The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Cognitive Cliodynamics
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

elephant-brain

The FLynn Effect has not acted uniformly across the various domains of intelligence.

To put it very roughly, in the past century, the developed world has seen a two S.D. improvement on Raven’s Progressive Matrices, hardly any improvement in verbal or Backward Digit Span tests, and a one S.D. improvement in various picture arrangement and completion tasks.

This has translated to an approximately one S.D. improvement in general intelligence.

Raven’s loads heavily on visuospatial ability, which in turn is highly dependent on brain size. OTOH, verbal ability to seems to have little, if any, correlation with brain size.

Brain size increased by well more than an S.D. since the late 19th century, in line with increased in body size as a whole [see the book The Changing Body by Floud et al. for a comprehensive treatment]. However, people familiar with classical literature, with contemporary journals, magazines, and letters, etc., could be understood for dismissing this on account of it just being too incredible.

At it happens, they would be right to do so. According to one study (Henrichsen et al., 1986), which was highlighted by IQ blogger Pumpkin Person, fourteen pairs of MZ twins who had weight differentials of more than 25% at birth had their bodies and minds measured at the age of 13. The heavier twins had a 0.5 S.D. higher head circumference, a 0.5 S.D. higher performance IQ, but there was no difference in verbal IQ.

Two other bits of evidence from HBD. First, larger-brained men have a 10 IQ point advantage in visuospatial ability over women, but verbal abilities are at best equal. The Inuit and Yakuts have some of the biggest brains on the planet, more so even than their other Mongoloid cousins, but while their visuospatial abilities are legendary – early Soviet psychometrists noted the ability of the Altai to notice one missing animal in a herd of hundreds – their verbal IQs are nothing to write home about. Meanwhile, Jews dominate verbal IQ, being almost one S.D. above Whites, while having normal sized brains and unremarkable visuospatial IQ.

Apart from auxological factors, which was emphasized by Richard Lynn, performance also increases with greater training, an observation that was stressed more by James Flynn. One study (Armstrong et al., 2014) discovered a correlation between the FLynn effect on various tests, and the extent to which said tests are rule-dependent. Rule-dependent tests, in turn, benefit from retesting effects and the progressively greater emphasis on abstract thinking skills in schooling during the course of the 20th century. Raven’s maxes out on both factors, and has consequently seen the greatest increase.

Verbal skills, in contrast, benefit little if at all from greater brain size, and children in the developed world were already getting very stringently trained on it even a century ago. Even brutally so (spare the rod and spoil the child; one beaten is worth two unbeaten; etc.). OTOH, there must have been a large improvement in average verbal proficiency between, say, 1600 and 1900.

Verbal skills are much more important for economic productivity than recognizing patterns in weird shapes, ergo GDP per capita and development levels showing the highest levels of correlation precisely with verbal IQ. Incidentally, this is why I find PISA tests – which are both strongly g loaded, as well as focusing on precisely the most economically useful skills – to really be the most useful psychometric tests from a real world perspective, as opposed to Lynn & Vanhanen’s and David Becker’s laudable efforts.

Note that neither of these two factors “disprove” genetic racial differences in IQ. Within countries, especially the modern developed world, both the auxological environment and the learning environment tend to be very similar across racial groups. American Negroes, if anything, benefit from being more urban than Caucasians, and contrary to leftist rhetoric, inner city schools are typically very well financed. However, in both the US and across all other countries where studies have been conducted, including African ones, Negroes consistently place at least half an S.D. to one S.D. lower than Caucasians across pretty much all types of IQ tests.

The immigrants who came to the US in the late 19th/early 20th centuries from places like Southern Italy or Ireland were nutritionally underdeveloped (so lower scores on culture neutral but auxology-dependent tests), usually less intensely educated and certainly not in the English language (so lower verbal IQ performance), and certainly had less practice with more abstract problems. This made for a large gap with indigenous Americans, and up until the 1960s/70s, with residents of the most developed nations in general. Since then, nutritional and educational convergence has almost entirely closed those gaps.

However, precisely because our world is now much more biorealistic than in the past, with best practices filtering through to all but the most benighted places, I am skeptical of existing gaps continuing to get closed to any significant extent (even if there is still considerable room for improvement in Africa and the Indian subcontinent). For instance, Jason Richwine has noted – and gotten into trouble for it – that Mexican-Americans stop converging to White Americans norms after the second generation.

East Asians (Chinese, Koreans, Japanese) tend to have larger brains and larger visuospatial IQs than Caucasians, but similar verbal IQs. However, they modestly lag in GDP per capita (relative to what it should be), significantly lag in elite science output (again, relative to what it should be), and grossly lag in historical accomplishment (how China was not first to the Industrial Revolution must be one of the biggest puzzles of Intelligence Theory).

My guess is that this underperformance can be ascribed to greater East Asian conformism, relative to the other major races of man (Kura et al., 2015).

Let’s take an extreme case. Women do not significantly lag men in intelligence, or at least on the sort of intelligence that is useful for making discoveries. And if anything they are better – more conscientious, more diligent – at office work. And yet the achievement gap is awesome. According to Charles Murray’s calculations, women only account for about 2% of human accomplishment across most scientific or cultural domains, and this figure hasn’t budged upwards despite the appearance of feminism and affirmative action. Women are, of course, far more conformist than men, less willing to challenge the dominant paradigms, and there is good reason to think East Asians are “tilted” in a similar direction. Just look at their inventions: As Steve Sailer is wont to say, while the Indians invented the zero, the Chinese invented paper and the compass. Even in the Early Modern Age, East Asian mathematics was most developed relative to Europe in the highly non-abstract field of numerical techniques, while lagging cardinally in more theoretical fields such as calculus and number theory.

As I argued in Apollo’s Ascent, the Sinosphere was also very much hampered on account of their logographic writing systems. As anyone who has studied Mandarin can confirm, literacy is MUCH simpler to acquire with alphabetic systems, while even retaining literacy in logographic systems such as Hanzi is not trivial without constant practice. In contrast, the civilizations of the Med shifted to alphabets, beginning with the Phoenicians, as soon as literacy rates began expanding beyond the priestly castes. Possibly it was precisely East Asian conformism that preempted similar developments there (note that Korea’s Sejong the Great did introduce an alphabetic system from above in the 15th century, and for the express purpose of increasing literacy amongst the commonfolk, but the system was apparently so resistant to change that it took until the 20th century to truly catch on).

