Commenter Afrosapiens wrote:
First thing, contrary to what HBDers want us to believe, these cranial capacity gaps are extremely small. Too small to explain a one SD gap in IQ or “g”.
First of all, racial differences in brain size are not that small. The most high quality data ever obtained on black-white brain size differences in the U.S. was a 1980 study of autopsied brains at the Case-Western Reserve University’s Medical School in Cleveland, Ohio. The purpose of the study was to obtain norms for black and white brain weight so that when an autopsy is performed, one could determine if the brain weight was abnormal since this can tell you a lot about the cause of death.
Now one problem with this data is that the sample varies in age from 25 to age 80. This is not a problem for comparing the mean brain of blacks and whites because both groups died at a mean age of 60, however having such a wide range of ages likely greatly inflated the standard deviation and thus minimize racial differences expressed in SD units. Since I don’t know the brain weight standard deviations for same age groups, I decided to convert autopsied brain weight (estimated at age 25) to in vivo volume (following Rushton 1997) and use the standard deviations of Caucasian enlisted army men and women (91 cm3 and 90cm3 respectively, see table 1 of Rushton’s data ) since skull measurements, especially in young adults are much less age sensitive than brain weights in mixed-age adults. To make this conversion, one must first divide by 1.09 because brain weight increases by 9% post-mortem so the in-vivo weight is 9% lower. Then, converting brain weight to brain volume is simply a matter of multiplying by 1.036.
| group | n | height(cm) | brain weight (g) | sd of brain weight (g) | brain weight height adjusted (g) | estimated brain weight at age 25 (g) | estimated in-vivobrain volume at age 25 (cm3) | cranial capacity sd taken from rushton’s data-set (cm3 ) |
| white males | 413 | 175 | 1392 | 130 | 1392 | 1570 | 1492 | 91 |
| black males | 228 | 173 | 1286 | 138 | 1290 | 1375 | 1307 | |
| white females | 395 | 162 | 1252 | 125 | 1252 | 1339 | 1273 | 90 |
| black females | 222 | 162 | 1158 | 119 | 1158 | 1291 | 1227 |
The data seems to indicate that the average white male has an age 25 in-vivo brain size that is 185 cm3 bigger than the average black male. A difference of 2.03 SD.
Meanwhile the average white female has an age 25 in-vivo brain size that is 46 cm3 bigger than the average black female. A difference of 0.51 SD.
Averaging across sexes, white brains are 1.27 SD larger than black brains. Assuming about a 0.35 within race correlation between IQ and brain size in adults, then racial differences in brain size can arguably explain 0.35(1.27 SD) = 0.44 SD or 7 IQ points. So virtually half of the 15 point black-white IQ gap is arguably explained by racial differences in brain size.
Further, if racial differences in brain size are just a by-product of selection for intelligence, rather than directly selected for, then one could even argue that genetic IQ differences should be much greater than brain size differences since the latter were just a side-effect of selection, not the primary target.
Of course there are many other biological properties that affect IQ besides overall size such as nerve cell myelination, brain glucose metabolism, number of brain folds, etc, and I don’t know much about how the races differ on these traits, if at all. It’s even possible that some of these traits greatly favour blacks.
It also remains possible that racial differences in brain size are entirely environmental in origin, particularly if one believes that black mothers provide worse prenatal environments. Comparing the brain sizes of mulattos with white mothers to mulattoes with black mothers could resolve this question since both would presumably be racial identical but only the latter would have black prenatal environments.
So, there’s a bigger SD in brain weight in “Black” (men)? Like you had said you asked Rushton about a good-few years ago?
Due to being an older race, with more diversity? or due to the varying degrees of admixture?
Also, so perhaps Black women are smarter than Black men.
On Robert Lindsay’s blog there’s a discussion about why Black Men and “Hispanic” women see less intelligent than those of the opposite gender in their race, and it is hypothesized by some that varying degrees in hormone levels/types of hormones are to blame.
If both black men and women had a bigger SD than their white counterparts, I might think there was something to it, but for now I’m just dismissing it as sampling error, especially since most studies show blacks have a smaller SD for IQ.
Keep in mind that Africans being the most genetically diverse needn’t imply that they are more diverse in IQ or any other trait. As Cochran explained:
Of course, most genetic variation is neutral, having no significant effect on phenotypes, so the numbers they use are totally irrelevant to the question they’re addressing. One could imagine that it might be better to have more (or less) genetic variation in cognitive or personality traits, but we don’t know enough about the genetic architecture of those traits to say diddly about who has more or less.
Lots of people – not just Ashraf and Galor – seem to think that having more overall neutral variation implies more trait variation. That isn’t the case.
