Tags
One of the great mysteries in IQ research is why Indian Americans are such super achievers despite the fact that India reportedly has an IQ of only 82 according to the book IQ and Wealth of Nations.
And yet Indians in North America are known for their high intelligence and scholastic achievement, and despite being new to America, are already slightly over-represented on Forbes list of the 400 richest Americans. In some parts of Canada (particularly the maritime provinces like Newfoundland) if you’re Indian, all the white will people will assume you’re a doctor.
So how can Indians in North America be so smart when India’s average IQ is not great? Many people in the HBD-blogosphere invoke the theory that India is nation of many micro-races (castes) and that largely the smartest castes migrate to America, but the truth is usually much simpler.
Of the 2.8 million Indians in America, probably no more than 25% (700,000) are the ones who initially gained immigration (and the remaining 75% are the spouces, siblings, parents, and children, who came alone for the ride). But these 700,000 who actually gained immigration for themselves and their families are probably roughly the most occupationally successful 700,000 Indians out of a population of nearly 1.3 billion. In other words, they are above the +3.3 standard deviation mark in occupational status, and are on on average +3.5 SD. Since occupational status (mostly a function of education and income) correlates 0.7 with IQ, we should expect their IQ’s to be 3.5(0.7) = 2.45 SD higher than the average Indian (assuming Indians have a mean IQ of 82 and an SD 15, those who initially gain immigration to America should have an IQ of 119).
But because the IQ correlation between a parent and his adult offspring is about 0.45, the children of these high achieving immigrants from India should regress precipitously to the Indian mean:
0.45(119 – 82) + 82 = 99
Thus we should expect second-generation Indians born in America to have IQ’s around the U.S. average which is inconsistent with their incredible achievements. Can their achievements thus be explained by Tiger Moms? According to excellent Jamaican American blogger JayMan, parenting has zero impact.
So how do we explain the high achievements of second generation Indian immigrants? Nutrition. Blogger Steve Sailer was perhaps the first to notice that even un-mixed black Americans who have lived in the United States for centuries are several inches taller and about 13 IQ points smarter than black Africans. This suggests that first world nutrition adds about 13 IQ points (and several inches of height) to people of third world ancestry.
So the children of these high achieving immigrants would only have had an average IQ of 99 if born in India. Since they’re born in America, they should have IQ’s of 99 + 13 = 112.
Is it really plausible that Indian Americans could really have an IQ that high? Forbes magazine writes:
Just how smart are Indian Americans? We don’t know with much certainty. Most data sets with information on ethnic groups do not include IQ scores, and the few that do rarely include enough cases to provide interpretable results for such a small portion of the population.
The only direct evidence we have comes from the 2003 New Immigrant Survey, in which a basic cognitive test called “digit span” was administered to a sample of newly arrived immigrant children. It is an excellent test for comparing people with disparate language and educational backgrounds, since the test taker need only repeat lengthening sequences of digits read by the examiner. Repeating the digits forward is simply a test of short-term memory, but repeating them backward is much more mentally taxing, hence a rough measure of intelligence.
When statistical adjustments are used to convert the backward digit span results to full-scale IQ scores, Indian Americans place at about 112 on a bell-shaped IQ distribution, with white Americans at 100. 112 is the 79th percentile of the white distribution. For more context, consider that Ashkenazi Jews are a famously intelligent ethnic group, and their mean IQ is somewhere around 110.
Indian American Deepak Chopra shares his deep spiritual wisdom with big brained Oprah.
Given East Asians higher visual spatial IQs, they lag Europeans when it comes to artistic design, creativity and character.
East Asians are very primitive when it comes to interior design. Have you ever visited a place owned by East Asians, whether it’s their home or business? It’s cold, simplistic, lacking in warmth or character.
Again, Anon should stop ranting about East Asians and their inferiority. History and Art have taught us just that.
The Mongols had the largest empire, surpassing that of the Muslims and Alexander the Great, yet, there was no exchange of information between East and West.
Furthermore, East Asians lack curiosity.
They do not even scale their own creations in Shanghai, because only Whites do that:
“Furthermore, East Asians lack curiosity.”
That’s far more plausible based on hormone levels than the creativity thing;
A basic look at brain structure will tell us that Asians are not necessarily less creative (probably about cancels out the hormones).
Hormones plays a role in IQ, does it not?
blacks have significantly higher t levels, and therefore, they are less intelligent, because of it. On the upside, blacks are more daring, less nervous, have more charisma as suggested by Pumpkin and the pro black crowd here. East Asians are quite the opposite, low t levels, lower sex drive, more introverted and more nervous (or cautious as suggested by Rushton).
