NSFW Charles Murray, Richard Lynn, Tatu Vanhanen and the difficulty in finding data on a censored internet

[IowaOffRoad]

Yet your OP pontificates a question of why one geography of a group of people has a different result of another geography of that group of people…. /taps fingers on table

Huh?

Guess I'm not on the correct side of the bell curve Please dumb down the point? Not certain of your correlation...

"Western civilization" has meant many different things over the years, do you mean the post-dark-ages liberal individualism that was largely rejected by the prussian socialists in the late 19th century?

You could also mean 'forcing our moral values upon the uncivilized savages for their own good', as that's another shade of "western civilization". It does result in a lot of generational wisdom being extinguished though. Shit like 'primitive religions' preventing overhunting because 'it angers the gods when you don't use every piece of the animal', or savage tea ceremonies being mostly about hygiene.

I believe you refer to the so-called "white man's burden" that the european colonialists referred to during their division of africa and southeast asia in the 19th century.
Admittedly, the outcomes for those regions can be directly correlated to how much they embraced and how much they shunned the colonial systems put in place after independence.

 

[[486]]

So... Should we send out inspectors... after we rebrand the DoE as The United States Department of Education (USDE) and have them tat the foreheads of those who passed... the barely passed with "USDE Inspected", the better ones with "USDE Grade A", the really good with "USDE Choice", and the 1% with "USDE Prime"?

Is that not what we've got now?
Fuck the DOE, I'm all for there being a school of any set of beliefs that the open market will support without coercion.

If there's enough people paying for an education in the flying spaghetti monster to support there being a classroom teaching it, then fuck yeah. If it continues being a thing and starts growing through its own merits I'd be shocked, but...

 

[Yota Up]

Supreme Court decision of 1979 I think. Banned IQ tests in public schools because too many black kids were scoring at 85 or below and being put into a special ed classes. Should be able to find that on google as it's a big court decision.

 

[[486]]

Admittedly, the outcomes for those regions can be directly correlated to how much they embraced and how much they shunned the colonial systems put in place after independence.

So success isn't about IQ, but instead conformity to outside forces?

Feels kinda cargo-culty

 

[IowaOffRoad]

Supreme Court decision of 1979 I think. Banned IQ tests in public schools because too many black kids were scoring at 85 or below and being put into a special ed classes. Should be able to find that on google as it's a big court decision.

At the same time, the US military cannot recruit anybody under 86 by federal law as they have determined there is no way to train them to do anything useful.

So success isn't about IQ, but instead conformity to outside forces?

Feels kinda cargo-culty

That's a cynical take, but give me the outlier?

 

[Landslide]

In my professional opinion, as a carpenter, Intelligence Quotient tests are flawed in that they may consider the Ashkenazi jew who kicks ass at math, but can't track a moose across a mud flat to be very intelligent, but not a bushman who can track a snake across a flat rock and tell you what it ate for breakfast...both people who are very smart, but different practical applications. There is not, that I'm aware of, a better way to measure one's mental abilities.

You may find the value of my opinion to be commensurate with the compensation I have received for it.

I think that kids early on before and after starting school with what people would call mental health issues, like ADHD etc, and then drugging them kills the real potential they were gifted with. Maybe they can’t focus on reading or can’t set still in class, they will find a way to use their minds in doing remarkable things that the focused kids can’t do. Imagination or day dreamers survived long before drugs to dull their senses ever came available.

 

[Mikel]

Intelligence is a very complex thing to measure, and requires many character traits to be fully utilized (curiosity, perseverance, work ethic, drive, ambition...) and turned into something useful. This is why very often, moderately smart people with those qualities will achieve more than super-geniuses who are lacking in other areas.

Otherwise you end up with the equivalent of a 1000 HP car with shitty tires, brakes and suspension.

 

[[486]]

That's a cynical take, but give me the outlier?

Dunno, all I've got is that I'd rather see cultures naturally subsumed by the self evident merits of other cultures. Gives the chance for the dying culture to leave the mark of their bright spots. Like how the US used to be all about adopting the most appropriate parts of every culture and rejecting the incompatible bits.

Cultures are sets of morals, and trying to unify morality across a society is exactly where socialism always turns authoritarian.

Rather see the natural evolution of a shared culture where it intersects without force, rather than the woke bullshit we've got going on where black kids are taught that 'being a violent thug' is somehow their 'cultural heritage'

 

[IowaOffRoad]

I think that kids early on before and after starting school with what people would call mental health issues, like ADHD etc, and then drugging them kills the real potential they were gifted with. Maybe they can’t focus on reading or can’t set still in class, they will find a way to use their minds in doing remarkable things that the focused kids can’t do. Imagination or day dreamers survived long before drugs to dull their senses ever came available.