Moreover, even in the modern day US, as I pointed out, East Asians (though not South Asians!) take much less of an interest, especially relative to their IQ levels, in “out of left field” topics and communities such as rationalism and transhumanism. The usual boors will rejoinder “good for them,” but I am sure that they will not come up with anything or original either. But just to address their autistic screeching: (The Japanese researcher) Kenya Kura notes: “Among undergrads, 40% or more are Asians, but graduate students are something like 20% (depending on departments). Faculty members are well less than 10%.” Getting an undergraduate degree is the normal, handshakeworthy thing to do in modern society. Slaving away for a PhD? Not so much.

More conformism, literacy retarding writing system, no advantage in verbal IQ. And so China didn’t launch a Scientific Revolution, or an Industrial one, despite consistently having high human capital, an unusually unified and free market of 100 million+ people, vast numbers of schools, etc.

There isn’t near as much to explain about the Middle East and India. They are simply less intelligent – significantly so – than the Europeans or East Asians. They got to intensive agriculture, urbanization, and some degree of literacy – these all very much went together before the Industrial Revolution – faster than China or Europe. They made vast progress when that happened, but they ran into cognitive barriers, which were pushed back as soon as each new wave of more cold-adapted, higher IQ peoples got into the innovation game. This is the argument that Richard Hart makes in Understanding History.

I also don’t consider it at all necessary to invoke Christianity to explain European intellectual success, as Charles Murray insists on doing in Human Accomplishment. I am certainly not one of those militant atheist types, but it’s hard to deny that Christianity’s influence in late Antiquity was highly negative, helping push the Roman sphere further into obscurantism. It did play a role in conserving knowledge during the Dark Ages, and in advancing knowledge after 1100, but it’s not clear how it did that, or promoted literacy, beyond what it would have been the case under a different religion (e.g. William Harris in Ancient Literacy estimates Roman Italy’s literacy rate to have been at 10%-15% at its peak, and that was without the benefit of cheap paper). Protestantism did raise literacy way above what it would have been, due to the emphasis it placed on a personal reading of the Bible. But by the time Protestantism rolled around, Europe was already way scientifically ahead of China, not to mention all other civilization.

Finally, I don’t think Jaychick’s ideas about clannishness played a major role either. They are correct and original in their observations that countries within the Hajnal Line are indeed less corrupt and more civic-minded than those outside it, and East Asian evolved an alternate prosociality based on shame instead of guilt. These have important consequences with respect to everyday life, institutions, etc. But economic development, or innovation? Not so much. The reality is that there were plenty of very bright and creative Middle Easterners and Mediterraneans – especially Greeks and Italians – who pushed the scientific frontier forwards. Almost everything can be explained by IQ, and differential rates in the appearance of intensive agriculture, urbanization, and literacy. The two biggest factors that can’t be are the relative underperformance (relative to IQ!) of East Asians vs. everyone else, and women vs. men. Common factor there seems to be higher conformism.

Rant over. Did I miss anything?

 
• Category: Science • Tags: Economic History, Human Biodiversity, IQ 
Hide 335 CommentsLeave a Comment
335 Comments to "Cognitive Cliodynamics"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. DFH says:

    The obvious reason for female underachievment is that men greatly outnumber women at the highest levels of intelligence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Certainly a major factor, but assuming equal IQs, an female S.D. of 13.5 vs. 15 for men (James Thompson usually uses 14), and a discovery threshold of 145, women would still account for almost a quarter of eminent figures; at a discovery threshold of 160, they would still account for ~12% of eminent figures. Whereas the actual number is just 2%. So other factors must clearly play a role.

    My pet theory is that even though female capacity to contribute to innovation has been getting progressively better throughout history - absolute conditions may be even better than for men, these days - the threshold discovery rate has also been steadily going up. The two factors have canceled each other out, resulting in zero net progress in the percentage of female eminent figures. They might even fall this century, since female access is now maxed out, whereas the problems that need to be solved will continue getting harder.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. AaronB says:

    Almost everything can be explained by IQ, and differential rates in the appearance of intensive agriculture, urbanization, and literacy.

    Bah!

    It is all almost spiritual factors.

    [MORE]

    Some people will invest all their energy into developing materially and uproot, destabilize, and reorganize their entire culture to achieve material advantage – other people’s will prefer spiritual happiness, or at least a better balance.

    East Asians simply aren’t willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage – which reminds me I really need to live there!

    And the people who invest all their energy into material advantage eventually burn out and become gloomy and apathetic and self hating and try and destroy themselves or get overrun by people who invest more of their energy in spiritual happiness – so it’s a short term strategy, a few centuries at most.

    And that is is the TRUE history of the world – not this incoherent genetic nonsense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @DFH

    East Asians simply aren’t willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage
     
    You've become a parody of yourself, Aaron
    , @Hyperborean

    East Asians simply aren’t willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage – which reminds me I really need to live there!
     
    Please don't.
    , @Abelard Lindsey
    This is a funny comment. Its down right hilarious! As someone who lived for a decade in the East Asian countries, I can tell you that they are the most materialistic people on the planet, way more than most Americans. You see, I don't give a rat's ass what people believe as long as they don't keep me from doing what I want with my own life.

    You know, people use the word "spritual" a lot and I still have no idea WTF they mean by it. The only thing I can come up with is that "spritual" is just a state of mind, nothing more.

    You know, there is the concept that the human personality is not an integrated whole, but rather a system of subselves. Eric Berne was the first to talk about this with his theory of "ego states". Later, there are others to come up with thier own variants of this concept. Julian Jaynes bicameral mind theory is a specific variant of this concept. By his theory, reliigious belief in modern humans is a vestigial remnent of the bicameral mind. I see no reason to reject this explanation out of hand.

    , @meis
    This is a reply to all, especially White men, not just the original poster of the comment.