Asians just don’t have the drive in terms of hormones (literally makes you more energetic), and that may even cause their creativity not to be tapped into, but their creativity aptitude based on the brain structure, is still high…
”– A basic look at brain structure will– tell us that Asians are not necessarily less creative (probably about cancels out the hormones).”
Show me evidences
The visual parts involve pain perception as well, and processing of things (leading to creativity)
The verbal part is where personality comes from, so JS is perhaps right that Asians are less “dynamic” but that doesn’t go hand-in-hand with creativity, somewhat counterintuitively.
How do you think that creativity is produced in your brain??
You know that creativity is strongly intuitive. East Asians tend to be less intuitive than euro-causasians??
Already there million of east Asians in western world. They have been more creative achievers than whites?? If the answer was yes show me evidences. If the answer was not, why??
If you compare Western Euros vs East Asians, then the creativity of the former have surpassed the latter. How many East Asian cities are like the ones found in Western Europe? Such criteria would civic engagement, diversity of goods and the different institutions. And remember, Western institutions and Western products attract East Asians.
Asians have lower sex drive?
Then why are Asian countries a massive market for Eastern European prostitutes? Chinese and South Korean men are the cause of a massive demand for Eastern European prostitutes which is provided by the Russian mafia.
As for interior design, modern Asian offices and homes are modeled right off western ones. A “traditional” Asian office would have had decorations, dragons, and phoenixes.
Their birth rates. They have a high population of virgins.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/09/17/japans-population-decline-and-rk-selection-theory/
Philosopher Immanuel Kant said orientals are irrational. Their ideologies are based on sensation and not reason. The same could be said of their societies, reflective of their sensational thoughts. They live for ostentation, while Westerners strive for reason.
”They live for ostentation, while Westerners strive for reason.”
”Philosopher Immanuel Kant said orientals are irrational. Their ideologies are based on sensation and not reason”
source*
Your vociferant generalizations via big biased point of views is astonishing!!!
Supposedly eastern IS a big shooping while western IS a big library.
too fundamentalist binnary thinking sir (wrongly used).
And you’re a experienced traveller isn’t*
His works on anthropology describe the orientals as sensational rather than rational.
Yes, Western institutions are numerous. It’s mind boggling. There are all kinds of museums, libraries and other centers with specific interests/disciplines. This is a result of the dynamic quality found in the West and lacking in East Asia.
East Asia are lacking in institutions in comparison.
But you need keep in mind that is not all of them who may be like that…
well, nerds on avg tends to no have aesthetic sense.
just look to the avg western nerds**
easterners are the nerdest of the human populations.
Reason, rationalizing, as a way to find moral truths is wrong. Plato, Aristotle, et al are wrong. The social intuitionist argument from Jonathan Haidt makes much more sense. Inb4 Santo says anything stupid to the studies Mr. Haidt has conducted himself to find that “wagging a dog’s tail doesn’t make it happy”.
We’re not talking about moral truths, but rationality, which bring us to this:
Aristotle came up with the idea of eudaimonia for man. Living the good life with reasoning doesn’t seem to be a precept among East Asian-Confucian based societies, who are not only less dynamic, but less inclined to reason with qualities of balance and fairness, and more on intuition and authoritarianism. Confucius’ ideologies are of filial piety, respect for elders and the de facto authorities, work along the lines of the rote-bureaucratic inclinations of East Asians.
Surrealist is a parrot…
guti guti
i don’t need to say nothing about him, he say pretty stup..end imoral things by himself, none need press him, he admit himself he’s a asshol..nice guy.
Realist is a pale manifestation of the clannish asshol…nice guy…
what a clannish mafiosi look like
”i don’t care about others, just with my family and close friends”
– BLACK LIVES MATTER who said it**
– Cosa Nostra*
– Zionists*
You choice
Realist think he is
geneticist (”i’m interested in genetics”)
philaaaawsopher (”philosophy is dead, but i’m surreal enough to ”argue” about it)
sociologist (my white fly example… with New Jersey accent, please)
wise
anthropologist…
He think hes a swiss Army knife.
Too du..SMART to know what he really is…
and i know…
Surrealist confuse
truth with ”to say nasty things”
testosterone with intelligence
relativity with relativism
individuality with individualism
well…
but look
he is extremely stubborn…
himself he thinks he is always right, and it makes little or no effort to find out if he’s really right.
look to their ”’argument”
”Plato is wrong, Haidt is right”
”Idealism is wrong. Social darwinism is right”
he simply don’t explain why he think like that, he can’t be more deliberated, reflective, your reflective (to the BEST judgment) defec…quality is evident, at least for me.