I've got a kid with known semi-severe ADHD and high-functioning autism. We acquiesced to a very low dose of meds for ADHD for a couple of years then dropped them for several reasons. They did help for a time, but he was on a way lower dose than 'recommended'. I know some kids benefit from that long-term, but most need to learn to cope. That's what my oldest is doing now. We spend a lot of time talking about how to handle various situations and work on coping mechanisms.
I have another kid who's probably also ADHD as well, but I think with what we know we can avoid anything other than working with her strengths to mitigate her weaknesses. I do think form many, if not most kids who deal with this it's the right way. It makes their life harder short-term (something I've discussed with the boy often) but I feel it will pay dividends when he can begin to channel these things that can be gifts.

Dunno, all I've got is that I'd rather see cultures naturally subsumed by the self evident merits of other cultures. Gives the chance for the dying culture to leave the mark of their bright spots. Like how the US used to be all about adopting the most appropriate parts of every culture and rejecting the incompatible bits.

Cultures are sets of morals, and trying to unify morality across a society is exactly where socialism always turns authoritarian.

Rather see the natural evolution of a shared culture where it intersects without force, rather than the woke bullshit we've got going on where black kids are taught that 'being a violent nog' is somehow their 'cultural heritage'

Well, wouldn't choosing to keep the culture of another after decolonization be a form of natural subsuming of the colonizing culture? It could certainly be argued that is a conscious choice, just as wholly rejecting it.

 

[rockota]

Huh?

Guess I'm not on the correct side of the bell curve Please dumb down the point? Not certain of your correlation...

As you asked: “ So, why the difference between black americans and black africans?”


Because IQ tests are cultural….

 

[IowaOffRoad]

As you asked: “ So, why the difference between black americans and black africans?”


Because IQ tests are cultural….

K, gotcha.

Its my understanding that there are formulations of IQ tests that take that into account. It was also my understanding that this was done in the finer-grade studies done on the topic that differentiate between African blacks and American Blacks. (edit to add, among other differentiations. This is the one everyone hangs up on. I'd like to find that paper so I can use one of the other, more palatable, less controversial examples)

I think one of the reasons everyone pushes back on this is two-fold:
You don't want to feel inferior as historically much emphasis has been placed on this.
It's fashionable now to blame anything uncomfortable on "systemic-this" and "structural-that"

I presented data. Not mine, but others who've taken much time and effort to put together. It's been peer-reviewed, and rarely challenged on it's merits. Do you or anyone else have any countervailing data to refute and not just how you feel about the thing? Not a gotcha, I'd like to see it.

Like many others I didn't want to believe it when I first ran across it 20 years ago for the same reasons. My theory expands on it and makes the differences less about race and more about how a culture (which for much of human history was tied to a specific race) might select for intelligence. Doesn't mean that melanin makes you dumb or straight black hair makes you smart.

 

[[486]]

Well, wouldn't choosing to keep the culture of another after decolonization be a form of natural subsuming of the colonizing culture? It could certainly be argued that is a conscious choice, just as wholly rejecting it.

the ends do not justify the means

If it came about naturally through trade or whatever, sure it is good by me. I won't even say that colonialism is immoral in itself, it is just when force and coercion come into the equation all that goes out the window.

Maybe by starving a small portion of the population, the majority will see an incomparable benefit in time, I just can't justify putting that kind of power into the hands of anyone. Individual action is easily justified, but collective action is not. Shooting your rapist is justifiable, having the state execute someone accused of rape is not.

 

[IowaOffRoad]

the ends do not justify the means

If it came about naturally through trade or whatever, sure it is good by me. I won't even say that colonialism is immoral in itself, it is just when force and coercion come into the equation all that goes out the window.

Maybe by euthanizing a small portion of the population, the majority will see an incomparable benefit in time, I just can't justify putting that kind of power into the hands of anyone. Individual action is easily justified, but collective action is not. Shooting your rapist is justifiable, having the state execute someone accused of rape is not.

I can agree to that.

Admittedly, we come from an enlightened age. I don't think either of us would have seen much issue with this arrangement 200 years ago, as much as modern people like to rewrite history.
Just because many southerners didn't own slaves didn't mean that they disagreed with the practice.
Just because northerners didn't doesn't mean that they wanted to die for black slaves or ending black slavery.
Yet, here we are, having fought a war in our past that ended black slavery and wrote the practice out of our laws permanently (even though it was never really in them explicitly).

 

[[486]]

Goddamn, slavery is a whole topic in itself... You should maybe make a thread on it in a week or two.
I'm gonna poop and go to bed.

 

[Yota Up]

Like many others I didn't want to believe it when I first ran across it 20 years ago for the same reasons. My theory expands on it and makes the differences less about race and more about how a culture (which for much of human history was tied to a specific race) might select for intelligence.

And you don't think race impacts the culture? Why not just combine race and culture and you're right back to square one.