    Confucianism. Morality. Discipline. Humble. Guilt (which Karlin has touched).

    Recently, I watched these programs from China:

    Millionaires going back to the village life (in Yunnan I think)
    2014
    Season 1
    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRKN8nAk12Zf909jTwje09KOEOSfnJTm3

    2015
    Season 2
    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRKN8nAk12ZeL8M8Sq4NPMj_Nxq9Glf_e

    Another title with a similar theme with celebs
    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUM8x224JrX83Ai3H3ZndAfN9uvI_UUH3

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. DFH says:
    @AaronB

    Almost everything can be explained by IQ, and differential rates in the appearance of intensive agriculture, urbanization, and literacy.
     
    Bah!

    It is all almost spiritual factors.



    Some people will invest all their energy into developing materially and uproot, destabilize, and reorganize their entire culture to achieve material advantage - other people's will prefer spiritual happiness, or at least a better balance.

    East Asians simply aren't willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage - which reminds me I really need to live there!

    And the people who invest all their energy into material advantage eventually burn out and become gloomy and apathetic and self hating and try and destroy themselves or get overrun by people who invest more of their energy in spiritual happiness - so it's a short term strategy, a few centuries at most.

    And that is is the TRUE history of the world - not this incoherent genetic nonsense.

    East Asians simply aren’t willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage

    You’ve become a parody of yourself, Aaron

    Read More
    • Replies: @AaronB
    Lol, I was kind of joking, but I see Karlin dislikes my comment, so I'll stop.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. @DFH
    The obvious reason for female underachievment is that men greatly outnumber women at the highest levels of intelligence.

    Certainly a major factor, but assuming equal IQs, an female S.D. of 13.5 vs. 15 for men (James Thompson usually uses 14), and a discovery threshold of 145, women would still account for almost a quarter of eminent figures; at a discovery threshold of 160, they would still account for ~12% of eminent figures. Whereas the actual number is just 2%. So other factors must clearly play a role.

    My pet theory is that even though female capacity to contribute to innovation has been getting progressively better throughout history – absolute conditions may be even better than for men, these days – the threshold discovery rate has also been steadily going up. The two factors have canceled each other out, resulting in zero net progress in the percentage of female eminent figures. They might even fall this century, since female access is now maxed out, whereas the problems that need to be solved will continue getting harder.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon
    if innovation is a combination of brains + wildness

    (where wildness = anti-conformism in your formulation)

    then females should have less wildness for "sperm is cheap, eggs are expensive" reasons
    , @Guillaume Tell
    The drawing of the homunculus with the elephant-shaped brain is very spooky!
    , @phil
    Apart from IQ considerations, women are less interested, on average, in abstract speculation.
    , @bispora
    "assuming equal IQs"

    This is the key point. Lynn hypothesized about 5 IQ point higher male cognitive ability. Check your numbers whit this knowledge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. AaronB says:
    @DFH

    East Asians simply aren’t willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage
     
    You've become a parody of yourself, Aaron

    Lol, I was kind of joking, but I see Karlin dislikes my comment, so I’ll stop.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. I think that the great variability between male and female IQ is also a very important factor. On the very high IQ level, there are far fewer women than men.

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed). Eastern Europe on the other hand was regularly devastated by warlike tribes from the steppe, who’s ways of war were infinitely more devastating then thus of western European states. Eastern Europe did not exactly develop much, before the Nomad problem wasn’t finally handled in the late 18th century (when the Crimean horde was conquered by Russia), after which the east started to catch up with the west.

    We just don’t know how a Song China would have developed, had the Jurchen and Mongols not destroyed it. Europe took over 600 years to recover from the fall of Rome after all. And if anything the Mongols were far more brutal and devastating then any of the tribes, that brought down the Roman Empire. The Manchu conquest also surpassed the religious wars of Europe by far in brutality and devastation.

    Meanwhile, the Malthusian crisis of western Europe, like the one that ended in the black death in the 14th and in the religious wars of the 17th, was not accompanied by barbarian invasions, so while population did decline, material wealth and social order did remain far more preserved, for instance opening the way for the early capitalist revolution of the post black death era.

    No matter what Pommeranz says….post Song china always had a very small part of its population living in cities. See K Dengs work on “Agrocracy” for a detailed explanation. The Chinese social and political system was developed in a way that encouraged population flow from cities into the countryside, where of course people were generally less intellectually productive. The comercial classes were also far less influential in China then in the most productive areas of western Europe (16th century Northern Italy, 17th century Netherlands and 18th century England). By 1600 around 8% of western Europeans were living in cities with over 10 000 inhabitants, vs only 4% in CHina (the numbers are not much different over the regions of China, while Western Europe had several areas of high urban concentration). By 1800 the highest rate of urbanisation in any province of China was 5,6%, while in Western Europe it was 30%.

    I would also say that the Hajnal Line and the institutions it encouraged, does play a role in economic development and might have had an impact on western European IQ.

    Sorry for my bad English.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Guillaume Tell

    Sorry for my bad English.
     
    You must be kidding. Your English is very good (better than mine for sure) and your comment above is very informative. Thank you.
    , @Anatoly Karlin

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed).
     
    E.L. Jones makes this point in The European Miracle. More capital in China was destroyed during nomad invasions than in Europe.

    Of course, one aspect of this is just China's plain back luck in being a giant plane abutting the Eurasian steppe, which could masses of steppe cavalry on home soil. Largest plain in Europe west of the Wild Fields is in Hungary, which, however, is relatively small and can only support 1-2 tyumens. Main reason the Mongols decided to call off their invasion.

    Still, while acknowledging that the nomads did nothing good for China, I don't really buy the idea that they explain why Europe "won" instead of China. Nomad dynasties inevitably became Sinicized; populations bounced back; the Confucian bureaucracy seems to have been remarkably resilient, and provided continuity of governance. And of course Japan did not have that problem, but in many respects followed in China's footsteps (self-imposed isolation; improvement over innovation).
    , @RaceRealist88
    "I think that the great variability between male and female IQ is also a very important factor"

    It's built into the test.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. There isn’t near as much to explain about the Middle East and India. They are simply less intelligent – significantly so – than the Europeans or East Asians.

