The attempts by do-gooders to dismiss the evidence against racial differences in IQ are often amusing for their desperation. They almost invariably come up with claims and ideas that have been very thoroughly raked over long ago and are too arrogant to suspect that they might learn something by checking the research on the subject (Rushton's demolition of Gould's "Mismeasure of Man" is a handy introduction to some of the more common issues). In his Freakonomics blog on the New York Times, however, economist Steven D. Levitt has come up with something that is at least original -- though at the price of absurdity. He reports a study in which he studied the IQs of one-year-olds. And guess what? At that age there were no differences between blacks and whites.
The idea that one-year-olds can have their IQs reliably measured is of course a joke and Steve Sailer satirizes it well. Steve does not go the full monte, however, so I will -- thus making me perhaps the most incorrect blogger on the net. I regret if it loses me readers but I have never shrunk from telling the full truth.
The fact is that if Levitt had included one-year-old chimpanzees in his group of infants, he WOULD have found some differences -- in favour of chimpanzees. Chimps grow up faster than humans so are capable at an earlier age -- but at the price of a lower final intelligence and a shorter lifespan. Generally speaking, the higher the final IQ, the longer it takes to reach its peak. If the test used by Levitt had really measured IQ, he would almost certainly have found the white children at that age to be LESS intelligent than black children. Blacks do reach puberty earlier than whites. Levitt was the simpleton for being unable even to form a reasonable hypothesis for his study.
The outrage brigade will have stopped reading by now but I must make clear that I am NOT equating blacks with chimpanzees. Blacks are clearly vastly more intelligent than chimpanzees. But comparisons between primates can sometimes help illuminate general principles. Leftists have long claimed to find great significance for human beings in the behaviour of the "peaceful" Bonobos, for instance. But more on that some other time.
Finally, let me add a routine caveat: People have a tendency to see statements about groups as applying to all members of that group. That is rarely so and is certainly not true in this instance. There is no inconsistency in saying that blacks as a whole are less intelligent while also acknowledging that some individual blacks are very intelligent. What is true of most need not be true of all.
(For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.)
DEDICATED TO EXPOSING DISINFORMATION AND PROPAGANDA AND TO PROMOTING UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS - WITH SHARP ANALYSIS AND BLUNT COMMENTARY. NO ADS. NO TIP-JAR. JUST THE TRUTH.
3 comments:
Hi J.R.,
I have long read your posts on this subject. I have also read other people's thoughts and findings on this subject.
I am not at all outraged by the subject.
However, I do wonder what is the purpose of putting so much effort into precisely this subject?
Is it merely inquiry into truth? Is it to make a case for separation of the races? Or, is there another purpose which I can't figure at this time?
Please, let me know.
One thought I have. Some people who study this subject must believe that it would be better for those who are more intelligent to breed only with those who are more intelligent. That is fine, as long as racial classification is not considered as an important factor in breeding.
In fact, it seems clear to me that different races have different aptitudes for different kinds of intelligences. Now, this could be cultural, or this could be something that arose out of culture, and then became bred into genetics. Either way, it seems clear that it is true. Although, I must say, I suspect that it is the latter. That is to say, I suspect these stronger aptitudes for certain intelligences began with culture and were eventually bred into the race. They actually, probably, emanate from the demands of various environmental factors.
If, in fact it is true that various races have various intellectual strengths, then, as I understand the theory of natural selection and genetics, it would be better for the human race for intelligent white people to breed with intelligent black people. In fact, it would be better for intelligent people of all races to breed with intelligent people of all other races.
Oh, but let us not forget that we are also going to need warriors. We are going to need human beings who are willing to slice the head off the neck. That will also always be a needed commodity in the human race.
i agree with most of what pastorius writes.
what we must combat i think is the idiotic attitude that races are equal - and that race is itself all one needs to know about an individual.
race is but one factor.
individuals should not be given rights or privileges because of their race.
and they should not be denied any because of their race.
THIS IS TRUE WHETHER OR NOT RACES ARE EQUAL IN IQ OR ANYTHING ELSE.
persons must be judged individually. no group guilt or benefits.
and we should not allocate diversity based on trying to get the same distribution in one specialized group as in society as a whole.
Post a Comment