 

[IowaOffRoad]

And you don't think race impacts the culture? Why not just combine race and culture and you're right back to square one.

Not in ways that matter.

In spite of the WEF, illuminati, whomever, the attempts to divide us and blame all of our problems on our founding is largely baseless. Proof? For all of our faults, the foundational document of the pinnacle of the west (us, of course) doesn't require a point of origin or a preferred religion in order for one to receive the benefits. All it requires is an adherence to principles and, hopefully, with that an understanding of what lays at the base of them. If all people of all races came here and didn't do one thing to adopt our culture, the US would have fragmented into the Balkans a century and a half ago.

Besides, Charles Darwin and his theory is in serious doubt these days for what we now know of the forces involved, but that's a whole 'nother thread, so I dismiss his racism as another thing he's incorrect about.

Besides, Tom Sowell agrees with me on the point

 

[Squamch]

Many of the social and psychological researchers have found correlation between many of the things they study and IQ. According to them, the only people who want to debunk those tests are those who don't like what the outcomes are.

Going counter to the narrative of those who receive funding for said narrative is often frowned upon by narrators.

 

[Squamch]

IMO, if MY pet theory is correct, it really doesn't matter what 'race' you are. It matters more that the 'west' tries to encourage and instill the values of western civ on those who are lagging and, generationally the differences will mitigate, and in the near term those places/cultures would benefit from the fruits of what it took the rest of us thousands of years to learn the hard way.
The best 'reparations' for the perceived exploitation is to give those folks the tools to better themselves.
Its also a bit of a jab against the anarchists who want to tear civilization down, and a defense of western civ.

There are ways of correcting for the bias that you point out. It's been explained to me and I believe it, but I'm not sure I can articulate it. There are certainly IQ tests that are weighted for age and education level, and I'm sure you understand that they are available in many languages.

So...what are your thoughts on the eastern cultures who score very highly on IQ tests then?

 

[Chicken Corners]

Math is RACIST

 

[IowaOffRoad]

So...what are your thoughts on the eastern cultures who score very highly on IQ tests then?

Many of those eastern cultures at the time of testing had adopted a wester civ mindset (think Japan and Korea, and to a lesser extent China).

One of the problems with a layperson trying to look into this, pro or con, is the difficulty in getting some of the finer details easily (as chronicled in the OP). Much of the testing was done in the 'west' on recent immigrants or children of the same IIRC from my reading as those subjects were easier to attain. A self-selecting group for sure, but it's my understanding that they did bolster their data with a strong sampling from those in the select countries. I believe the researchers knew their biased samples and attempted to correct for it (which is meaningful in that they cared about the outcome being accurate, even if they failed to achieve accuracy in some way). I remember from some Murray interviews he attempted to describe the way the studies were done, and I think what he did was pull together a multitude of studies regarding IQ from around the world, many done by the governments of those regions themselves, so I believe they would be incentivized to err on the good side of those studies.

Ultimately I don't know, but I accept the basic premise: IQ matters, and can be predicted in large sample sizes if you can determine the genetic makeup of those who were part of the sample.

Another of the IQ researcher said this (I'm paraphrasing):

"Just because I know that the IQ of someone from the sub-saharan would be on average x, if I run into someone from that region at an academic conference I would never assume they were less intelligent than I, and may even assume they may be more intelligent. Large group studies is not a predictor of individual performance, but can be useful when discussing general trends and could lead to solutions to the problem."

One of the other studies, somewhat related has seemed to indicate there is very little to be done about IQ to increase IQ, but much can be done to decrease IQ (lack of food, vitamins, water, proper health care, familial relationships, proper education) from it's full potential. Maybe some of the IQ differences are due to cultures in regions with a high correlation between society and genetic makeup aren't prioritizing meeting those basics for the largest number of their populations and is stunting them artificially? Yet one more thing that could be done if WE WOULD JUST LOOK AT THE DATA OBJECTIVELY.

 

[fordguy]

i took an iq test and failed

 

[Yota Up]

All it requires is an adherence to principles and, hopefully, with that an understanding of what lays at the base of them. If all people of all races came here and didn't do one thing to adopt our culture, the US would have fragmented into the Balkans a century and a half ago.

And that is why blacks in America have a higher IQ than blacks in Africa. It's our culture that helped educate them, and more importantly, provide them with the opportunities to succeed if and when they demonstrate talent.

The most money I ever spent in my life at one time was to pay 2 brilliant black doctors for a complex medical surgery that nobody else had even half the chance of doing successfully. They are a perfect example of education and opportunity to shine here in America, and also serve to show that regardless of baseline IQ among any given race it's the ones that excel and channel their motivation to become winners that should be praised.

 

[No way]

Holy fawkin blabla.

Are you fawking around with that chatbot shit again?
I'm Northern European so I ain't brainy enuff to reed that sheet anyhows.