    Is there a credible estimate of Indian IQ? I am not convinced by Lynn & Vanhanen’s low-80s estimate. You have mentioned high parasitic load and malnourishment as potential factors holding the subcontinent in general back. Malnourishment in India is higher than even the average Sub-Saharan African country.

    You go on to state that you view the g-loaded PISA tests to be better guides, but India notoriously underperformed the (only) time they participated, probably for the same reason(s). Speaking of Jason Richwine, Steve Sailer on his twitter mentioned a few days ago, in response to a direct question on this very topic from an Indian, that the mean IQ of 2nd-gen Indian-Americans is something around 112 IQ, so quite close to mean Ashkenazi IQ. This would imply that ‘regression to the mean’ is quite high, and as such would throw cold water on the idea that the average Indian IQ is low on a genetic basis.

    Of course, as most people know, India has many subpopulations and many castes have extremely high endogamy, which makes determining Indian IQ so difficult, especially as most immigrants to the US are high caste(implied as Brahmin). That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins. Then again, some Indians on /pol/ have thrown cold water on this Brahmin = high caste theory.

    I say this in the context of recman1′s comments on UK Indians, and his focus on Brahmin’s as high caste, which, if the-above comments is anything to go by, is misleading since ‘high caste’ is not synonymous with Brahmin in a strict socio-economic sense (but more so in a cultural sense).

    Verbal skills are much more important for economic productivity than recognizing patterns in weird shapes, ergo GDP per capita and development levels showing the highest levels of correlation precisely with verbal IQ.

    This is interesting, and I’ve heard this before. Additionally, I do not remember which author – perhaps it was Murray – who once wrote that mathematical IQ is actually better correlated with verbal IQ than the other way around. In other words, someone with a verbal IQ of 130 will have a higher mathematical IQ on average than someone with a mathematical IQ of 130 will have a verbal IQ. I do not know if this is true, do you know something about this? It goes against the stereotype of “clever humanist but worthless on math”, which is why I was skeptical when I read it. It’d be interesting if true.

    My guess is that this underperformance can be ascribed to greater East Asian conformism, relative to the other major races of man (Kura et al., 2015).

    Isn’t this an old stereotype(or even a slur) repackaged in a new exterior? I’ve gone back and read some articles from ~2005 recently and it is astonishing how dismissive many Western media outlets were of the Chinese. Sure, they write, the Chinese are growing fast but [insert litany of thinly-veiled dismissive insults about 'robotic' Asians who lack innovation]. Yet as you yourself have pointed out, the Chinese have risen very fast at cutting-edge research in the academies. Their AI efforts are already world-class. This does not disprove their historical lag, but it should perhaps caution us on taking an essentialist perspective by tagging them as perpetually ‘incurious’. If that was the case, you’d expect it to remain a constant constraint and that doesn’t appear to be true, or at least far less than many thought 10-15 years ago. Thoughts?

    Also, there was plenty of Chinese innovation pre-1500 AD and one could argue that if you focus from 0 AD to 1500 AD, it is not clear that Europeans did better. We innovated in a shorter burst and as technological output accelerated, it was more tightly packed in a shorter timespan, though I will concede that the last 500 years were vastly more important than anything than came before it put together.

    However, as Kurzweil has noted, human innovation has sped up consistently over the last 10 000 years. The introduction of each technology has been shorter and shorter, which perhaps shows to a generalised pattern that makes the industrial revolution less of a unique European phenomena in the sense that “without us, it would never have happened” and more a logical end-conclusion of ever-faster innovation over the course of human history. Perhaps we were simply doing better at this particular juncture, which is why it was us, but had it begun in 1300 AD, maybe I would have written this in Mandarin.

    P.S. For what it’s worth, there are questions over whether we measure productivity adequately today. Some, like prof Diane Coyle, argue that we are underestimating it and research institutions like the Conference Board has taken in her research and the result of those models is that East Asian GDPpc is higher than it is today due to higher productivity.

    It is particularly technological productivity that is undermeasured, and that would remove a lot of this ‘underperformance’. SK has lower productivity than Spain according to the OECD, which is somewhat implausible.

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    Is there a credible estimate of Indian IQ? I am not convinced by Lynn & Vanhanen’s low-80s estimate.
     
    We are still waiting for Jason Malloy to chime in with his promised study. But I think that low 80s are plausible, with potential to go up to low-to-mid 90s.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-puzzle-of-indian-iq-a-country-of-gypsies-and-jews/

    Speaking of Jason Richwine, Steve Sailer on his twitter mentioned a few days ago, in response to a direct question on this very topic from an Indian, that the mean IQ of 2nd-gen Indian-Americans is something around 112 IQ, so quite close to mean Ashkenazi IQ.
     
    Something like 50% of Indian-Americans are Brahmins IIRC, and Americans did very thorough cognitive filtering on which Indians got in.

    I know that Jason Malloy once commented that Brahmins in India DON'T have superior IQs, but since it's just one short comment and goes against a lot of other evidence (e.g. almost all of the people who developed Indian nukes were South Indian Brahmins), plus the heterogeneity of the Brahmin caste itself, I don't take this seriously.

    That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins.
     
    British Indians do much worse than Indian-Americans, they are at best only equal to British Whites on academic tests. Ergo for IQ tests.

    Isn’t this an old stereotype(or even a slur) repackaged in a new exterior? I’ve gone back and read some articles from ~2005 recently and it is astonishing how dismissive many Western media outlets were of the Chinese.
     
    Well I never did that from the very start so I think I have some credibility on the matter.

    This is from 2008, less than a year after I began blogging!: http://akarlin.com/2008/08/a-long-wait-at-the-gate-of-delusions/

    Also http://akarlin.com/2011/07/top-10-sinophobe-myths/

    Yet as you yourself have pointed out, the Chinese have risen very fast at cutting-edge research in the academies. Their AI efforts are already world-class.
     
    Correct.

    However, as I have also long pointed out, Japan has less elite scientific level output than the UK or Germany: http://www.unz.com/freed/affirmative-action-and-the-american-mind-if-any/#comment-2349841

    South Korea is equal to Spain (!) and Switzerland (!!!).

