Reply to: I've heard it all now!

[sasguru]

my personal take on this ...

...as someone who thinks statistically, I know how hard it is to conduct a study of this sort. Getting representative samples from each population, especially when, as far as I know, IQ tests are not routinely administered in the US, would be problemataic. There are well known problems with retrospective tests.
If you factor in the nebulous concept of IQ as a dependent variable - I would be very sceptical.
PS Are these the same guys who came out with the absurd nonsense of assigning a mean IQ to a country?

[lilelvis2000]

Oh yes, I love a nice pussy now and again... and again and again...

I doubt there's enough of us in the UK to satisfy your hunger. Plenty of loose cats in the USA however. Though it will be hard to sneak a large green lizard (with a deep seated hatred of James T) onto a plane.

[snaw]

Critics basically say the methods used were flawed, and the result pre-determined before the actual outcomes, and was funded by a body which has been accused of 'scientific racisism'. It was carried out by two guys, one of whom was alive when it was published and who's not actually qualified in this field.

Supporters say it's all true, and genetics explain it all.

Maybe a good place to sum it up would be an independent scientific bodies published statement:

"The differential between the mean intelligence test scores of Blacks and Whites (about one standard deviation, although it may be diminishing) does not result from any obvious biases in test construction and administration, nor does it simply reflect differences in socio-economic status. Explanations based on factors of caste and culture may be appropriate, but so far have little direct empirical support. There is certainly no such support for a genetic interpretation. At present, no one knows what causes this differential."

BTW It's an american study on the american population.

[Lucifer Box]

Too much info. Executive summary please. Was Herrnstein talking bollox or not?

[snaw]

Average IQ



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence


But what is intelligence anyway? Voting Labour?

You want to be careful when you post highly controversial things like the bell curve as some sort of statement of fact. Here's some thoughts on it (Both sides)

While the book's popularity was mostly propelled by its controversial claims regarding race and intelligence, both the accuracy of those claims and the qualifications of the authors soon came under attack. Dr. Herrnstein died before the book was released, leaving Charles Murray to do most of its public defense. Although Herrnstein was a prominent psychologist, Murray has a Ph.D. in political science with no formal credentials in psychometrics.

Some scientific response to The Bell Curve has been highly negative. Georgetown University Distinguished Professor of Health Studies Craig T. Ramey said "Within the sophisticated research community, the opinion has been virtually unanimous that The Bell Curve was a primitive, oversimplistic and flawed analysis." University of Oklahoma Assistant Professor of Anthropology Michael Nunley wrote:

I believe this book is a fraud, that its authors must have known it was a fraud when they were writing it, and that Charles Murray must still know it's a fraud as he goes around defending it. [...] After careful reading, I cannot believe its authors were not acutely aware of [...] how they were distorting the material they did include.

Professor Leon Kamin, a longtime critic of cognitive ability tests, said the book did "a disservice to and abuse of science." Boston University Neurology Professor Howard Gardner (who, like Kamin and some of the other critics, holds views which are criticized by Herrnstein and Murray) called the style of thought "scholarly brinkmanship":

The authors seem to show the evidence and leave the implications for the reader to figure out; discussing scientific work on intelligence, they never quite say that intelligence is all important and tied to one's genes, yet they signal that this is their belief and that readers ought to embrace the same conclusions.

Economist and conservative writer Thomas Sowell, who is black (a racial group identified in the book as having a lower average IQ than some other racial groups), criticized some aspects of the book, claiming that the authors ignored data and failed to draw obvious conclusions from it that would have hurt their argument. But he nonetheless concluded that "The Bell Curve is a very sober, very thorough, and very honest book." [3]

In its defense, fifty-two professors, including researchers in the study of intelligence and related fields, signed a statement titled "Mainstream Science on Intelligence" supporting many of the scientific views reported in The Bell Curve. The statement was written by psychometrics researcher Linda Gottfredson and published in The Wall Street Journal in 1994 and later in the journal Intelligence[4]. Some of the signers had previously made similar claims about race and intelligence and were cited as sources in the book.