And Santo has said MericaStan’s Whites have taken the formulaic from East Asians.
The adherence of the status quo regardless of its nature, a less inclination for intellectualism and freethinking and a lower civic participation because of first 2 reasons.
Surrealist read some sentences of mister (((Haidt))) and concluded:
”he is right”
Most people think humanities studies is easy, everyone can study it…
result: ….
One of the great mistakes of human boings.
“We lie, cheat and bend ethical rules often when we think we can get away with; and then we use our moral reasoning to manage our reputations and justify ourselves with others. We believe in our posteriori reasoning so deeply that finished moralistically (self-righteously) convinced of our own power ”
wonderful ”insight” by mister (((Haidt)))
“It is the first principle: the intuitions come first, strategic reasoning second”
oooooh.
So this supposedly prove morality is subjective.
my two concepts (or just obvious concepts) about morality nail all this little talk ”morality is relative”
we have
objective morality (what is absolutely right and absolutely wrong)
kill a person by no rational reasons is wrong.
subjective morality (what human cults has confusing with virtues, with objective morality because their strong mechanisms of cultural imposition)
kill a person because she/he is muslim…
kill a person because she/he is proved homossexual…
kill a person because she/he was adulterous…
“What chance is there that people think open-minded, exploratory, when self-interest, social identity and strong emotions do want or need to reach a conclusion preordained?”
Strong emotions, for example, necessarily don’t falsify good moral judgment.
Social identity necessarily don’t falsify good moral judgment.
Morality is balance/harmony, in ideal world.
Ideal morality is too much responsibility/boring for many humans because they are childish, mentally imature…
“While opinion is firmly rooted in feelings, she wins more than loses stability when it finds a preponderant weight of arguments against it. For if it had been built as a result of an argument, a refutation of the argument could undermine the strength of the conviction; but when lies only in feelings, the worse it is in terms of arguments, most are persuaded their supporters that they feel should have a deeper reasoning that the arguments do not reach; and while the feeling persists, it is always bringing new arguments barriers to repair any breach made the old man. ”
Haidt…
Surrealist,
explain for us this part
I have the impression you understand what you want about Haidt theories and not what he said.
Haidt is
– pro en masse immigration**
– pro israel**
– pro BLM**
Sir,
Most in west dont know much about Indians. But facts are-
1.Best in India dont go to US / EU, as they can get powerful jobs in India & enjoy services of Bangladeshi maids, chefs, shoffers, helping hands and lead HQ life.
2.Most Indians who excel in GRE /GMT are who lost Medical entrance for AIIMS and such. It is 2nd best of India youth who go to US; though they excel in US.
3.Creativity / curiosity- these are individual views / perceptions. Some may not like English pop music, but they need not be less intelligent.
4.IQ/EQ is mostly about leadership, ability to see over the horizon, able to decide with translucency / opaque / with much inputs and still achieve. Indians have done very well last 30 yrs or more.
5.Most peace loving, adaptable, innovative population of US are Indian Americans.
6.EQ/IQ is also about benevolence and empathy- see 50 million Bangladeshi population accommodated / taken care off.
Many young Indians who achieved in US are from poor back ground including Googles Sunder PIchai or Micro Soft -Nadela or Pepsi Indira. No 1 is from rich family / parents.
Yes , there are many poor tribal in hills of India.
There are 50 million poor Bangladeshi labor force too since 1971 in India. I ndia has accommodated them too, They lived & multiplied last 45 years, given food, shelter & jobs too; taken care off.
The 7000 yr old civilization. Non violent religions like Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism & Hinduism -all belong to India.. It is all about human values…
See the way aborigines in Au & US etc being subjugated / marginalized in their own countries.
Actually it’s “Chauffeur” not “shoffer” I believe that’s what you intended to say. You are wrong! the most intelligent Indians choose to move to western countries purely to live with their intellectual peers. Most IIT grads choose to move to the US or Europe, a huge percentage of young indian medical grads move to the west for the same reason. Intellectual compatibility. My own parents who were invited by Columbia University back in the 60s moved from India to the US and decided to make it their home purely because they were very educated, and found cultural/ intellectual compatibility here. They loved the Opera, museums, intellectual gatherings etc.
