D
Deleted member 9467
kpopmaxxer
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2020
- Posts
- 2,636
- Reputation
- 4,273
CMV: There are intelligence differences between races due to genetics, with Jews and East Asians having the highest IQ, and Africans the lowest. I beg of you, change my view.
This is a view that I am neither proud nor happy to hold, but it seems to me to be the truth after some research. It is an ugly, and potentially unhelpful and harmful belief, but that may not stop it from being true. This post is so long because I want to be thorough in expressing my ideas. I am truly hoping that my view can be changed.
To clarify my view: I believe in the concept of races. This CMV is not about the existence of races. For one, races are a very clearly visible thing that we can distinguish from an early age (there is evidence that 1 year olds form racial preferences). I can look and see, 'this guy is white, this guy is indian, this girl is native american, this girl is east asian'. I believe that while races can intermix, there are still pretty clear delineations between groups. Some populations or countries might, for example, be 80% caucasian and 20% east asian, and there may be spectrums between races in some areas, but I don't think that negates the concept of races. I think it's very possible that Africans, having had more time to evolve in Africa than the other races since they left, could be considered to be more than one race, but I don't know enough about it. I've heard that different African populations have more genetic dissimilarity than caucasians do compared to Asians, for example. I will be using the term 'race' to refer to the broad groups (i.e. caucasians) as well as smaller, less distinct people (i.e. semitic peoples, or jews, or slavs) because I don't understand enough to differentiate.
My belief relies heavily on IQ scores and testing. While IQ is only a tool we can use to measure intelligence, which isn't even that well defined in the first place, I fully believe that it is a useful and valid measure of what we generally think of as intelligence. It is highly and positively correlated with almost all the things we think of as good in people and society: reduced criminality, increased wages, increased lifespan, reduced mental illness, increased level of education. I don't think anyone will CMV by arguing that IQ is an illegitimate measure of intelligence. When I speak of the intelligence of a race, I fully understand that the measured IQ of a group is a single number given to a distribution of scores, and that not only individuals, but families, clans, and ethnic groups will have IQs significantly higher or lower than the group they belong to. It is my sincere hope that this post doesn't offend anybody.
My biases: I am white, and have a negative view of African-American culture. I've taken bias tests which show a negative prejudice towards black people. I know how this is going to sound, but if I see a black person dressed not in a lower class or 'urban' way, and they speak and act in a 'white' way, I honestly believe I have no prejudice towards them. I think that if I have racial prejudice towards black people at all, I am much, much more classist towards black culture. On the other hand, I hold a lukewarm opinion of Japanese culture, and a mostly negative one towards chinese, though I believe they are, as a race, more intelligent than caucasians. I also may hold a disproportionately high view of the IQ test, because I've been tested as a child and scored higher than average.
My sources: My information is mostly from wikipedia, as well as other online sources throughout the years. I don't have the time to reread all the wikipedia articles and cite all my claims, but I will post a few links that I think are important. Now, I think it is a very important point to bring up the politics of race and intelligence within academia. I believe, as a pretty far left liberal who's life goal is to go into academia, that there has been and continues to be a bias among researchers to minimize any racial IQ differences. There are many reasons for this, from the greater proportion of lefties in social sciences, to the potential blowback a researcher or institution could get if it published research that showed significant differences. The effect of political correctness of the accuracy of studies must not be underestimated. I will be using research from Richard Lynn in this CMV, and while I believe that he may be racist, and that it is true that his some of his methodologies may be suspect, I trust his work. (This view is open to be changed- that there is no political correctness influencing studies to show less of a difference in IQ). I do think it is somewhat likely that Lynn has exaggerated the difference in IQ, but I don't think it would be a very significant exaggeration.
These are the main articles I've read to gain an understanding: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nations_and_intelligence https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_size#Race https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
I haven't read all these recently in preparation for this CMV, I've skimmed some but I'm mostly going on memory. I've read them all at points in the past.
Now, the ugly bits. My understanding is that Jews and east asians have the highest IQs. Using data from IQ and Global Inequality (2002), Hong Kong and Singapore have an national IQ of 108. According to this page , Ashkenazi Jews have an average IQ of 107-115. Most of northern Europe sits a little above or below 100. Turkey sits at 90, Guetamala at 79, Qatar at 78, Ethiopia at 69, and Equitorial Guinea at 59. I understand the Flynn effect, but it doesn't seem that this can come anywhere close to accounting for differences. It is completely possible for authors to massage and omit data to fit whatever narrative they want, so I'd appreciate if somebody with a lot of experience with these studies could weigh in on which ones to trust.