A population with more total (mostly neutral) variation can easily have less variation in a particular trait. For example, hair color and eye color ( both genetically controlled) are more variable in Europeans than in sub-Saharan Africa, even though African populations have more overall genetic variation.
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/06/18/diversity-galor/
On course a genetically diverse race is more likely to be phenotypically diverse, just not necessarily.
Also:
[b]For a while now we have seen occasional articles about how people outside of sub-Saharan Africa may have more genetic load, generated by drift over a population history in which Eurasians generally had a smaller effective population size. This is related to those recent papers with similar but stronger conclusions about Eurasian archaic humans like Neanderthals and Denisovans.
As I mentioned, I kind of doubt that that Neanderthals and Denisovans were all that screwed up – partly because a more complete theory indicates that salvage mutations get easier as you drift away from the optimum and ameliorate the effects of low population size to a surprising degree, but even more because the Neanderthals obviously weren’t all that screwed up, didn’t have their fitness depressed by tens of percent, because they stood off anatomically modern humans for something like 70,000 years after first encounter. Results count. The mechanism makes a lot more sense for Flores hobbits because their population was much smaller, but even more because they actually were screwed up: it shows in their skeletons.
So, just how screwed up do Eurasians look, compared to Africans? I mean, if we’re going to be busy explaining a phenomenon, shouldn’t we bother to make a cursory check to see whether it even exists? I know that probably sounds radical…
Of course there’s no bloody sign of any such thing. Sub-Saharan Africans have shorter lifespans and lower IQs than most Eurasian populations. East Asia has lower genetic diversity than Europeans – so has had lower effective population size over the past few tens of thousands of years – yet those populations have higher average IQs and longer lifespans than Europeans.
On the other hand, it is also the case that strong selection for any particular trait tends to mess up other traits – logical, considering trade-offs. So strong selection for resistance to falciparum malaria has made lots of deleterious variants common in the tropical and subtropical parts of the Old World. We know many that are strongly, obviously bad for you – even lethal – but there are surely many others with milder (but still negative) effects. We know that selection for resistance to sleeping sickness has selected for APOL1 variants that greatly increase the risk of kidney failure, so that African-Americans develop end-stage renal disease (ESRD) about 3.5 times more often than people of European ancestry. Those APOL1 variants also exacerbate kidney disease caused by sickle cell, and there’s an AIDs-related kidney-wrecking syndrome (HIVAN: HIV-associated collapsing glomerulopathy) (while AIDs is of course much more common in blacks) that seems to require those African APOL1 variants – HIVAN is up to 50 times more common in blacks than whites. Those social constructs can sure seem real when they’re shoveling the dirt over your face.[/b]
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2016/04/10/bugs-versus-drift/
According to more scientific in vivo measurments of brain size, the actual difference is 1178g for whites and 1076g for blacks. Total gray matter is 665g for whites and 627g for blacks. Total white matter is 445g in whites, 430g in blacks.
journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0013642
Then, according to wikipedia:
“The biological basis of intelligence is founded in the degree of connectivity of neurons in the brain and the varying amounts of white and grey matter. Studies show that intelligence is positively correlated with total cerebral volume.[1] While it is true that the number of neurons in the brain actually decreases throughout development, as neural connections grow and the pathways become more efficient, the supporting structures in the brain increase. This increase in supporting tissues, which include myelination, blood vessels, and glial cells, leads to an increase in overall brain size.[1] When brain circumference and IQ were compared in 9 year olds, a positive correlation was found between the two. An increase of 2.87 IQ points occurred for each standard deviation increase in brain circumference.[5]
The brain grows rapidly for the first five years of human development. At age five, the human brain is 90% of its total size. Then the brain finishes growing gradually until age twenty. From start to finish, the brain increases in size by over 300% from birth.[2] The critical period, defined as the beginning years of brain development, is essential to intellectual development, as the brain optimizes the overproduction of synapses present at birth.[2] During the critical period, the neuronal pathways are refined based on which synapses are active and receiving transmission. It is a “use it or lose it” phenomenon.[2]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleability_of_intelligence#Neuroscience_basis
Other than malnutrition and some diseases, one thing that is proven to affect brain growth and efficiency is stress, especially through cortisol exposure.
HBD is a lost cause.
HBD might be a lost cause, yet people want to understand the differences between the races.
No one has the right answer for the unique abilities and inherent weaknesses of each respective race.
“No one has the right answer for the unique abilities and inherent weaknesses of each respective race.”
All abilities and weaknesses exist in individuals of all backgrounds, none is unique or inherent to each respective race. That’s the right answer.
No it’s not. All racial groups have their own specific strengths and weaknesses, in a collective sense. The same applies to cultural groups in the next level of definition. Outliers go out their way, and define themselves outside of those inherent qualities in their respective group. Because Whites are the most complex and diverse group, with talents in the broadest sense, a White outlier is hard to define, and outliers among blacks and Asians are rare.
