| race | iq | real iq (rounded) | genetic iq (rounded) | brain size | genetic brain size |
| ashkenazim | 108 | 110 | 110 | 1457 | |
| east asians | 105 | 105 | 105 | 1416 | 1534 |
| whites | 99 | 100 | 100 | 1369 | 1487 |
| arctic people | 91 | 95 | 95 | 1443 | 1561 |
| southeast asians | 87 | 90 | 95 | 1332 | 1450 |
| native americans | 86 | 90 | 90 | 1366 | 1484 |
| pacific islanders | 85 | 90 | 90 | 1317 | 1435 |
| dark caucasoids | 84 | 85 | 90 | 1293 | 1411 |
| congoids | 67 | 75 | 85 | 1280 | 1398 |
| australoids | 62 | 65 | 70 | 1225 | 1343 |
| capoids | 54 | 60 | 70 | 1270 | 1388 |
| pygmies | 54 | 60 | 70 | 1085 | 1203 |
The above chart has six columns. In the first column I list 13 human races. In the second column I list the IQs assigned to each of these 13 races by scholar Richard Lynn, on a scale where the British white mean is set at 100 (SD = 15). In the third column I list the “real IQ” of each of these races. That is, the IQ score each would get on a tuly culture reduced test, not the pseudo culture reduced tests they were often given like the Raven Progressive Matrices. Real IQs were estimated by averaging the reported IQs in column 2, with the genetic IQ is column 4.
Genetic IQ
The genetic IQs in column 4 were estimated by noting that black Americans score about 85 on IQ tests as adults (even when reared by upper class whites) yet black Africans score 67, even though the two groups should have the same genetic IQ. Yes black Americans have some white admixture which should have raised their genetic IQ above black Africans’, but they are also descended from perhaps the least intelligent class of black Africans (slaves) which should lower their genetic IQ below the average black Africans’, so on balance they should have the same genetic IQ.
And yet black African school kids score 18 points lower than African Americans, suggesting the poverty, illiterate parents, malnutrition and disease of sub-Saharan Africa is holding them back. Averaging the 2001 human development index (HDI) of Cameroon and Cote D’Ivoire together (see table 7 of this paper), I estimated that sub-Sahara had a 2001 HDI of 0.448, compared to 0.937 for the United States and this roughly explained why they scored 18 points lower than U.S. blacks. From here I came up with the following formula:
Genetic IQ = Reported IQ + [(0.937 – population HDI)/0.02716]
For races that live in economically advanced countries such as Ashkenazim, East Asians, and Whites, IQs were assumed to equal genetic IQ, but for races like Southeast Asians and Pacific Islanders, I estimated the 2001 HDI of the Southeast Asia region to be 0.751 (based on the Philippines) and the above formula was applied. Similarly, for Dark Caucasoids, I assumed the Middle East had an HDI of 0.709 (the average of Saudi Arabia and Egypt).
Although Arctic Peoples, Native Americans, and Austalian aboriginals technically live in developed countries, they are often segredated on reservations, and have HDIs below their fellow citizens. Arctic Peoples were assigned an HDI of 0.851 based on the reported value for Canadian indigenous peoples (again see table 7 of this paper). Native Americans were assigned an HDI of 0.864 based on averaging the HDI of Canadian and U.S. indigenous peoples. Australian aboriginals reportedly had an HDI of 0.724.
Capoids and Pygmies were assumed to have the same HDI as mainstream black Africans (Congoids). Although this is probably false, the Capoids and Pygmies used in actual IQ studies were those who lived side by side with their Congoid cousins under illiterate conditions. Their actual IQ scores were probably a lot lower than the 54 Lynn reported for them, but because they scored about 13 points lower than illiterate Congoids, and Congoid school kids scored 67, it was assumed that Capoid and Pygmy school kids would score 67 – 13 = 54 if they too were in school. Since the IQ was calculated under the scenario of similar environments, the genetic IQ was calculated assuming the same HDI.
Brain Size
Row 5 gives brain sizes reported by Lynn with the exception of pygmies which was reported by scolars C.L. Smith and K.L. Beals. However since Lynn cited Smith and Beals as his brain size source, the figure should fit right in.
Row 6 gives estimated genetic brain size for each of the 13 races. Because craniometry became taboo after WWII, I assume most of the brain size data was obtained before the 1930s, and perhaps well before the 20th century. However Lynn notes that in the 1930s, people in the developed World began growing taller because of better health/nutrition and that height gains were perfectly paralleled by brain size gains. Since height among U.S. whites has increased by 1.3 Standard Deviations over the 20th century before plateauing in 2006, I assumed that prior to the 1930s, Whites, and by extension every other race, were also 1.3 SD below their genetic brain size, and so genetic brain size was estimated by adding 118 cc to the Smith and Beals numbers.