    Assuming China converges to somewhere between Korea's and Japan's level, its elite scientific output will max out at 100%-150% of the US level. Which will make it the world's premier scientific power, but not an overwhelmingly dominant one, which is what you would expect from its demographics + average IQ.

    This ofc assumes that the US will not keep on declining due to internal demographic changes and SJWization.

    Incidentally, in the deeper past, I actually long resisted the claim that East Asians are somehow less curious and so forth. However, things like the Nature Science Index, Kura's arguments, the data on East Asian participation in "out of left field" communities, etc. have gradually convinced me that there is something to those stereotypes.

    Though their extreme versions (e.g. Wingrove's Chung Kuo series) remain ridiculous exaggerations.

    Also, there was plenty of Chinese innovation pre-1500 AD and one could argue that if you focus from 0 AD to 1500 AD, it is not clear that Europeans did better. We innovated in a shorter burst and as technological output accelerated, it was more tightly packed in a shorter timespan, though I will concede that the last 500 years were vastly more important than anything than came before it put together.
     
    Lead was very much restricted, from around 300 AD when Rome began to fall into obscurantism, to 1100 AD, which correlated to the rise of medieval scholasticism (not even the Renaissance!): https://www.unz.com/akarlin/graphing-the-dark-ages/

    https://www.unzcloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/kirkegaard-human-accomplishment-2.png

    Also, China's peak during that period was very modest relative to the earlier Greek peak, to say nothing of course of post-1100 developments in Europe.

    There is also the structure of Chinese developments: Much more practical, heavily loaded towards tech (compass, paper, gunpowder, printing press), including even the basic research (didn't bother with proofs until arrival of modern Western mathematics; but 18th century Japan independently developed advanced numerical techniques). In contrast, India (Kerala)... developed the zero.

    Perhaps we were simply doing better at this particular juncture, which is why it was us, but had it begun in 1300 AD, maybe I would have written this in Mandarin.
     
    I believe core Europe was already more advanced in important respects than China by 1300. By then, IIRC, they were even producing more manuscripts, despite China having the printing press.

    However, if Europe was to vanish off the face of the Earth c. 1300, I do think China would have been by far the next best candidate to reach the Industrial Revolution soonest. Maybe around 2200-2300.
    , @DFH

    That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins
     
    Not really

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UA0XGVjQtQM
    , @songbird
    Based on acquaintances, I can easily believe 112 for Jews, 105-106 for NE Asians, but I can't believe 112 for US Indians, and I believe immigration here makes them more selected than in India.

    Two provisions: I did not know many growing up, (the number has since wildly exploded), and I don't live near Silicon Valley.

    By my observation alone, ave. US dot-Indians maybe 100. Many work in convenience or liquor stores, which seems to give the lie to the idea that they are here based on skills. First generation, (at least) has more stable marriages than whites in general, not sure about compared to white immigrants. Horribly, tribal, compared to most other groups. Most of their women are blah to frumpy. Exceptions rare, though notable.

    I wouldn't mind living next to Indians, but still it is obvious they are sharpening their knives politically, and would gut any European country, the whole continent, without one iota of shame, if it meant bringing in more Indians. Same for the US, or any other Western country.

    I recently saw a travel commercial for India. It seemed to be targeted toward whites and began with an Indian bookseller in Rome. While it did have two white children in it, I thought that was a lot of effrontery - a wise Indian in the Eternal City of Europe, spreading his knowledge to Europeans, when selling to your own country as a tourist destination to Europeans - which you would not see from any other people, even Jews.

    A pity, because I don't believe the average Indian in India is anywhere as malignant as the average African. Many even have a certain goofy charm and optimism about their country, but they are Malthusian people - tribalistically Malthusian. And the tribal ones ruin any practical possibility of getting along with the others.

    Is there any reason to suppose native Indian average is any greater than MENA countries? I don't believe so. Maybe, 90 in ideal conditions. Can they achieve this in their own country? I don't know.
    , @RaceRealist88
    PISA are scholastic achievement tests; not tests of "intelligence" (whatever that is).
    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    ...greater East Asian conformism
    ...Isn’t this an old stereotype(or even a slur)
    ...Their AI efforts are already world-class.

     

    .
    China's Social Credit System: AI-driven panopticon
    , @dux.ie
    > someone with a verbal IQ of 130 will have a higher mathematical IQ on average than someone with a mathematical IQ of 130 will have a verbal IQ. I do not know if this is true, do you know something about this?

    From the way the proposition is framed it implicity introduces biases from different sub-population IQ attributes. The SAT test is a pretty good proxy for IQ as the scores are directly related to the national cognitive percentile, abide that the Maths and ERW scales have different relationship with the percentiles, i.e. the SatERW scale is inflated where lower SatERW score gives higher percentile (and higher IQverbal) than that from SatMaths (and thus it gives an unfair advantage for natives with English as the first or only language). Thus for IQverbal=130 requires only SatERW=699.9 while IQmaths=130 requires SatMaths=720.9. However, by lowering the bar for SatErw, relatively more those with ESL (English as second language) and high IQmaths are included and that raises the average SatMaths for the IQErw≥130 sub-group.

    On the other hand for SatMaths≥130, the dominant students included tended to be from certain sub-populations with ESL. Hence the average SatErw will be lowered.

    I have a dataset of 7329 self reported SatMath and SatErw scores for university applications. From that the stats are

    Type|N|SatMaths|StdDev
    IQErw≥130|3669|742.8|54.6

    Type|N|SatErw|StdDev
    IQMaths≥130|3610|717.4|62.2

    The proposition seems to be correct.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Sunbeam says:

    “Verbal skills are much more important for economic productivity than recognizing patterns in weird shapes, ergo GDP per capita and development levels showing the highest levels of correlation precisely with verbal IQ. ”

    Quite a statement. If true, and I’ll take your word for it, why?

    What are the mechanics of this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Echoes of History
    Storytelling is profitable, especially storytelling that profits from ameliorating mortality salience, i.e., the fear of death, per Terror Management Theory.