 

[IowaOffRoad]

Are you fawking around with that chatbot shit again?
I'm Northern European so I ain't brainy enuff to reed that sheet anyhows.

Naw man, all me. Pent up mental energy after a bought of fever-dream sickness. Thanks for checking in

 

[Thefishguy77]

In my professional opinion, as a carpenter, Intelligence Quotient tests are flawed in that they may consider the Ashkenazi jew who kicks ass at math, but can't track a moose across a mud flat to be very intelligent, but not a bushman who can track a snake across a flat rock and tell you what it ate for breakfast...both people who are very smart, but different practical applications. There is not, that I'm aware of, a better way to measure one's mental abilities.

You may find the value of my opinion to be commensurate with the compensation I have received for it.

There is a difference between being smart and being intelligent. That aside I tend to agree with you on flawed IQ tests/testing/correlation. The more I listened to intelligent people speak to the subject there are 2 different levels of IQ tests and it depends on who set it up as to what kind it is. Certain questions out of the massive accepted pool of questions for IQ tests are considered lower quality or counter point higher quality. Now I’m not smart enough or intelligent enough to begin to explain it but the better question tests tend to be more accurate. Also they are highly biased towards those with a 12+ year education vs someone who grew it street/woods/real life smart. Being able to do those questions in your head is a practiced skill for most to be good at it. Being able to tell what way a snake went on a flat rock is a practiced talent and has my up most respect but people like that would need to have an applicable question test made up for them to get an comparable score IMO.

Where I can see a person like your snake tracker would excel at in some of those questions would be the practical problem solving ones.

All those lies above out of the way. Isn’t there a prime time in brain development that is considered the best time for testing. No one here should dispute that you’re not as sharp and quick as you were 20 years ago. Brains only bounce so many times before the get grumpy.

 

[Thefishguy77]

I saw an interview with Jordan Peterson who said IQ tests are some of the easiest to develop that produce very accurate results. He said the data is clear. We just cant talk about it because people are offended by the results.

That episode sent me down a rabbit hole one night.

 

[Yota Up]

All those lies above out of the way. Isn’t there a prime time in brain development that is considered the best time for testing.

A long time ago, before internet, I understood that to be the age of 10 years old. An IQ result of 110 would demonstrate an 11 year capability while a score of 90 would demonstrate a 9 year old. So you can get an idea of the implication when someone say IQ 180, think of a 10 year old with the mind of an 18 year old. Could be horseshit, but sounds good enough to me for putting a perspective on the number itself.

But I'm sure Eviltwit will be here as expert any minute to set us straight.

 

[Animalmother]

You know none of this is going to matter in a couple years when people can jack their brain into the google.

If your not jacked in you wont be able to even have a conversation with those that are and with AI

 

[PoBoy84]

I think that kids early on before and after starting school with what people would call mental health issues, like ADHD etc, and then drugging them kills the real potential they were gifted with. Maybe they can’t focus on reading or can’t set still in class, they will find a way to use their minds in doing remarkable things that the focused kids can’t do. Imagination or day dreamers survived long before drugs to dull their senses ever came available.

My son is like this. We had him IQ tested, but yiu didn't need the number to gauge his intelligence. It's obvious when he speaks he's on a different level than the adult he's speaking to. He had every country in the world memorized in alphabetical order before he was 3. Eary teachers wanted him on meds. Now they know him well, but some still despise him because he can't stop himself from correcting them if he notices an error in something their teaching. Public schools don't have time to F with smart kids.

 

[aczlan]

There is a difference between being smart and being intelligent. That aside I tend to agree with you on flawed IQ tests/testing/correlation. The more I listened to intelligent people speak to the subject there are 2 different levels of IQ tests and it depends on who set it up as to what kind it is. Certain questions out of the massive accepted pool of questions for IQ tests are considered lower quality or counter point higher quality. Now I’m not smart enough or intelligent enough to begin to explain it but the better question tests tend to be more accurate. Also they are highly biased towards those with a 12+ year education vs someone who grew it street/woods/real life smart. Being able to do those questions in your head is a practiced skill for most to be good at it. Being able to tell what way a snake went on a flat rock is a practiced talent and has my up most respect but people like that would need to have an applicable question test made up for them to get an comparable score IMO.

Where I can see a person like your snake tracker would excel at in some of those questions would be the practical problem solving ones.

All those lies above out of the way. Isn’t there a prime time in brain development that is considered the best time for testing. No one here should dispute that you’re not as sharp and quick as you were 20 years ago. Brains only bounce so many times before the get grumpy.

Excellent point, I once took an IQ test that was asking the definition and spelling of words and then another one where they tell you a string of random letters and numbers and you have to repeat them back in order.
I aced the first and bombed the second.

Aaron Z