I’d like you to list behaviors that are universal within a group and unique to this same group in a magnitude that individuals who don’t follow these behavioral patterns are less than 1% of that group.
For example, blacks have a propensity to be charming, extroverted, gregarious, easygoing, impulsive, fun-loving, yet much of these traits translates into lack of ambition, non-intellectual, uninteresting, irresponsible, and often towards destructiveness. An outlier black person would possess those nice qualities and put them into good use in a productive manner. Pumpkin mentions Oprah as a black female counterpart, who capitalizes on these desirable traits. Oprah is a successful black american, yet she’s an outlier, because most blacks do not capitalize on their unique strengths, where they are well liked by people across the board. Perhaps Ben Carson and Allen West are these types of outliers for black men.
Conversely, East Asians are known for their industriousness, pragmatic intelligence, shrewdness, but most of them lack the charm, the gregarious and extroverted nature of blacks for them to capitalize on their strengths, where people across the spectrum will pay attention to them. Furthermore, East Asians have lower testosterone levels, and thus they seem to lack the curiosity of people with higher IQs, that one finds with Whites and even Ashkenazis.
JS, I think you’re missing the point. While races do follow this spectrum what you seem to forget is that individuals follow this spectrum as well. Less intelligent people are on the extroverted end of the spectrum, this is never a solely black thing it’s just their average so in reality the problem is low IQ individuals not low IQ races.
For example, blacks have a propensity to be charming, extroverted, gregarious, easygoing, impulsive, fun-loving, yet much of these traits translates into lack of ambition, non-intellectual, uninteresting, irresponsible, and often towards destructiveness.”
Well, according to the big 5 personality traits study conducted in 56 countries, Subsaharan africa ranks lowest on extravertion, and by far (with a score of 0.56 on this trait compared to 0.84 for Western Europe, 0.72 in East Asia).
The other traits are:
-agreeableness (Subsaharan Africa = 0.62 , East Asia = 0.64, Western Europe = 0.68)
-conscientiousness (Subsaharan Africa = 0.68 , East Asia = 0.73, Western Europe = 0.82)
-neuroticism (Subsaharan Africa = 0.63, East Asia = 0.75, Western Europe = 0.82)
-openess (Subsaharan Africa =0.58 , East Asia = 0.78, Western Europe = 0.72)
If there is a genetically determined spectrum for personality traits, it appears that Africans are at one end and Western Europeans at the other, with East Asians falling in between.
From the the personal and anecdotical experience I accumulated through travelling and volunteering in West Africa and Haiti, and from the every day relationships and encounters I have with members of the diasporas of theses regions, I can guarantee that what you describe above is far from reflecting some kind of universal tendencies among black peoples. And I also know by experience that East Asians, especially Koreans can be realy entertaining and fun-loving.
But extravartion is a good thing, it is indispensable to getting in and succeeding in management or other leadership positions and to maintaining sane social relationships.
I attempted to find scientic papers establising a positive correlation between introversion and IQ but I’ve only be able to find evidence for a very small positive correlation (0.15) between extravertion and IQ. So if something of this kind exists, it is most likely in the opposite way to what you guys think.
And, knowing that humans are by nature social animals, it would be logical to find extraversion as a sign of general fitness. Aren’t (on average) extroverts attractive and introverts ugly ? I think so.
There are fewer unique individuals found among blacks and Asians. And this probably correlates with IQ and testosterone levels.
I was at an expensive book fair not too long ago, the kind that attracts both intellectual snobs and collectors alike. A few black men maybe about 5 were there, a few black women too, around the same number, as attendees looking at expensive books. They were among a few hundreds of White attendees of course, this is mostly a White thing. I witnessed about 3 East Asians walking and browsing at the stands, and there was only one group of booksellers from Japan, in terms of any Asian book dealers. There were no black booksellers of this sort. I’m not talking about your run in the mill popular titles sold at your modern day bookshop. These people were selling dusty antique stuff, that passes off as pricey collectibles.
From a HBD point of view, which measures it standards using the White demographic as a measuring stick, because Whites are the apex of civilization with diverse interests/talents, one can assume that blacks have a higher curiosity rate than East Asians. This is probably due to their higher testosterone levels, with lower levels of autism – social avoidance behaviors that are prevalent among Asians. Yet, blacks would be less capable of running this sort of business, due to its esoteric nature. Running a business requires planning, insight and discipline, a few qualities that are harder for blacks to execute, which Asians are very capable of, yet they lack the flair, that one finds with Whites and also blacks. Again, this might have to do with testosterone.
I understand your thought process, however the initial premise, is unproven.
Asians<Whites in terms of creativity and agreeableness is not true, and even if it was, is indirect evidence against Blacks.