    Jewish storytellers in the Jew Testament have convinced Whites that Jews are the means to remain alive forever.

    "We worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews." John 4:22
     
    From life-extension vitamin supplements to doctors to religion, the white man will spend money to assuage his mortality salience by saving him from death.

    “For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings.” Romans 15:27
     
    There is American foreign aid policy in a nutshell. $$cha-ching!$$ http://explorer.usaid.gov/cd/ISR

    And that is, at least one way, how verbal skills are important for economic productivity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. I’ll like to see if there is any correlation between Rex Jung’s temporary hyperfrontality and verbal IQ measures.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. (how China was not first to the Industrial Revolution must be one of the biggest puzzles of Intelligence Theory).

    Necessity is the mother of invention. It strikes me that east asia (perhaps ultimately owing to some of this conformism) has been relatively much more stable and peaceful throughout history than Europe has. Obviously there is a lot of war and empire and what have you in East Asia as there is anywhere else, but it seems to me like less overall. Asian empires had short periods of ‘senkoku’ followed by extremely long lived dynasties of unified countries.

    Europeans comparatively had short periods of unified empires but mostly existed throughout their history in a permanent state of senkoku, disunited warring states. China’s maxim from the Romance of the 3 kingdoms is “that which is long united must divide, and that which is long divided must unite” but in east asia, it seems more like “that which is briefly divided must unite, and that which is long united must divide” whereas Europe is more like “that which is briefly united must divide, that which is long divided must briefly almost unite before blowing back up”.

    The Chinese invented the cannon but they did not really develop it because they ultimately had relatively little use for it. Chinese adventures were things like invading Vietnam, where they had no problems at all blasting into the place without cannons but the issue became holding it in a high attrition jungle full of guerrillas which cannons don’t really help with. The only real threat they faced besides peasant rebellions was steppe raiders on horseback (more guerrilla and mobility warfare) and cannons don’t help with that either. The issue is the horse raiders strike where the line is weak, and then run away before you can reinforce. Cannons only slow reinforcements down even more.

    In Europe they were basically in a constant state of senkoku. Raiders hitting where the line was weak would take territory but then loose it back again a few years later, so they started building massive defensive fortifications to try to hold on to the land against raiding, and all these massive defensive fortifications (castles) required cannons to bust holes in.

    I think this crucible of nearly permanently warring states for a millennia is what necessitated a lot of the military tech advances which is what ended up driving a lot of the non-military tech advancements. Asia became kind of stagnant because it was comparatively too peaceful and stable. And their (relative) peace and stability I think we can blame on their conformism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh

    The Chinese invented the cannon but they did not really develop it because they ultimately had relatively little use for it. Chinese adventures were things like invading Vietnam, where they had no problems at all blasting into the place without cannons but the issue became holding it in a high attrition jungle full of guerrillas which cannons don’t really help with
     
    Chinese walls were built in a fashion that cannons did not seem like they could possibly defeat them, as even 20th century cannons had difficulty defeating city walls, which were made of alternating slanted hard portions to deflect and soft portions within in order to dampen surviving impact:

    We fought our way to Nanking and joined in the attack on the enemy capital in December. It was our unit which stormed the Chunghua Gate. We attacked continuously for about a week, battering the brick and earth walls with artillery, but they never collapsed. The night of December 11, men in my unit breached the wall. The morning came with most of our unit still behind us, but we were beyond the wall. Behind the gate great heaps of sandbags were piled up. We 'cleared them away, removed the lock, and opened the gates, with a great creaking noise. We'd done it! We'd opened the fortress! All the enemy ran away, so we didn't take any fire. The residents too were gone. When we passed beyond the fortress wall we thought we had occupied this city
     
    As a result, development in increasing cannon size was pretty much halted, with larger bores developed later to basically fire grapeshot-equivalents in order to try to maximize their utility against soft targets like horsemen.

    It testifies to something of the entire siege mentality of China which I hope has slowly slipped away a bit, but one historian, noted that the walls of the marketplace of Chang'an were thicker than the walls of major European capitals.
    , @myself
    I think there is something to this idea.

    I think it explains perhaps not all, but a great deal of the reason for East Asian historical stagnation.

    What happened in Eastern Eurasia, under the crushing dominance of Chinese civilization, was something like what would have occurred in Europe, North Africa and the Levant had the Roman Empire the same level of institutional resilience, ethno-cultural cohesion and general ability to regenerate, as the Chinese state.

    Sometimes, ethnic assimilation, organization and efficiency can succeed too well, and therefore go too far. The civilization's structure becomes so well-formed that it becomes rigid, and therefore dynamism is not merely neglected but often brutally suppressed.

    This then results in a closing of the civilizational/racial mind, and a sense of having reached the "End of History". The End of History - the idea that you already have all the answers, and have already mastered the hardest of all challenges - specifically that you have the "secret immutable formula of civilizational success", there is nothing more in the universe worth learning, and everything else involves an application of what you already know regarding society and culture.

    "The End of History" - sound familiar? It should, and I am not merely applying it to Asians in the above paragraph.

    I am no advocate of either "diversity" nor of "identity". As ever, the answer lies in harmonious balancing. the reconciling of opposites.

    Take the case of the Mediterranean basin, in Western Eurasia. By roughly 480 BC, the Greeks had already attained the pre-modern peak in most areas. Rome would preserve and replicate their methods, far surpassing classical Greece in organization, efficiency and scale, but not bettering them in knowledge. After Rome was the long regression. It was only really around 1500, that we witnessed "the opening of the European mind", and Western civilization was truly born.

    Now, imagine if, by dint of resilience, organization and cohesion, Rome had managed to IMPOSE the Pax Romana throughout its empire for another THOUSAND years. Suppose that instead ot falling, never to rise again, in 476 AD, Rome instead was able to mount a successful military and economic counter-offensive against its enemies, and rule until not merely 1500 AD, but until 1912!

    And in all that time, Roman orthodoxy, Roman classical modes of thought, Roman philosophies and "the Roman way" overshadowed all competition. The result would have been the End of History for Western Eurasia - cultural/racial stagnation and demoralization.