To my knowledge Smith and Beals did not give data on Ashkenazim brain size, but very old studies suggest they were 30 cc below the white mean, so their genetic brain size is assumed to also be 30 cc below the genetic white mean. These old studies give very different white brain sizes from Smith and Beals, showing how sensitive cranial capacity measures are to methodology.
I calculated the line of best fit to estimate the genetic IQ of a population from its genetic brain size, where X is genetic brain size (genetic cranial capacity) and Y is genetic IQ. Pygmies were excluded because their small bodies make their brains abnormally small, even relative to IQ:
Pumpkin Person 
Your methodology is very fragile:
Firstly, if I wanted to find a proxy for the quality of life of polutions, I would take life expectancy alone, it summarizes people’ access to good food, healthcare and resources. HDI takes GDP per capita into account, thus hiding national income inequality, artificially lowering the figures for countries with young populations and large informal economy whereas it artificially increases the stats for resource rich countries.
And you can’t make up numbers by averaging arbitrarily selected countries, you need to average all countries of a race and then weight by population.
Your categories are disputable too:
Why are Ashkenazim the only jewish group that you treat separately?
Who are the dark caucasoids ? Persians ? Indians ? Ethiopians ? Arabs ? Armenians ? Jews ?
What about central Asians, Turks, Southern Sudanese, Melanesians, Negritos, Polynesians, Siberians ?
What you say about colonized races in western countries wrong too. In the US, blacks live in segregated urban reservations and are more withdrawn from the mainstream than Indians who are now urban dwellers for the majority.
For instance, Los Angeles metro has the largest Native population in the US.
Mean white share of neighborhood population by race of resident:
White: 56,4%
Black: 15,5%
Asians: 29,9%
Natives: 31,8%
Hispanic: 16,5%
Indians are the least segregated race in Los Angeles, and in Anchorage, where they have their highest representation in the country, they are at the same level as Blacks.
http://www.censusscope.org/us/m4480/chart_exposure.html
An for your information, Bushmen are as small as pygmies.
Interesting idea to look only at life expectancy, although Rushton argued that races differed in their genetic longevity, so it might not be a purely environmental measure, but I suppose the same confound is true for all such adjustments.
Since you can redact comments, can you change polutions to populations ? I’m at the airport writing with my tablet so I make a lot of typos.
Races don’t genetically differ in their life expectancy.
You find populations with high incidences of super-centenarians in Okinawa, black islands of the Caribbean and Southern Europe. However, Age of menopause which correlates with longevity varies between ethnic groups and regions but not in the direction expected from hbd myths
http://www.jwatch.org/wh200807240000007/2008/07/24/age-menopause-differs-little-race-and-ethnicity
Afrosapiens I talked about the Okinawan diet here.
https://pumpkinperson.com/2016/12/03/racial-differences-in-penis-size/#comment-39924
You should look into amount of neurons in total in the brain for each race and ethny as well as cortical neuron amount. I’ll look into this this afternoon. Brain size really doesn’t say shit. Neurons says more in my opinion.
What do you about this study PP? Afrosapiens?
In vivo brain size correlates with IQ.
Effects of 148 mixed-sex healthy and patient-based samples (>8000 individuals).
The effect generalizes over age, intelligence domain, sample type, and sex.
Previous effect sizes were inflated due to reporting bias.
Brain size is not a necessary cause for human IQ differences.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014976341500250X?via%3Dihub
I’ll tell you next year, I’m about to board on the plane. I’m coming to your country.
Have a safe trip buddy. I’m beginning to believe neuron amount, especially amounts of neurons in the cerebral cortex says more about intelligence differences than absolute brain size does.
“Have a safe trip buddy.”
Thanks, that was short but intense.
” I’m beginning to believe neuron amount, especially amounts of neurons in the cerebral cortex says more about intelligence differences than absolute brain size does.”
I believe the same, the number of neurons of the cerebral cortex is the thing that really sets us apart from other species, but our brain is still just a scaled up primate brain. And I’ve seen that neuronal density is inversely correlated to brain size, so variation in brain size doesn’t mean variation in neuron count.
But I also believe that our brains are not the only thing that make humans exceptional. We have vocal organs that allow us to communicate with a variety of sounds and tones, our facial expressions are also a means of communication. And more importantly, our hands. No animal can handle things with as much precision as does the human hands. I wouldn’t be surprised if some species had the brainpower to be super-calculators, some animals migrate over very long distances, we’ve seen elephants painting what they were watching with their trump. All of that is impressive but useless without the human ability to vocalize complex messages and to use their hands with such precision. So I think the evolution of the human intelligence has been dependent on the evolution of other body parts, not just the brain.