The direct evidence Afrosapiens puts forward is far more viable…
Afro sapiens, That’s weird I thought blacks had the highest level of conscientiousness? Do you have any more studies that you could link us? I think I had read somewhere that agreeableness wasn’t even correlated to intelligence significantly
“I understand your thought process, however the initial premise, is unproven.
Asians<Whites in terms of creativity and agreeableness is not true, and even if it was, is indirect evidence against Blacks."
What are you talking about and who are you talking to ?
the personality tendencies reflected in the study I linked above are, in my opinion, mostly do to the fact that African and Asian societies (or any non-western society) have retained more traditional features, contrary to Western Europe, which is at the pinnacle of individualism and self-expression, whereas Asian and African cultures promote comformism and collectivism.
"They were among a few hundreds of White attendees of course, this is mostly a White thing."
That makes sense without evoking HBD. Think a little bit…
Who are the rich people who could buy and sell antiquity books probably taken from family libraries ?
A- Members of a historically poor and mostly illiterate community
B- Members of a foreign and culturally radically different community whose immigrant parents were mostly STEM international students and technical/medical sciences professionals
C- Members of the culture in which this literature developed.
Come on, prove you've got a decent IQ.
"Running a business requires planning, insight and discipline, a few qualities that are harder for blacks to execute,"
Go to any city in Africa or to some African enclaves in Europe, these are kingdoms of self employment, everybody's running their little business pretty well, often from a very young age.
Or maybe you can't afford to go that far. Then visit a prison, you'll meet people who ended up there because of their otherwise very lucrative business.
I was talking to JS.
If Asians were less creative than Whites, on the continuum, with Blacks having high testosterone (assuming correlation and causation), it should reflect favorably on the creative abilities of Blacks relative to their IQs.
However, Black IQs are supposed to be lower than White ones, more than Asian ones are higher…so…
blacks created blues, R&B, Jazz, funk music. I cannot find East Asians who set trends in America, at one time, it was Bruce Lee was his martial arts. Jews are seen as less creative, and their forte is business acumen. Jews, however, were recording artists and literary writers, very prominent in the 60s and 70s.
Essentially, East Asians serve no real benefit to American society. The political landscape either left or right, find East Asians without any merit or worthy of consideration. Similarly, they are discriminated in the Ivy League admission, because the schools find them of no benefit in return. They are the least dynamic of all the groups, so this explains everything.
“Essentially, East Asians serve no real benefit to American society. The political landscape either left or right, find East Asians without any merit or worthy of consideration. Similarly, they are discriminated in the Ivy League admission, because the schools find them of no benefit in return. They are the least dynamic of all the groups, so this explains everything.”
It amazes me how some “HBDers” can suddenly completely disregard the research THEY PROPORT, and just basically make stuff up/go by research that is more sketchy than Gould’s.
The Asian thing, and the Black penis size thing, both KEY to HBD, are disregarded, because well, they want to feel good about being White.
You’ll be deported too, JS.
No it’s not.
Whites have made good use of blacks, as slave labor and athletes. Jews have made good use of blacks as recording artists and entertainers.
Asians serve no particular purpose to Whites or Jews.
Ivy League admission of blacks serve as a ideological principle of fairness and equality.
Furthermore, Asians are the least dynamic race in America. In fact, they are the least opportunistic of all the groups. They generally do not capitalize on America’s resources to their fullest, essentially, lacking ambition to forge trends.
Why do Asians overpopulate the STEM classes and STEM fields? Are they fascinated by STEM. No, they aren’t. They have not done anything in the sciences, that is significant to society. I don’t even find Asians telling us about science. Maybe only this guy.
He’s Japanese. The Japanese seem to be the more talented group.
Pumpkin mentioned how high IQ groups like Jews take advantage of America, a trait that is apparently not present among high IQ Asians.
“Afro sapiens, That’s weird I thought blacks had the highest level of conscientiousness? Do you have any more studies that you could link us?”
No I don’t have other links, I could search on google scholar or on other scientific journals databases but you could do it too.
But I can be more precise with the numbers I summarized above. As you can see, Subsaharan Africa always ranks lowest, on any trait. This is due to the gread level of variation within Africa, which makes it a less coherent categorization, hence the lower correlation and continental trans-cultural convergence.
If we exclude countries like Morocco and Ethiopia and only consider African Countries countries that are typically black (West African or Bantu, Tanzania, DR Congo, Botswana, South Africa and Zimbabwe in the study) and then compare them to Germany, which can be seen as the white contry par excellence we can say that:
-On extraversion: they all score below Germany except for the Congo
-On agreeableness: they all score above
-On conscientiousness: they all score above, interestingly, Japan has the lowest score among the 56 countries
-On Neuroticism: they all score below
-On openness: they all score above
It would have been interesting to have caribbean countries in the study though. Anyway, we can grossly say about black Africans that they tend to be less extrovert and neurotic but more agreeable, concientious and open than Germans.