    IMHO, this has, until very very recently, held back Eastern Eurasia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @AaronB

    Almost everything can be explained by IQ, and differential rates in the appearance of intensive agriculture, urbanization, and literacy.
     
    Bah!

    It is all almost spiritual factors.



    Some people will invest all their energy into developing materially and uproot, destabilize, and reorganize their entire culture to achieve material advantage - other people's will prefer spiritual happiness, or at least a better balance.

    East Asians simply aren't willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage - which reminds me I really need to live there!

    And the people who invest all their energy into material advantage eventually burn out and become gloomy and apathetic and self hating and try and destroy themselves or get overrun by people who invest more of their energy in spiritual happiness - so it's a short term strategy, a few centuries at most.

    And that is is the TRUE history of the world - not this incoherent genetic nonsense.

    East Asians simply aren’t willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage – which reminds me I really need to live there!

    Please don’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Eh, I think he'll be happy with the Taoists.
    , @AaronB
    English teacher, eh?

    I see it as my duty to expose Asians to quality white people - can't have them thinking you're typical :)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @Lars Porsena

    (how China was not first to the Industrial Revolution must be one of the biggest puzzles of Intelligence Theory).
     
    Necessity is the mother of invention. It strikes me that east asia (perhaps ultimately owing to some of this conformism) has been relatively much more stable and peaceful throughout history than Europe has. Obviously there is a lot of war and empire and what have you in East Asia as there is anywhere else, but it seems to me like less overall. Asian empires had short periods of 'senkoku' followed by extremely long lived dynasties of unified countries.

    Europeans comparatively had short periods of unified empires but mostly existed throughout their history in a permanent state of senkoku, disunited warring states. China's maxim from the Romance of the 3 kingdoms is "that which is long united must divide, and that which is long divided must unite" but in east asia, it seems more like "that which is briefly divided must unite, and that which is long united must divide" whereas Europe is more like "that which is briefly united must divide, that which is long divided must briefly almost unite before blowing back up".

    The Chinese invented the cannon but they did not really develop it because they ultimately had relatively little use for it. Chinese adventures were things like invading Vietnam, where they had no problems at all blasting into the place without cannons but the issue became holding it in a high attrition jungle full of guerrillas which cannons don't really help with. The only real threat they faced besides peasant rebellions was steppe raiders on horseback (more guerrilla and mobility warfare) and cannons don't help with that either. The issue is the horse raiders strike where the line is weak, and then run away before you can reinforce. Cannons only slow reinforcements down even more.

    In Europe they were basically in a constant state of senkoku. Raiders hitting where the line was weak would take territory but then loose it back again a few years later, so they started building massive defensive fortifications to try to hold on to the land against raiding, and all these massive defensive fortifications (castles) required cannons to bust holes in.

    I think this crucible of nearly permanently warring states for a millennia is what necessitated a lot of the military tech advances which is what ended up driving a lot of the non-military tech advancements. Asia became kind of stagnant because it was comparatively too peaceful and stable. And their (relative) peace and stability I think we can blame on their conformism.

    The Chinese invented the cannon but they did not really develop it because they ultimately had relatively little use for it. Chinese adventures were things like invading Vietnam, where they had no problems at all blasting into the place without cannons but the issue became holding it in a high attrition jungle full of guerrillas which cannons don’t really help with

    Chinese walls were built in a fashion that cannons did not seem like they could possibly defeat them, as even 20th century cannons had difficulty defeating city walls, which were made of alternating slanted hard portions to deflect and soft portions within in order to dampen surviving impact:

    We fought our way to Nanking and joined in the attack on the enemy capital in December. It was our unit which stormed the Chunghua Gate. We attacked continuously for about a week, battering the brick and earth walls with artillery, but they never collapsed. The night of December 11, men in my unit breached the wall. The morning came with most of our unit still behind us, but we were beyond the wall. Behind the gate great heaps of sandbags were piled up. We ‘cleared them away, removed the lock, and opened the gates, with a great creaking noise. We’d done it! We’d opened the fortress! All the enemy ran away, so we didn’t take any fire. The residents too were gone. When we passed beyond the fortress wall we thought we had occupied this city

    As a result, development in increasing cannon size was pretty much halted, with larger bores developed later to basically fire grapeshot-equivalents in order to try to maximize their utility against soft targets like horsemen.

    It testifies to something of the entire siege mentality of China which I hope has slowly slipped away a bit, but one historian, noted that the walls of the marketplace of Chang’an were thicker than the walls of major European capitals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @DFH

    Chinese walls were built in a fashion that cannons did not seem like they could possibly defeat them, as even 20th century cannons had difficulty defeating city walls, which were made of alternating slanted hard portions to deflect and soft portions within in order to dampen surviving impact:
     
    This doesn't explain why they lagged behind in shipborne cannons, which were by far the most important European technological advantage.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. When it comes to Chinese innovations, there were vast differences over time, same as for European innovations.
    In the Song period (around 1000-1250) the rate of invention was 2,5 times greater than in the 500 years preceding it. It was one of the most creative periods of premodern history. Meanwhile after the Song and till around 2000 China didn’t really invent anything (with the exception of the Bristle Toothbrush). (see Joseph Needham)
    So a moderately creative period was followed by an explosion in creativity, which in turn was followed by a barren wasteland.
    Meanwhile in Europe, the creative explosion of classical Greece, was followed by the rather modest creativity of the roman period, followed by a wasteland and slow recovery. Then suddenly there was a hence unseen leap upward around 1500, surpassing anything that came before.
    Booth processes seem to correlate with GDP per capita in the areas concerned. While GDP calculations for premodern economies should be treated carefully, most calculations come to the conclusion that there was a strong leap upwards in European per capita GDP at the time of the black death, after which the per capita GDP in most of western Europe remained stably above that of the rest of the world. It was especially high in northern Italy. Later per capita GDP was the highest in the areas, with the largest scientific output. Be it the Netherlands or the UK in the 17th-18th centuries.
    Now how did it look like in China?Chinas GDP per capita was respectable during the Song, but plunged to Spanish levels under the Ming, only to reach Malthusian limits under the Qing. All of this was accompanied by low levels of urbanization and a mostly subsistence economy.
    From about the 14th century parts of the West took a different path from the rest of the world. This seems to strongly overlap with Scientific and technological progress. China on the other hand, seems to have gone into the opposite direction. And the effect on science was also the opposite one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. @Hyperborean

    East Asians simply aren’t willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage – which reminds me I really need to live there!
     