Speaking about number of neurons in the cerebral cortex, it’s interesting to see that the best endowed species are all either African or marine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_by_number_of_neurons#Cerebral_cortex
Some say marine mammals have large brains for thermoregulation, other say that their environment provides an exceptional amount of iodine, which also increases intelligence in humans. For african mammals, and why they have more neurons than their non-african counterparts, we won’t find an answer from HBDers.
“I believe the same, the number of neurons of the cerebral cortex is the thing that really sets us apart from other species, but our brain is still just a scaled up primate brain. And I’ve seen that neuronal density is inversely correlated to brain size, so variation in brain size doesn’t mean variation in neuron count.”
Correct. 100 percent correct. I’ll get to you a cite on that this afternoon.
“But I also believe that our brains are not the only thing that make humans exceptional. We have vocal organs that allow us to communicate with a variety of sounds and tones, our facial expressions are also a means of communication.”
Agreed. Bipedalism allowed all of the things you see today. I was reading that erectus had the same vocal cords or something that extend as we do. Signifying that they had the same ability for language as we do.
“All of that is impressive but useless without the human ability to vocalize complex messages and to use their hands with such precision. So I think the evolution of the human intelligence has been dependent on the evolution of other body parts, not just the brain.”
Yes. What PP calls “symbolic IQ” I believe is what sets us apart. We got our scores up primate brains around 65 mya. Then the advent of bipedalism, tools, fire, cooking and meat eating further separated us from our chimplike ancestors. I’m beginning to believe that it was language (humans have the FOXP2 gene, which allows for speech) combined with our knack for symbols that had us communicate with others in our band.
I did some more scientific, objective estimates on hominid IQ last night. Dividing 100 by 86 gives 1.163. Then multiplying that by the mount of estimated neurons in the brain we come to:
Paranthropus: IQ 38 (33 billion neurons); Afarensis: IQ 40 (35 billion neurons); Habilis: IQ 46 (40 billion neurons); Erectus: IQ 72 (62 billion neurons); Heidelbergensis: IQ 88 (76 billion neurons); Neanderthals: IQ 99 (85 billion neurons) and Sapiens: IQ 100 (85 billion neurons).
What are your thoughts on this? Check out my latest article and tell me what you think.
“Speaking about number of neurons in the cerebral cortex, it’s interesting to see that the best endowed species are all either African or marine.”
Yes. However, we have a higher neuron packing density in our cerebral cortex. On the long-finned dolphin, we have more neurons tightly packed in our cerebral cortex. I actually emailed Herculano-Houzel for comment on that matter. PP showed that cite to me when I said what explains our cognitive superiority is the amount of neurons in our cerebral cortex. This is what I wrote to Herculano-Houzel.
Hello Ms. Herculano-Houzel,
I read your book and I enjoyed every page. I’ve also read all of your papers available in pubmed and your research is fascinating. Though, I had one question.
On page 103 you write:
“We can thus predict that the large cerebral cortex of several cetacean species, such as the pilot whale (Globicephala Macrorhyncha), which is about twice as large as the human cerebral cortex, would be composed of only around 3 billion neurons. Even the largest whale cortex, at 6-7 kilograms, is predicted to still have fewer than 10 billion neurons (figure 6.5).”
So I decided to look up the amount of neurons in the cerebral cortex by animal and came to find out that a paper published on November 24, 2014 showed that the total number of neurons in the cerebral cortex of the long-finned pilot whale was almost double that of humans at 37,200,000. (Mortenson et al, 2014)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4244864/
They also say:
“According to the theory that the absolute number of neurons predicts cognitive superiority (Herculano-Houzel, 2011a), the long-finned pilot whale should be cognitively superior to all other species studied, including humans. However, long-finned pilot whales show a higher than expected number of neocortical neurons relative to body weight, but not to the same degree as humans or harbor porpoises. Still, this is an unusually high number of neurons compared to what have been reported recently in other large-brained animals using non-stereological methods (African elephants: 5.6 × 109, gorillas: 9 × 109, orangutans; 8 × 109) (Herculano-Houzel and Kaas, 2011; Herculano-Houzel et al., 2014).”
I was wondering what your thoughts were on this? Does the amount of neurons in the cerebral cortex by weight matter, since Mortenson et al say that long-finned pilot whales show a higher than expected number of neocortical neurons relative to body weight, but not to the same degree as humans or harbor propoises?