Note that other European countries often score below or above germany on any trait, no one could make serious evolutionary theories from this study.
“I think I had read somewhere that agreeableness wasn’t even correlated to intelligence significantly”
I think I have read somewhere else that none of these 5 big traits was correlated to IQ.
Well actually, the only black African countries in the study were Bantu, it would have been interesting to see figures for West African countries, especially Nigeria, Ghana, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire and Senegal.
From my experience I guess that they’d have scored lower than Germany on extravertion, neuroticism and opennes, higher on agreeableness and conscientiousness.
Well the more I read it the more I realized the link you posted was the same source I had gotten the idea from to begin with.
I’m pretty sure being open to new experiences has a positive correlation with intelligence.
“I’m pretty sure being open to new experiences has a positive correlation with intelligence.”
Yes, in this study, openness is positivly correlated with being inventive, imaginative, originality, liking to reflect and play with ideas, valuing arts and aesthetics, being ingenious and deep thinker, being sophisticated in arts, musics and literature, being curious about many different things and generating a lot of enthousiasm. It is negatively correlated with having few artistic interests and preferring work that is routine.
It seems to describe the kind of intelligence that is prized in social sciences and humanities. It is somewhat opposite to the stereotypical STEM geek, though not entirly.
I think West Africans would score lower on these traits because of the very conformist nature of their societies and their appreciation for more pragmatic and materialistic values. That’s from an empirical point of view. On the other hand, the Bantu originate from West Africa but score higher than Germans. So I don’t really know what to think. (I don’t care, to be honest).
This study must also be taken with caution, the figures come from self-report, not objective measurement.
About the distribution of openness in some selected countries:
-Britain: 45.97
-Germany: 47.80
-France: 48.09
-Italy: 50
-USA: 50
-Brazil: 49.16
-India: 48.48
-South Korea: 44.30
-Japan: 41.53
-DR Congo: 46.23*
-Zimbabwe: 48.52
-Tanzania: 48.39
*I had made a mistake, the Congo actually did score lower than Germany on openness, though not by much. But it is consistent with what I think of West African cultures, and the Congo is among the northwesternmost Bantu majority nation.
By selecting only a few relevant countries, we see Japan and South Korea being the least open, as expected from a non-HBD point of view. I would however have expected France, Brazil and Italy to score much higher, the US somewhat lower while the countries of Germanic Europe are not surprising me. I had no expectation for India and I would have expected the countries of Subsaharan Africa to score below Britain and Germany, though higher thant Japan and Korea.
Even though I do not share the usual HBD stereotypes, I was deeply convinced that the confucian values of Japanese and Koreans made these people the most conscientious in the world. I had an image in mind that was that of unconditionally obedient slave-like workers and devoted family men.
Doing a quick search led me to contrast my previous views due to the various records of widespread immaturity, materialism and low business productivity by first world standards with harsh disciplinarian practices to compensate for it.
I won’t fall into HBD’s simplistic and deterministic theories though. I will investigate that topic and soon find a reasonable explanation to this.
Yes my father is asian and would spout that they were the hardest working race. I quickly learned this wasn’t exactly true.
I’m a little disappointed that italy is the only other place as open in this study than the US. The fact that japan is so low is reflective of their sexually frustrated young male population.
“I think West Africans would score lower on these traits because of the very conformist nature of their societies and their appreciation for more pragmatic and materialistic values. That’s from an empirical point of view. ”
Source?
“Source?”
Personal experience, though I’m not good at making generalizations about people.
The societies of West Africa are collectivist, or more precisely clannish . They tolerate very little deviation from the norm and the clan prevails over the individual in everything, which is why nepotism and corruption are so bad there: a clan’s interests are more important than a person’s integrity. If you go to West Africa or meet people from there, you’ll understand what I mean. Otherwise, you can also find this tendency related in the scocial science accademic literature.
I see the West African middle and upper class as materialistic, at the same level as Asians and Russians, they are often brand addicts, show off, live in McMansions, like to be called “Sir” and “Madam” by their subordinates, very “Nouveau Riche” basically. But I think most societies had their higher class expressing this type of behavior at one point in time.
By pragmatic I mean that they tend to find the simplest way that leads from a current situation to a particular goal, ethical and philosophical considerations come long after, if at all in some cases.
East Asians might be hardworking in routine tasks, enforced by an authoritarian figure or an unpleasant environment, but they lack any self initiative, independent, inquiry, when such stimuli is no longer present, and relapse into isolated idleness or laziness. This translates into autistic-like behavior like playing video games and surfing the internet, and often excessively.