The idea that different races would have different intelligence seems to me to be a fact. They may be small, but different evolutionary pressures in incredibly different environments must have led to differences. Humans might have left east africa up to 300000 years ago, and Africa up to 125000 years ago.
There are clear physical differences that can be used to determine the race of a person from their bones. A study from 1995 found east asians have an average brain volume of 1364 cm3, caucasians 1346 cm3, and africans 1267 cm^3.
A look at American crime rates, SAT scores, incarceration rates, income, and lifespan all show a consistent theme: east asians at the top, then caucasians, then africans. Of course some of this is influenced by culture and the history of racism in our country, but I don't think it explains all, or even most of it.
Look at Jews throughout history. They were massacred in progroms. Denied land ownership and jobs. Systematically discriminated against everywhere. Asians recieved much the same treatment in America for years and years. They came as the bottom of society, breaking their backs building railroads, a step up from slaves. Barred from most of society, denied employment. Yet, these two groups are more successful in America and Europe than caucasians today. Compare this to Africans. If racism really is the sole cause of African-Americans as a population's hardships, why aren't jews and east asians struggling today with them?
I think it goes even further back. People tout the Mali and Ethiopian and Numidian empires as proof that Africans were just as technologically and societally advanced as the Europe, the near east, and the far east, but I don't agree. These civilizations were nowhere near as advanced as their counterparts, mostly empires built on pure warfare rather than administrative and technological capabilities, and they are an exception rather than the rule in Africa. Look at how Africa struggles even to this day. A racial intelligence difference explains all this in a very simple way.
If I sound like a neo nazi, it is only because I am laying out my true beliefs in an open a way as possible, because I hate holding this belief. Please, change my view.
Edit: there was some trouble posting this the first time from a throwaway, and in the meantime I found some racist post a whole bunch of image links about race. Some were obviously bullshit, like that gorillas are smarter than africans. I'm going to post the rest to either provide more evidence or so they can be debunked.
Wealthy blacks commit more hommicide than poor whites
Blacks are 25x as likely to commit violent assault on whites compared to whites on blacks
Genetic distance of different ethnicities
This is a view that I am neither proud nor happy to hold, but it seems to me to be the truth after some research. It is an ugly, and potentially unhelpful and harmful belief, but that may not stop it from being true. This post is so long because I want to be thorough in expressing my ideas. I am truly hoping that my view can be changed.
To clarify my view: I believe in the concept of races. This CMV is not about the existence of races. For one, races are a very clearly visible thing that we can distinguish from an early age (there is evidence that 1 year olds form racial preferences). I can look and see, 'this guy is white, this guy is indian, this girl is native american, this girl is east asian'. I believe that while races can intermix, there are still pretty clear delineations between groups. Some populations or countries might, for example, be 80% caucasian and 20% east asian, and there may be spectrums between races in some areas, but I don't think that negates the concept of races. I think it's very possible that Africans, having had more time to evolve in Africa than the other races since they left, could be considered to be more than one race, but I don't know enough about it. I've heard that different African populations have more genetic dissimilarity than caucasians do compared to Asians, for example. I will be using the term 'race' to refer to the broad groups (i.e. caucasians) as well as smaller, less distinct people (i.e. semitic peoples, or jews, or slavs) because I don't understand enough to differentiate.
My belief relies heavily on IQ scores and testing. While IQ is only a tool we can use to measure intelligence, which isn't even that well defined in the first place, I fully believe that it is a useful and valid measure of what we generally think of as intelligence. It is highly and positively correlated with almost all the things we think of as good in people and society: reduced criminality, increased wages, increased lifespan, reduced mental illness, increased level of education. I don't think anyone will CMV by arguing that IQ is an illegitimate measure of intelligence. When I speak of the intelligence of a race, I fully understand that the measured IQ of a group is a single number given to a distribution of scores, and that not only individuals, but families, clans, and ethnic groups will have IQs significantly higher or lower than the group they belong to. It is my sincere hope that this post doesn't offend anybody.
