments of Rushton and other racists. Far from being nonsense what Graves argued is based on empirical evidence.

    I didn't say there was no human variation just no scientific basis for claiming that there are genetic differences related to intelligence between races. Bells was the one that said that the psychologists surveyed read like a member list of a white power conference. Since the subjects of the survey are anonymous we can't make that assessment however we can look at the methodology of the authors and their motives.

    They contacted specific psychologists who had a fixation on intelligence differences. Notice that most of the people they invited to take part in the survey did not respond (only 20%). While I can't say that the ones who did are racists I imagine that the few that bothered to participate already had an interest in the idea that there is a genetic component to racial differences in IQ. So the subjects were most likely biased. Also the references cited in the study and language of the authors suggests to me that they were trying to prove a point of where mainstream science stands on this issue. This is basically an update of the Snyderman and Rothman survey which attempts to be more technical than its predecessor.

    One problem that I find with this whole affair is that I don't think most psychologists have enough knowledge of genetics to give an informed opinion on the subject. This survey would be more credible if its subjects came from multiple disciplines including genetics, biology, anthropology and neuroscience in addition to psychology and included questions about how the subjects believe genetic differences related to intelligence came about. Basically we'd need to see how much knowledge the subjects had of evolution and genetics to determine that they really had an informed opinion on the topic.

    Templeton looked at Chimpanzees and Humans and compared the Fst values as well as whether or not their populations belonged to distinct evolutionary lineages. He found that some chimpanzee populations fit the criteria for classification as subspecies (biological races) but none of the human populations did. As far as Sewall Wright's threshold for subspecies is concerned it is debatable whether an Fst value below 0.25 invalidates a population from being classified as a subspecies but it is generally accepted by population geneticists that this value is the point at which we see fixation of different alleles in subpopulations.


    By environment. Consider the fact that some IQ differences by nation belie the racial matrix of people like Rushton. For example if White Europeans are one race which presumably have the same level of intelligence why do Eastern European countries have lower IQs and higher rates of poverty than Western European countries? Why do we see the same difference between Northeast Asian populations and Southeast Asian populations? If intelligence determines attributes such as wealth and social organization why is North Korea poorer and their government in disarray compared to South Korea? If Northeast Asians evolved in the cold to be the most intelligent race why are their most recent derivative population, the Native Americans, impoverished with less cultural achievement and lower IQs? Why is it that Greece, Italy and Egypt countries with significant historical cultural achievement are not the top nations in the world today? Islamic countries had a golden age hundreds of years ago. Why are they not as advanced now? Europe had a dark age hundreds of years ago. Why are they the most advanced people now? Many Latin American countries are run by people of predominately European descent. Why aren't they First World countries if Whites are so smart?

    This idea of a highly consistent pattern in Life History Variables that supposedly validates the idea of genetic differences related to intelligence between races doesn't work when you look at human variation in its totality. There only appears to be a pattern when you selectively site data and practice confirmation bias.

    Environmental differences easily explain national differences in IQ.

    My argument is that there is no scientific basis for claiming there are genetic differences related to intelligence between races. I cited several studies establishing this fact. Based on the principles of quantitative genetics in order to test your hypothesis environments would need to be equal in order to show that there are differences in genetic potential between different genotypes. Population genetic research shows that human intelligence is not unevenly distributed across geographic populations (Graves, 2015).

    If human populations do not structure in to biological races and genetic research does not show that humans evolved to have differences in average intelligence between populations then there is simply no basis for claiming that the hereditarian theory is based on objective reasoned science. The 100% environmental theory for the cause of national differences in IQ is perfectly scientifically respectable and empirically valid.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2016
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Phill Banned Banned

    Messages:
    144
    It isn't.

    But you have to establish that the variation exists before you explain it. That's what this thread is about. Your post is irrelevant.
     
    Yelena McMullen likes this.
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. EgalitarianJay Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    110
    Actually it is because evolutionary arguments get straight to the point of why we should expect differences in intelligence between races exist.

    No one is denying that differences in IQ between nations and demographic groups exist. If you're looking for an explanation then you need to provide one. I have already shown you with sources why proposed explanations supporting a genetic hypothesis are invalid. My post is very relevant to this discussion.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Phill Banned Banned

    Messages:
    144
    Of course there will be variation due to geopolitical factors. It would probably require several essays to answer all of these questions. But you're really looking at a different question: national wealth and achievement differences, not IQ differences. For example Europe probably has higher technical achievement than East Asia due to creativity and individuality differences.

    You've done nothing to show that, just produced some spurious arguments to deny any genetic differences and assumed no genetic differences.

    The paper you cite clearly shows uneven distributions.

    There are genetic clusters, whether or not you call them races, and there is variation which must be explained. Any genetic differences in intelligence must necessarily have evolved. Ironically the 2015 Graves paper you cite supports the existence of such differences.
     
  8. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    Hell no. Everyone should be afraid of racism. And we should engage in research to help fight racism. We also need to engage in investigations of research methods in order to fight biases that enter into research methods, racist or not.
     
  9. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    I suppose that might make sense, since most of the world gets their electronics from Europe... Oh, crap, it's Asia where most of the electronics comes from.
    Differences do not always need to be explained. Nor do these explanations need to be tied to "genetic clusters".
    No. Not at all. Because whole organisms live or die, there are limits to how effective evolution can be on shaping genetic differences. There must necessarily be many genetic differences that are neutral, slightly good, and slightly bad that have very little selective pressure on them.