That isn’t a simple explanation. A nutrition argument has a lot more assumptions behind it than population stratification, which is easy to verify.
” some parts of Canada (particularly the maritime provinces like Newfoundland) if you’re Indian, all the white will people will assume you’re a doctor.”
A very big caveat here. Corruption in getting admission into top indian universities and courses is very rampant. A number , in fact most of the admits in the top courses such as medical doctor and universities such as IIT get admitted by having somebody else write their examInation,( an entrance examination, which is the practice in india), . In other cases, they get help from authorities who will solve exam for them and they will merely note it down. These candidates belong to powerful families and upper castes butnot fit to be admitted while professors, who are usually from similar and related families will give them top marks also once they are admitted. In fact such admits are majority. Almost all admits I came across, did this. Universities are well aware and keep quite.It is all
Iike a racket, very well hid.
The universities will talk loudly about reservation, i. e. Affirmative action candidates not performing well, but it,s all bogus.
There are genuine cases of hardworking students getting in but they are nearly rare, may be 20% of the admits. An IQ test, a standardised test, a valid measure, which will sniff out if one got admitted by such means by measuring his inteligwnce or ,g,, a wide gap relative to what is usual and expected at such levels of selection or relative to their peers will bust such candidates.
Sir-
IQs of course regress because heritability is not 1.00, but not towards racial means.
If IQs of individuals/groups regressed towards racial means, it would mean
phenotype= Racial Alleles + Environment.
The only genetic component of IQ (or any phenotype) would be racial alleles, not any sort of other alleles.
Natural selection, the breaking off of a group with phenotypes more selected for, would be impossible.Indeed, there would be no genetic diversity within a race if this was the case.
I hope this comment can be posted.
Thank you.
As long as the IQ correlation between parents & kids is imperfect, you’ll get regression to the mean. Doesn’t matter whether the correlation is caused by race genes, non-race genes or is 100% environmental
but towards what mean?
Not the racial mean.
There’s more to the “Genes” portion than just racial alleles.
The children of the first generation will regress to the racial mean because they’re SELECTED by criteria that is imperfectly correlated with their offspring’s IQ. But the third generation will not regress, assuming the second generation was endogenous, because their parents were not selected by any criteria.
PP, regression doesn’t occur to the racial mean\
https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/regression-to-the-mean/
It regresses TOWARDS to racial mean, meaning not AT the mean. I remember Rushton’s AmRen talk on this, he said it wrong. He said that 2 high IQ blacks who had a kid, their kid will regress TO the black mean, which is not true.
RaceRealist, regression TO the mean is synonymous with regression TOWARDS the mean. The words “to” means both “to” and also means “towards”, BUT the word “towards” ONLY means “towards”.
Indian immigration to Canada isn’t that select. Lots are in blue collar occupations and came as refugees but they perform at the same level as whites or higher.
Westerners keep thinking about your shit concept called I.Q which was created by racist white minds for the white people.Now that white people are challenged by some slum dwelling street shitter poor Indian they are beginning to get insecure.That shows Concept of I.Q is false
I agree. IQ is just a glorified short-term memory test. Intelligence is much more complicated.
The conflation of IQ and intelligence, invalidates any useful hypothesis from this article attempts to make.
The standard IQ test should be validated, If there is such a huge discrepancy between the IQ test results of Indians in India vs those who emigrate to the west. To validate the nutrition argument you would actually have to do an apples to apples comparison between India and the US not some anecdotal evidence of diet between Africans and African Americans. Anthropological Sapiens evolved to thrive on the wort diets.Comparing the quality of cities and infrastructure is also a corrupt argument because you would have to look at several thousand years of data rather than a snap shot in time. I would say the answer will be found in the fact that Indians in India have culturally adapted to survive in an extremely tough environment, the competition for resources is much more difficult in India than in the US. So clearly if you take someone that has been struggling uphill on a 45 degree angle for many generations and put them on a more level incline they will exceed those that have already been there.
Again you can not measure cultural achievements in a snap shot in time. If it was not for the Indians we would be dumbfounded trying to do trigonometry with Roman numerals and I can imagine how difficult it would have been for Einstein to come up with the theory of relativity. For humanity to concept of zero was as important as the concept of the wheel.
The caste system in India has led to the big gap in IQ.So the higher castes and noble prize winners are almost entirely from the higher brahmin preistly caste.One can equate them to the jews.The problem India had and still to a certain extent is this has not allowed the majority access to higher learning as they were forced to do lower jobs based on their caste which was determined by birth.