New York City is such a wonderful environment to observe racial differences. I’ve found East Asians to be the least civic friendly people, with the least civic engagement. Their minors and also adults, are not as proactive in using the parks and running grounds like Whites and blacks, due to their inherent autistic, withdrawn social behavior. Internet Cafes are abound in their neighborhoods, as a form of recreation.
Afro sapiens, When I had said source I had meant like a scholarly study or article not anecdotal evidence.
“By pragmatic I mean that they tend to find the simplest way that leads from a current situation to a particular goal, ethical and philosophical considerations come long after, if at all in some cases.”
HBDers are very pragmatic people then.
Yes, and HBD should emphasize the cognitive and personality differences among the races. The entire IQ thing is old and no longer of any relevance, only when it comes to blacks.
Some commentator here mentioned the future of demise of blacks and Asians, due lower empathy levels among them, and this might be true, especially with regards to East Asians, who are the least dynamic of all the races.
It’s quite fascinating that both Askhenazim and East Asians, with their higher IQs, have been so divergent in motivation. Jews are very dynamic as a people, but their over-success and their tribal and destructive nature, have discounted this quality.
“Afro sapiens, When I had said source I had meant like a scholarly study or article not anecdotal evidence.”
I don’t think such studies have been carried. The only things that can give indication for now are anecdotal experiences and some concordant quality media reports.
“HBDers are very pragmatic people then.”
Yes, pragmatic but not realistic. They want things to be simple to understand all while fitting in their ideological frame.
“Their minors and also adults, are not as proactive in using the parks and running grounds like Whites and blacks, due to their inherent autistic, withdrawn social behavior.”
East Asians have recent immigrant backgrounds, it is understandable that they don’t feel that concerned by the socio-political matters of the US. Blacks and Whites form the historical populations of this country and have no other citizenship, it is norpal that they occupy most of the public sphere.
And be careful using “autistic” as a personality trait that would equal introvertion. Autism is a psychiatric disorder that has more symptoms than being simply socially withdrawn.
“The entire IQ thing is old and no longer of any relevance,”
It has never been of any relevance to any group, especially since most data on that topic is strongly flawed, psychometrics is a dying discipline now. And to most people, succeeding in life and enjoying has little to do with IQ.
East Asians might be recent immigrants as a whole. Yet, there are descendants of Chinese and Japanese Americans, who been in the Americas for ages. There’s even an East Asian who was the governor of Washington State. He’s pretty much forgotten, because he lacks the charm of black politicians and the verbal ability of White politicians, and from a more hardcore HBD perspective, East Asians generally do not make dynamic and progressive leaders for the Western world. Again, East Asians were the 1st ones to create successful agricultural societies, and thus had no need to be creative and dynamic.
HBD tries to explain the reasons why blacks and East Asians do not integrate well in Western Societies. Many racial minorities in White countries are generally less happy than the White demographic, and often attribute “White Privilege” or “White Racism” for their unhappiness.
“I don’t think such studies have been carried. The only things that can give indication for now are anecdotal experiences and some concordant quality media reports.”
Then that’s not really empirical.I’ll take your word for it now though because I’m assuming you’ve been to west africa. I’ll have to look more into it later.
“Yes, pragmatic but not realistic. They want things to be simple to understand all while fitting in their ideological frame.”
Indeed, I would notice they are a little too quick to dismiss data that could contradict their evolutionary narrative. IQ is a measure of g, Genes does play an important role, because of these facts they believe they are “Galileo’s of science” not quite understanding the biology behind their pseudo-calculations is flawed. Almost like they understand math yet they don’t now where to go with that math because they lack the proper education in other disciplines. Even most anthropologists I see that study HBD are shoddy in their own “specialized” knowledge. I seriously doubt if any of them know what the is-ought problem is. If they did some of them wouldn’t even be interested in HBD anymore. I wonder if anyone of them realize that HBD does not have the implications they think it will? They are the reasons I can’t study HBD without being called racist.
“HBD tries to explain the reasons why blacks and East Asians do not integrate well in Western Societies.”
Then HBD is trying to explain something that is in part fictional. The media likes sensational reports of inter-ethnic tensions and a large part of the audience, within each ethnic group gets the feeling that race relations have to be confrontational.
But at the individual level, people of different races get along very well when given the opportunity to meet naturally. This is especially true in Europe where no ethnic group can be considered to be hyper-segregated, where inter-marriage is widespread and has hardly ever been taboo.
HBDers fall victim to a media-induced bias that makes believe that the most frightening depictions of race relations are those experienced by most people whereas the truth is that the silent and understudied majority of each group is so “normal” that there are no incredible stories to be told about them. And they go on making up ridiculous pseudo-evolutionary theories to explain the distorted reality, which seems to be backed up by statistics that don’t tell much about the reality they grossly summarize.
