See other Immigration Articles
Title: Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.amazon.com/dp/159368021X/ref=pe_606_9510120_pe_ar_t1
Published: Jun 9, 2008
Author: Richard Lynn
Post Date: 2008-06-09 09:12:45 by Jethro Tull
Keywords: None
Views: 266
Comments: 10
Comment by: By #J. P. Rushton "Prof"32;# (University of Western Ontario) - See all my reviews 32; The book's central finding: the world average IQ is no more than 90, and declines from north to south. An IQ of 90 is equivalent to the mental age of a White14-year-old. (Standardized IQ tests are normed to 100, the mental age of the average white 16-year-old.). Lynn also draws attention to the fact that a north-south IQ continuum has evolved, apparently through selection for survival in cold winters. These findings in Lynn's latest book have profound geopolitical significance. They imply it may simply not be possible to transmit Western-style democratic and economic systems to the populations of Latin America and Moslem North Africa and the Middle East, let alone sub-Saharan Africa. They mean that the world's long-term problems will stem from its populations' capabilities-much deeper and more intractable than any "Clash of Civilizations"-style competition between different political concepts. The implications for immigration are obvious: it can have fundamental, and permanent, consequences. Lynn's book reviews more than 500 published IQ studies worldwide from the beginning of the twentieth century up to the present, devoting a chapter to each of the ten "genetic clusters", or population groups, as identified by Luigi Cavalli-Sforza and his colleagues in their mammoth 1994 book, The History and Geography of Human Genes. Lynn regards these genetic clusters as "races". He concludes that the East Asians-Chinese, Japanese and Koreans-have the highest mean IQ at 105. Europeans follow with an IQ of 100. Some ways below these are the Inuit or Eskimos (IQ 91), South East Asians (IQ 87), Native American Indians (IQ 87), Pacific Islanders (IQ 85), South Asians and North Africans (IQ 84). Well below these come the sub-Saharan Africans (IQ 67) followed by the Australian Aborigines (IQ 62). The lowest scoring are the Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert together with the Pygmies of the Congo rain forests (IQ 54). After the ten chapters setting out the evidence for the average IQ of each of these ten races, there follows a chapter on the reliability and validity of the measures. These show that, although additional evidence may be required to confirm some of the racial IQ estimates, many have very high reliability in the sense that different studies give closely similar results. For instance, East Asians invariably obtain high IQs, not only in their own native homelands but also in Singapore, Malaysia, Hawaii, and North America. To establish the validity of the racial IQs, Lynn shows that they correlate highly with performance in international studies of achievement in mathematics and science. And racial IQs also correlate with national economic development. This means they can help to explain why some countries are rich and others poor. Lynn's last three chapters are concerned with the book's subtitle-An Evolutionary Analysis. They discuss how race differences in intelligence have evolved. Lynn argues that as early humans migrated out of Africa they encountered the cognitively demanding problem of having to survive cold winters where there were no plant foods and they had to hunt, sometimes big game. They also had to solve the problem of keeping warm. This required greater intelligence than was needed in tropical and semi-tropical equatorial Africa where plant foods are plentiful throughout the year. Lynn shows that race differences in brain size and intelligence are both closely associated with low winter temperatures in the regions they inhabit. He gives a figure of 1,282 cc for the average brain size of sub-Saharan Africans, as compared with 1,367 cc for Europeans and 1,416 cc for East Asians. Since I have argued many of the same positions as Lynn, I will add that Lynn's brain size data are backed by a great deal of independent, converging evidence, including that from brain weights at autopsy, endocranial volume, and external head size measures. (My book provides many details of individual studies.) Moreover, magnetic resonance imaging studies make clear that the relation between brain size and intelligence is highly reliable. Lynn is on very safe ground in his statements here.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
#1. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
(Edited)
Not surprisingly, there is almost a perfect match between the average level of achievement in the respective nations/cultures and average IQ. Compare what technology is like in Japan or Finland to the technology and lifestyle of an African or Australian bushman. When you have a society that builds satellites and supercomputers, and other societies that are still in the stone age, it kind of throws this "all people are equal" and "the only difference is in skin color" crap into the dustbin.
If you were referring to "We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal" the intent of the author and the meaning missed by many is this has nothing to do with equality rather it refers to nobility.
Exactly - in the constitutional context. And as for the Biblical context, all men are equal in the eyes of God.
God does not discriminate.....man does
There are no replies to Comment # 6. End Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestHe concludes that the East Asians-Chinese, Japanese and Koreans- have the highest mean IQ at 105. Europeans follow with an IQ of 100. Some ways below these are the Inuit or Eskimos (IQ 91), South East Asians (IQ 87), Native American Indians (IQ 87), Pacific Islanders (IQ 85), South Asians and North Africans (IQ 84). Well below these come the sub-Saharan Africans (IQ 67) followed by the Australian Aborigines (IQ 62).
#3. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#1)
#4. To: robnoel (#3)
If you were referring to "We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal" the intent of the author and the meaning missed by many is this has nothing to do with equality rather it refers to nobility.
#6. To: scrapper2 (#4)
Replies to Comment # 6.