Thank you for your time, Ms. Herculano-Houzel.
I hope she responds! I wonder if I’m correct in my assumption.
“Some say marine mammals have large brains for thermoregulation, other say that their environment provides an exceptional amount of iodine, which also increases intelligence in humans”
I personally believe that it has to do with thermoregulation, as you say. Iodine is good to not for brain growth and things of that nature. But they have more neurons than us due to a larger brain.
“For african mammals, and why they have more neurons than their non-african counterparts, we won’t find an answer from HBDers.”
I’ve actually been thinking about this for the past few days. You will see me tackle it.
By the way, for elephants, 98 percent of their neurons are in their frontal cortex. So that explains why we’re more intelligent than they are despite having less neurons.
“I did some more scientific, objective estimates on hominid IQ last night. Dividing 100 by 86 gives 1.163. Then multiplying that by the mount of estimated neurons in the brain we come to:”
I’m not sure that you can extract IQs from neuron count, because there are many aspects of human intelligence that IQ doesn’t take into account.
“I hope she responds! I wonder if I’m correct in my assumption”
There is nothing better than getting information from the source, I also hope you’ll get an answer.
“I’ve actually been thinking about this for the past few days. You will see me tackle it.”
I can’t wait to see how you’re gonna make it HBD compatible.
“I’m not sure that you can extract IQs from neuron count, because there are many aspects of human intelligence that IQ doesn’t take into account.”
True. It’s alright, I think. Maybe brain weight would be better.
“There is nothing better than getting information from the source, I also hope you’ll get an answer.”
Exactly. She’s an expert on comparative neuroanatomy. I asuunmynhunch is correct that the long-finned dolphin has more neurons due to thermoregulation.
“I can’t wait to see how you’re gonna make it HBD compatible.”
It’s not really HBD compatible imo. I believe the neuron count only holds for humans and our ancestors, as well as the amount of neurons in the cerebral cortex, the cortical neurons.
I hope to see some estimates of our ancestors cortical neuron count eventually.
“True. It’s alright, I think. Maybe brain weight would be better.”
I feel myself not qualified at all to have strong opinions on neuroscience topics. But I find the field very interesting, I think I’m going to take college courses when I’m retired.
“I hope to see some estimates of our ancestors cortical neuron count eventually.”
It’s difficult to interpret neuroscience data.
“I feel myself not qualified at all to have strong opinions on neuroscience topics. But I find the field very interesting, I think I’m going to take college courses when I’m retired.”
One of my lady friends has a degree in neuroscience. She tells me all these cool things involved with the brain. She’s going for her master’s in it she’s pretty damn smart. She also knows a lot about nutrition like I do.
I’m studying biology at the moment, I don’t even need college since I’m already successful I just want more thing suffer my belt just incase things fall through.
“It’s difficult to interpret neuroscience data.”
Yes. Check out Herculano-Houzel and Kaas 2011 to see where they got their numbers. The cellular scaling works with us and gorillas, a species that diverged early, so it should hold for hominins who diverged early as well.
They state at the end of the paper that if they had the same neuronal count as us, could the transference of cultural be the cause for our achievements over them? It’s very thought provokininnmt opinion.
My friends in medical professions give me an inferiority complex, although my ego is huge in general. They make me realize how vain my knowledge and interests in life are.
I’m interested in nutrition too, I’ve been on various high protein and high energy diets since high school, this combined with a lot of physical activiy. Now I have my girlfriend who has similar fitness goals as me and who’s the greatest cook and knows a lot about nutrition. Maintaining and admiring our sexiness is huge part of our relationship, we’re really vain persons but we like it.
“I’m studying biology at the moment, I don’t even need college since I’m already successful I just want more thing suffer my belt just incase things fall through”
In college you would be able to ask professors for more information.
“Yes. Check out Herculano-Houzel and Kaas 2011 to see where they got their numbers. The cellular scaling works with us and gorillas, a species that diverged early, so it should hold for hominins who diverged early as well.”
The data is interesting but further research is probably needed to draw solid conclusions.
My friends in medical professions give me an inferiority complex, although my ego is huge in general. They make me realize how vain my knowledge and interests in life are.
Good for you!
Most lawyers are too arrogant to feel inferior to doctors
Glad to encounter a lawyer with some humility
I don’t see my doctor friends that often, I’m an arrogant and despicable lawyer in a range rover most days in a year. And I’m pretty much arrogant with doctors when we discuss non-professional matters. But everybody has an inflated ego in my milieu, my girl is currently in a fashion war on her best friend, that’s funny.