“Then that’s not really empirical.I’ll take your word for it now though because I’m assuming you’ve been to west africa. I’ll have to look more into it later.”
Sociology and ethnology priovide abundant information about the various cultural values that prevail in the many cultures of West Africa. But the descriptions are specific to some particular ethnic groups and social classes and that would be difficult to make a big picture that can be useful in HBD discussions that focus on “race”. No accademic discipline validates race-specific cultural and behavioral tendencies, here on this blog people say “whites do this”, “blacks do that”, “asians are like this” and “jews are like that” but this is not really concordant with the reality. When I read their depictions of race-related behavioral tendencies, I wonder if France (where I live) can be considered as a white country, or if Haiti, Nigeria, Senegal and Cameroon (that I’ve visited) can be considerd as black and equally black countries. Most HBD theories are untenable anyway.
“IQ is a measure of g, Genes does play an important role, because of these facts they believe they are “Galileo’s of science” not quite understanding the biology behind their pseudo-calculations is flawed. ”
And that’s why neuroscience, molecular genetics and other biological sciences have made little contributions to HBD. This “field” is led by bloggers and mostly psychology scholars who assemble disparate findings to back up their conclusions, this is kind of parasitic and serious scholars have often contested HBD’s misinterpretation of their findings, not because of political correctness as HBDers like to believe, but simply because of scientific correctness.
Now I see that a new argument is emerging among HBDers, which is that because most of HBD’s prominent scholars are now dead, anti-HBDers have been able to take over the debate. In actuality, now that the pioneers of HBD are dead, the debate has ceased and no one is interrested in keeping it going on, since it had no scientific legitimacy in the first place.
Go ahead, if you believe all races are inherently equal, then I congratulate you. In fact the entire non-Western world is still subordinate to the West. This might change in the future, but not anytime soon.
East Asians are the least dynamic of the higher functioning groups, and some of the commentators here have echoed a similar sentiment. With the exception of Japan, that region in the world possess less talents, skills, and even originality, when compared to the more dysfunctional Middle East and South Asia, let alone 1st world Europe and North America. Factory workers droning and grinding away, do not define talent and skills. East Asia has no tradition of cultural critique, philosophical and theological systems, and none of its traditional arts and architecture are on par with those of Caucasoid Civilizations.
“here on this blog people say “whites do this”, “blacks do that”, “asians are like this” and “jews are like that” but this is not really concordant with the reality. When I read their depictions of race-related behavioral tendencies”
I do believe there are inherit differences expressed as averages between populations of the human species. I do not think this says anything about any kind of superiority unless a reference point is defined. What causes the higher fertility rates in blacks? Have they identified genes for it?
HBD has truth to it most just put a racist agenda to it.
“What causes the higher fertility rates in blacks? Have they identified genes for it?”
That’s not even true,
Black americans have a fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman, compared to 1.8 in whites. Barbados, Trindidad and Tobago, Brazil, the US virgin islands have fertility rates of 1.8 too all while being either almost 100% black or with significant mixed race populations. Even Haiti (3.1) Botswana (2.9) and Jamaica (2.3) have very moderate fertility rates.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate
The countries of subsaharan Africa have high fertility rates because:
-They have agrarian societies in which children are assets more than liabilities due to the labor intensivity of subsistence farming, the minimal cost of raising a child in a traditional environment and the old-age insurance they provide.
-They have high child and adult mortality rates, so having more children ensures that a sufficient number will reach prodctive age.
-Women have little freedom and are forced into marriage and motherhood.
African fertility rates are not historically anomalous, pre-industrial societies all around the world had similar fertility before they entered demographic transition:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_transition
“Have they identified genes for it?”
They won’t, because fertility is not a genetic trait. Or at least, environment can very easily supress genetic infuences.
“That’s not even true”
Yes it is. Your links even say the same thing.
“They won’t, because fertility is not a genetic trait. Or at least, environment can very easily supress genetic infuences.”
The idea of G and E is a false dichotomy. There is NO doubt that there are genes related to fertility, the question is if they are distributed through different races as averages or if they are distributed through all humans. They could be, but according to your reasoning the pattern we see is the latter being influenced by different “levels” of societal development.
“-They have agrarian societies in which children are assets more than liabilities due to the labor intensivity of subsistence farming, the minimal cost of raising a child in a traditional environment and the old-age insurance they provide.
-They have high child and adult mortality rates, so having more children ensures that a sufficient number will reach prodctive age.
-Women have little freedom and are forced into marriage and motherhood.”
DTM seems like a a reasonably explanation but, I also this found this:
http://penta3.ufrgs.br/educacao/teoricos/MIND/SITE_PESSOAL/texto_aleatorio/arquivo1-33.htm
China had to institute the one child law to move away from agriculture in the mid 1900s……so Afrosapiens is right….it appears
I thought you would hate Yiannopoulos for being part Jewish.