    The racist likes to think that they are better than other people because of some inherent qualities, but this is not really the case among humans.
     
  10. Phill Banned Banned

    Messages:
    144
    Actually they tend to be designed in Europe. The ARM chip in your mobile was designed in Cambridge UK.

    Well feel free not to participate.

    Neutral differences evolved too, even though we are not talking about neutral differences.

    Now you are resorting to ad hominem and name calling, sadly all too common in these discussions, where people cannot control their emotions when their equality beliefs are challenged. Leave it out please.
     
  11. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,318
    on another note:

    Nature vs nurture:
    "Twin studies showed that 85% of identical twins raised together and 70% of identical twins raised apart had the same IQ. This would imply that genes have a major impact on intelligence,..."
    http://www.amnh.org/learn/genetics/Resource1

    "...we conclude that both nature and nurture matter but also that genetics are the primary factor in explaining schooling differences of children. We find that of all ability transfers about 79 percent run through genes. Compared to Behrman and Taubman (1989) who estimate that about 80 percent of the variation in schooling can be attributed to the genes, we end up with almost identical numbers..."
    http://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/63853/1/321132386.pdf

    What is heritable?
    What is inherited?
    How strong is the correlation?

    Simple questions.
    Complex answers?
    ............................
     
  12. EgalitarianJay Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    110
    I'm looking at the full argument in its totality. Racist scholars like Rushton have proposed that intelligence is highly heritable, that it can be measured by IQ and other mental tests, that it is highly correlated with other variables including wealth, standard of living, academic performance, crime, creativity, personality etc. and that genetic differences related to intelligence exist at the racial level with National IQ score averages as the primary evidence. Now my questions poke several holes in this theory. If you have an answer to these questions by all means give it your best shot.


    If there are no genetic differences then logically environment is the cause. Basic knowledge of how environmental variables can affect the nurturing of intelligence establishes this fact.

    Once you understand how environment affects intelligence you need only ask, are there environmental differences between demographic groups and nations? The answer is yes, therefore the cause is 100% environmental.


    The paper does not show uneven geographic distributions in genes related to intelligence which is what I was talking about.

    On an individual or population level? I agree that intelligence differs between individuals due to genetics but not between populations. Surely you're not saying that the paper I cited shows genetic differences related to intelligence between populations. If it does show the quotes.
     
  13. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    So?
    What, and let you try to convince people that there must be some sort of racist science answer? I think I'll continue to point out the holes in your reasoning.
    You haven't got a clue about the nature of the genetic differences that there may or may not be for intelligence, whatever that is. Regardless, your claim that all genetic differences must be due to evolution is false.
    I am certainly controlling my emotions. It is not an ad hominem to point out the fact that you are offering racist claims and the motivations of racists for promoting certain sorts of ideas. I'm not sure why you take offense that I am identifying the motives of racists unless you identify yourself as a racist. If that is the case, then why not be honest about it?
     
  14. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    And such twin studies also show a high correlation between the IQ of the twins and the IQ of their adoptive parents. Maybe it says something about the way IQ correlates to region or to families that adopt?
    Good for them for concluding that on so little evidence that could possibly support such a claim. Pardon me if I do not believe it.
     
  15. Phill Banned Banned

    Messages:
    144
    You quote Graves (again) asserting that intelligence is 50% genetic, then jump to it being 100% environmental for no reason. Is this supposed to a joke?
     
  16. EgalitarianJay Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    110
    The heritability of intelligence is about 0.50. The cause of group differences in IQ is 100% environmental. That's what I am saying and what Graves said.
     
  17. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,318
    That's Ok.
    You are pardoned.
    You are entitled to your ignorance!
    Or
    You could read the entire studies.
    And feel free to look up more.

    Have you never been wrong before now?
    Is this the first time?
    Were you an error virgin?
    If so: How did it feel?
     
  18. Phill Banned Banned

    Messages:
    144
    You have to provide evidence that the environmental variables explain 100% of the between group variance, rather than just name variables and "say" they do.
     
  19. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,318
    Phill:
    You have set PhysBang an impossible task.
    I expect the outcome to be entertaining.
     
  20. EgalitarianJay Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    110
    I provided evidence through my sources that the cause of racial IQ gaps is 100% environmental.
     
  21. Phill Banned Banned

    Messages:
    144
    Could you just briefly run the argument by me again point by point with no copy pastes? I got:

    1) There are environmental variables.
    2) It's 100% those.

    ie. a bald assertion based on nothing. Am I missing something?
     
  22. EgalitarianJay Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    110
    In brief, since there is no scientific basis for claiming that genetic differences related to intelligence exist between races the cause of racial differences in IQ must be 100% environmental. The lack of an uneven distribution of "IQ" genes between geographic populations means that all human populations have the same genetic potential for intelligence. Since we know that there are environmental differences between demographic groups and nations which can affect intelligence this indicates that the cause of group differences is 100% environmental.
     
  23. Phill Banned Banned

    Messages:
    144
    You didn't show that.

    I'm really not sure where this "there are environmental variables, therefore it's 100% those" idea is coming from. Can I suggest a primer on heritability? Sesardic's Making Sense of Heritability is excellent.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page