Race and intelligence research is often considered a taboo subject. Charles Murray noted, for example, "Some of the things we read to do this work, we literally hide when we're on planes and trains". Critics have noted much of the work referenced by the Bell Curve was funded by the Pioneer Fund, which aims to advance the scientific study of heredity and human differences, and has been accused of promoting scientific racism. Critics argue the book was written to encourage politically-beneficial racism, citing Murray's book proposal which described the target audience as the "huge number of well-meaning whites who fear that they are closet racists, and this book tells them they are not. It's going to make them feel better about things they already think but do not know how to say." (New York Times Magazine, 10/9/94)
[edit]

American Psychological Association task force report

In response to the growing controversy surrounding The Bell Curve, the American Psychological Association's Board of Scientific Affairs established a special task force to publish an investigative report on the research presented in the book. The full text of the report is available at a third-party website. [5]

Many of the task force's findings supported statements from The Bell Curve. They agreed that IQ scores have high predictive validity for individual differences in school achievement. They also confirm the predictive validity of IQ for adult occupational status, even when variables such as education and family background have been statistically controlled. They agree that individual differences in intelligence are substantially influenced by genetics. Consistent with Herrnstein and Murray's findings, they state there is little evidence to show that childhood diet influences intelligence except in cases of severe malnutrition. They agree that there are no significant differences between the IQ scores of males and females. Perhaps most significantly, the APA task force agrees that:

The differential between the mean intelligence test scores of Blacks and Whites (about one standard deviation, although it may be diminishing) does not result from any obvious biases in test construction and administration, nor does it simply reflect differences in socio-economic status. Explanations based on factors of caste and culture may be appropriate, but so far have little direct empirical support. There is certainly no such support for a genetic interpretation. At present, no one knows what causes this differential.

The APA journal that published the statement, American Psychologist, subsequently published eleven critical responses in January 1997, most arguing that the report failed to examine adequately the evidence for partly-genetic explanations of Black-White differences in mean IQ. Charles Murray, for instance, responded:

Actually, there is no direct evidence at all, just a wide variety of indirect evidence, almost all of which the task force chose to ignore.[1]

[Gold Dalek]

BTW I wouldn't call that a percieved racial slight, I'd call that a full blown racial statement, one of the ones straight from the days of empire - white man's burden and all that, eh, what ho.

Ah... then you would be mistaken

[Gold Dalek]

Fancy reposting that in a format it's readable in?

In a nutshell are you saying that sub-saharn africans are genetically inferior to everyone else?

If so please point me to some evidence of this.

I'm certain if you tried you could work it out

[Denny]

It will never work simply because humans have a built in hatred/deep seated mistrust of anyone who looks different to themselves.

Mailman

They must be jealous.

[Jabberwocky]

I like wobbly black bottoms first, if that helps. Pale bums next, asian, then chinky. Sasguru is the arze I like the least.

[DimPrawn]

Average IQ



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence


But what is intelligence anyway? Voting Labour?

[cojak]

It's genetic. Don't take offense - races are different - it's a fact. Get rid of the politically correct stuff and face the facts.

Of course it depends on who wrote the IQ test in the 1st place...

Test yours here...

[TheMonkey]

If it is true the big point won't be the intellectual differences but the generational scale of lies told and perpetuated by the PC brigade.

Precisely!

[TheMonkey]

What about Brummies?

black ones or white ones?

[vista]

Interesting

Let's clear this up. I'm an amateur brain surgeon (well cognitive neuroscientist). It fascinates me and has done for years. I've always been interested in the cultural differences between races as well.

Average IQ's per racial group at the age of 6 (the time the brain's synaptic pattern is fully developed).

East Asian - 107
White - 103
Black/African - 89

Always cite your sources: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(95)00158-1

There's some more references on the matter here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_an...8References%29

It's genetic. Don't take offense - races are different - it's a fact. Get rid of the politically correct stuff and face the facts.

It does give you pause for thought that there could be cold hard genetic evidence of differences between the races. I can't completely accept a few references as conclusive proof and others here will refuse to accept anything that contradicts their prejudices, PC of course, infact an argument could ensue that PC isn't prejudice at all.

If it is true the big point won't be the intellectual differences but the generational scale of lies told and perpetuated by the PC brigade.

[Fungus]

Let's clear this up. I'm an amateur brain surgeon (well cognitive neuroscientist). It fascinates me and has done for years. I've always been interested in the cultural differences between races as well.

Average IQ's per racial group at the age of 6 (the time the brain's synaptic pattern is fully developed).

East Asian - 107
White - 103
Black/African - 89

Always cite your sources: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(95)00158-1

There's some more references on the matter here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_an...8References%29

It's genetic. Don't take offense - races are different - it's a fact. Get rid of the politically correct stuff and face the facts.

What about Brummies?