You’re a manipulator amateur.
I no have a straight opinion about Milo. He super emphasize”feminism” stuff than the core of all this leftoidism. A way to continue divide lazy goy.
It’s an honest question,
you should be able to answer it.
I ask it sincerely.
Goys, smh.
Let’s stick on the subject of the blog. As pumpkin says this is boring to smart people.
Hey Pumpkin? Are you 100% sure there is no secret super low IQ black under class? Because im here to tell you there is -.- You have obviously never seen just how degenerate the inner city is from first hand experience. I spent a great deal of my young adult hood traveling to the inner city from my suburban home, usually for excitement and easy women and I can tell you there is a large group of blacks that have IQ of 75 , possibly lower.The IQ of the homeless is 85. They form groups, a social heirarchy, and co-ordinate together to make what little money they can. I have seen this for myself. I swear on my life there are at least hundreds if not thousands of adult inner city black males that survive solely on robbery and theft and their females survive of the meager financial support from the male activities. Tell me Pumpkin, What would the IQ be of someone who could only think of theft or robbery to make money. Theres a large amount of blacks that get away with this behavior constantly because in the inner city theres little to no police enforcement. The inner city is essentialy a modern day African Savannah. Its called a concrete jungle for a reason. Please do more research on a plausible theory before dismissing it.
What do you estimate the entire population size of this group to be? 10 000? 250000? 4000000?
No way. What kind of environmental variable(s) could account for a 1 to 1.2 SD difference between blacks and whites? It’s out of the realm of possibility for the racial IQ gap to be explained fully by the environment.
You’re right on prenatal environments. However, white mothers have a better prenatal environment genetically than black women. Mullatos with white mothers have higher IQs than mullatos with black mothers, so we could reason that on average, mullatos with white mothers have a bigger brain size than black mothers.
There is no way that this could be fully explained by environmental factors.
“There is no way that this could be fully explained by environmental factors.”
Sorry, but that option is still very possible. Look at average height changes in past century and then epigenetic studies. Very big changes.
The possibility of environment being able to explain 100% of all variation in IQ and behaviour is more possible now than it has ever been in the entire debate.
“Capacity From International Labour
Office Data
J. PHILIPPE RUSHTON
University of Western Ontario
Recent studies have shown that even after correcting for body size, significant sex and
race differences exist in brain size whether estimated from weight at autopsy, from endocranial volume, or from external head measurements. In this study, cranial capacities are
calculated from external head measurements reported for 40 samples from a 1990 review
of ergonomically important body measurements compiled by the International Labour
Office in Geneva. The measurements had been gathered over the previous 30 years from
tens of thousands of men and women aged 25 to 45 years. After adjusting for the effects of
stature and race, 14 male samples averaged 1,362 cmz and 14 female samples averaged
1,201 cm’. After adjusting for the effects of stature and sex, 6 East Asian samples averaged 1,308 cm?, I8 European samples averaged 1,297 ctn3, and 4 African samples averaged 1,241 cm2. ”
“1. North America (34 refs. from Canada and U.S..) : Cranial capacity (cm^3): 1,453
“1. West africa (16 refs uganda, kenya angola zaire, zambia etc. 34 refs.) : Cranial capacity (cm^3): 1339”
Wouldnt correcting for body size bolster non-africans? considering that blacks tend to be more swole in the states.
Still PP´s old criticism might apply:
“Different studies & techniques can give wildly different results. It’s more meaningful to compare different races all measured the same way in the same study with the same equipment.”
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0160289694900027
24 year old koreans brain mass
( https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ajpa.23464 ):
Whole brain volume (cm3) :1325
Cranial capacity:
Men: 1594
Women: 1425
Another Korean study of similar demographic backgrounds shares the formers Intracranial capacity, but doesnt meassure brain volume: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ajpa.23464
Total intra-cranial volume=Intracranial capacity
Total intra-cranial volume (TIV) of the Igbo population of Nigeria:
Men: 1298
Women: 1186
Men age group 18-27: 1315
(1594 -1298)/90=3.28888888889
or
(1594 – 1315)/90=3,1
3,1 – 3.28888888889 SD difference between nigerian and south korean 24 year olds. Total
For fun:
3,1 x 15 x 0,35= 16,275
I chose these studies becuase they all use Stereology.
Total intra-cranial volume is same as whole brain volume? And cranial capacity same as intra-cranial capacity?
Brain volume is less than cranaial capacity. Intra-cranail volume=cranial capacity.
Atleast that’s what the Korean studies indicated.
But if the Nigerians “total intracranial volume” is their brain volume, there would be an 1SD difference in brain volume.