“My friends in medical professions give me an inferiority complex, although my ego is huge in general. They make me realize how vain my knowledge and interests in life are.”
No matter how good you are there is always someone better. I have a huge ego and a ton of confidence. That comes with my job, I wouldn’t use a trainer or nutritionist who wasn’t confident. Just like I would fire a meek lawyer, I’d want a lawyer with an ego and tons of confidence.
“In college you would be able to ask professors for more information.”
Yea I know. I’ve learned a lot from other students and professors by asking questions. I got into it with my psychology teacher last year when she said IQ tests were biased towards white males. Lol.
“The data is interesting but further research is probably needed to draw solid conclusions.”
I agree. This research is the most interesting research I’ve come across in a while. I’m really glad I bought her book. You should buy it. It’s called “The Human Advantage”.
Good for you!
Most lawyers are too arrogant to feel inferior to doctors
Glad to encounter a lawyer with some humility
Not really Pumpkin. Afrosapiens definitely seems more arrogant than the average lawyer. It could be a cultural difference between North Americans and the French or because Afro’s parents are elites.
The French are definitely more frivolous and vain.
I feel myself only slightly more arrogant than my colleagues and ex classmates. I explain it by the fact that I have a charismatic physique, I’m tall, massive and black so I’m naturally impressive.
That might be cultural but I can’t imagine a French lawyer with your personality, you need confidence to be a law professional and for any profession. And yes, France is a vain country, only challenged by Italy, plus we also have the Southern European macho culture.
AS or RR 🙂
I think what differentiates us from other creatures is not the number of neurons/size of
the brain primarily, i think its the presence of specialized neurons. Maybe some specialized neurons exist in our brains that make us understand concepts that animals dont (concepts like philosophy, art, fashion etc). Ofcourse I cant cite anything saying this, its just my opinion. I feel maybe somebody we will discover those ‘special neurons’.
Doubling the neurons in a chimp will only get you a chimp that is smarter than other chimps….but not a human.
Also with regard to intelligence differences between humans, i think the size of the brain (relative to body size), number of neurons, and the kind of connections between them all determine intelligence not just the number of neurons, IMO. A better connected frontal lobe-parietal lobe means a better fronto-parietal intelligence. A better connected temporo-parietal lobe means better temporo-parietal intelligence etc
“By the way, for elephants, 98 percent of their neurons are in their frontal cortex. So that explains why we’re more intelligent than they are despite having less neurons.”
It would be interesting to know what could elephants and marine mammals do with human hands and voices, because we assume these animals are not as intelligent as humans but their bodies don’t allow them to materialize much of their potential.
It would be interesting to know what could elephants and marine mammals do with human hands and voices, because we assume these animals are not as intelligent as humans but their bodies don’t allow them to materialize much of their potential.
But one reason we have hands is that we have the intelligence to exploit them. If an animal’s not smart enough for advanced tool use, hands would have little selective advantage & would likely not evolve or conversely higher intelligence might not evolve unless we had the hands to exploit it.
In other words traits that work together evolve together, so if scientists genetically engineered all animals to have human arms and hands, few if any would be smart enough to much exploit them, though it would likely stimulate rapid natural selection to become smart enough.
Similarly for human human voices. If chimps suddenly mutated a human voice, they still would be incapable of anything like human language. They already have hands yet we don’t see them communicating in sign language outside of extreme training where minimal progress is made, though some believe dolphins have a language humans are incapable of hearing.
“But one reason we have hands is that we have the intelligence to exploit them. If an animal’s not smart enough for advanced tool use, hands would have little selective advantage & would likely not evolve or conversely higher intelligence might not evolve unless we had the hands to exploit it.”
It would still be interesting to see what their intelligence is made of. It could be similar to Asperger syndrome, impressive in some aspects but not actually functional.
It would still be interesting to see what their intelligence is made of. It could be similar to Asperger syndrome, impressive in some aspects but not actually functional.
Perhaps not Aspergers, but I do think many animals are analogous to what used to be called idiot savants. Geniuses in one area, but when the situation changes, they can’t adapt. For example birds that fly South in the winter; they’re geniuses at building nests and finding Florida, but if warm weather moved to a very different location, that bird would die.
“Perhaps not Aspergers, but I do think many animals are analogous to what used to be called idiot savants.”
There is a lot of savant idiocy in IQ.
PP or anybody here,
Do you happen to have info on what ‘kind’ of IQ tests were administered to indians? I mean the tests that were considered by lynn.
Pingback: A theory of IQ: Three mysteries of IQ research – Half-Assed Science