My biases: I am white, and have a negative view of African-American culture. I've taken bias tests which show a negative prejudice towards black people. I know how this is going to sound, but if I see a black person dressed not in a lower class or 'urban' way, and they speak and act in a 'white' way, I honestly believe I have no prejudice towards them. I think that if I have racial prejudice towards black people at all, I am much, much more classist towards black culture. On the other hand, I hold a lukewarm opinion of Japanese culture, and a mostly negative one towards chinese, though I believe they are, as a race, more intelligent than caucasians. I also may hold a disproportionately high view of the IQ test, because I've been tested as a child and scored higher than average.
My sources: My information is mostly from wikipedia, as well as other online sources throughout the years. I don't have the time to reread all the wikipedia articles and cite all my claims, but I will post a few links that I think are important. Now, I think it is a very important point to bring up the politics of race and intelligence within academia. I believe, as a pretty far left liberal who's life goal is to go into academia, that there has been and continues to be a bias among researchers to minimize any racial IQ differences. There are many reasons for this, from the greater proportion of lefties in social sciences, to the potential blowback a researcher or institution could get if it published research that showed significant differences. The effect of political correctness of the accuracy of studies must not be underestimated. I will be using research from Richard Lynn in this CMV, and while I believe that he may be racist, and that it is true that his some of his methodologies may be suspect, I trust his work. (This view is open to be changed- that there is no political correctness influencing studies to show less of a difference in IQ). I do think it is somewhat likely that Lynn has exaggerated the difference in IQ, but I don't think it would be a very significant exaggeration.
These are the main articles I've read to gain an understanding: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nations_and_intelligence https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_size#Race https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
I haven't read all these recently in preparation for this CMV, I've skimmed some but I'm mostly going on memory. I've read them all at points in the past.
Now, the ugly bits. My understanding is that Jews and east asians have the highest IQs. Using data from IQ and Global Inequality (2002), Hong Kong and Singapore have an national IQ of 108. According to this page , Ashkenazi Jews have an average IQ of 107-115. Most of northern Europe sits a little above or below 100. Turkey sits at 90, Guetamala at 79, Qatar at 78, Ethiopia at 69, and Equitorial Guinea at 59. I understand the Flynn effect, but it doesn't seem that this can come anywhere close to accounting for differences. It is completely possible for authors to massage and omit data to fit whatever narrative they want, so I'd appreciate if somebody with a lot of experience with these studies could weigh in on which ones to trust.
The idea that different races would have different intelligence seems to me to be a fact. They may be small, but different evolutionary pressures in incredibly different environments must have led to differences. Humans might have left east africa up to 300000 years ago, and Africa up to 125000 years ago.
There are clear physical differences that can be used to determine the race of a person from their bones. A study from 1995 found east asians have an average brain volume of 1364 cm3, caucasians 1346 cm3, and africans 1267 cm^3.
A look at American crime rates, SAT scores, incarceration rates, income, and lifespan all show a consistent theme: east asians at the top, then caucasians, then africans. Of course some of this is influenced by culture and the history of racism in our country, but I don't think it explains all, or even most of it.
Look at Jews throughout history. They were massacred in progroms. Denied land ownership and jobs. Systematically discriminated against everywhere. Asians recieved much the same treatment in America for years and years. They came as the bottom of society, breaking their backs building railroads, a step up from slaves. Barred from most of society, denied employment. Yet, these two groups are more successful in America and Europe than caucasians today. Compare this to Africans. If racism really is the sole cause of African-Americans as a population's hardships, why aren't jews and east asians struggling today with them?
I think it goes even further back. People tout the Mali and Ethiopian and Numidian empires as proof that Africans were just as technologically and societally advanced as the Europe, the near east, and the far east, but I don't agree. These civilizations were nowhere near as advanced as their counterparts, mostly empires built on pure warfare rather than administrative and technological capabilities, and they are an exception rather than the rule in Africa. Look at how Africa struggles even to this day. A racial intelligence difference explains all this in a very simple way.
If I sound like a neo nazi, it is only because I am laying out my true beliefs in an open a way as possible, because I hate holding this belief. Please, change my view.
Edit: there was some trouble posting this the first time from a throwaway, and in the meantime I found some racist post a whole bunch of image links about race. Some were obviously bullshit, like that gorillas are smarter than africans. I'm going to post the rest to either provide more evidence or so they can be debunked.
Wealthy blacks commit more hommicide than poor whites
Blacks are 25x as likely to commit violent assault on whites compared to whites on blacks
Genetic distance of different ethnicities