    Please don't.

    Eh, I think he’ll be happy with the Taoists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AaronB
    They will fit me like a glove!

    If I can locate their mountain huts...
    , @Hyperborean
    I was thinking about normal people, our dearest friend seems quite fond of proselytising...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. AaronB says:
    @Hyperborean

    East Asians simply aren’t willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage – which reminds me I really need to live there!
     
    Please don't.

    English teacher, eh?

    I see it as my duty to expose Asians to quality white people – can’t have them thinking you’re typical :)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    English teacher, eh?
     
    Not that old, comrade-kun.

    I see it as my duty to expose Asians to quality white people – can’t have them thinking you’re typical
     
    While I do make my general leanings visible occasionally, I generally try to avoid talking about topics that range within the political sphere IRL.

    I get told I am very well-mannered and courteous, so clearly their impression of me can't be all bad (well considering that it is Mainland Chinese perhaps the bar is not too high...)

    Online I don't care quite as much about decorum (which is mainly here at UR as I don't comment at any other blog I read), although I am sure I am not the worst offender.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. AaronB says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    Eh, I think he'll be happy with the Taoists.

    They will fit me like a glove!

    If I can locate their mountain huts…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    You could just go to Wong Tai Sin Temple(黃大仙祠) in Hong Kong and talk to the Taoists there. Maybe you can learn to design automotive engines by feng shui principles, then move to Germany and work for Benz, so that German_Reader will be eternally plagued by your work every time he turns the ignition key.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @AaronB
    They will fit me like a glove!

    If I can locate their mountain huts...

    You could just go to Wong Tai Sin Temple(黃大仙祠) in Hong Kong and talk to the Taoists there. Maybe you can learn to design automotive engines by feng shui principles, then move to Germany and work for Benz, so that German_Reader will be eternally plagued by your work every time he turns the ignition key.

    Read More
    • LOL: Talha, AaronB
    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    Maybe you can learn to design automotive engines by feng shui principles, then move to Germany and work for Benz, so that German_Reader will be eternally plagued by your work every time he turns the ignition key.
     
    Speaking of feng shui auto manufacturing:

    In 1998, William Clay Ford Jr. became chairman of Ford Motor and aimed to turn the company green by improving fuel economy and “greening” its production processes. The company even put an energy-efficient “living” roof on a truck assembly plant.
     
    https://www.innerself.com/content/social/democracy/activism/13655-what-are-the-roots-of-the-new-corporate-activism.html


    Ford’s engineers drank Billy’s Kool-Aid:

    How's your inner peace and harmony? Check your car's feng shui

    Feng shui is the art of placement, and it's a way to bring harmony into your environment - any environment - even a car. In fact, consumers spend so much time on the road these days, creating a relaxing environment in your vehicle just makes sense.

    Francesca Montini | [email protected]
     
    http://www.4-traders.com/FORD-MOTOR-COMPANY-12542/news/Ford-Motor-Company-Ford-eNews-March-21-2012-14230994/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @Polish Perspective

    There isn’t near as much to explain about the Middle East and India. They are simply less intelligent – significantly so – than the Europeans or East Asians.
     
    Is there a credible estimate of Indian IQ? I am not convinced by Lynn & Vanhanen's low-80s estimate. You have mentioned high parasitic load and malnourishment as potential factors holding the subcontinent in general back. Malnourishment in India is higher than even the average Sub-Saharan African country.

    You go on to state that you view the g-loaded PISA tests to be better guides, but India notoriously underperformed the (only) time they participated, probably for the same reason(s). Speaking of Jason Richwine, Steve Sailer on his twitter mentioned a few days ago, in response to a direct question on this very topic from an Indian, that the mean IQ of 2nd-gen Indian-Americans is something around 112 IQ, so quite close to mean Ashkenazi IQ. This would imply that 'regression to the mean' is quite high, and as such would throw cold water on the idea that the average Indian IQ is low on a genetic basis.

    Of course, as most people know, India has many subpopulations and many castes have extremely high endogamy, which makes determining Indian IQ so difficult, especially as most immigrants to the US are high caste(implied as Brahmin). That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins. Then again, some Indians on /pol/ have thrown cold water on this Brahmin = high caste theory.

    https://i.imgur.com/a2Uv6yM.png

    https://i.imgur.com/ViCWhFT.png

    I say this in the context of recman1's comments on UK Indians, and his focus on Brahmin's as high caste, which, if the-above comments is anything to go by, is misleading since 'high caste' is not synonymous with Brahmin in a strict socio-economic sense (but more so in a cultural sense).

    Verbal skills are much more important for economic productivity than recognizing patterns in weird shapes, ergo GDP per capita and development levels showing the highest levels of correlation precisely with verbal IQ.
     

    This is interesting, and I've heard this before. Additionally, I do not remember which author - perhaps it was Murray - who once wrote that mathematical IQ is actually better correlated with verbal IQ than the other way around. In other words, someone with a verbal IQ of 130 will have a higher mathematical IQ on average than someone with a mathematical IQ of 130 will have a verbal IQ. I do not know if this is true, do you know something about this? It goes against the stereotype of "clever humanist but worthless on math", which is why I was skeptical when I read it. It'd be interesting if true.

    My guess is that this underperformance can be ascribed to greater East Asian conformism, relative to the other major races of man (Kura et al., 2015).
     
    Isn't this an old stereotype(or even a slur) repackaged in a new exterior? I've gone back and read some articles from ~2005 recently and it is astonishing how dismissive many Western media outlets were of the Chinese. Sure, they write, the Chinese are growing fast but [insert litany of thinly-veiled dismissive insults about 'robotic' Asians who lack innovation]. Yet as you yourself have pointed out, the Chinese have risen very fast at cutting-edge research in the academies. Their AI efforts are already world-class. This does not disprove their historical lag, but it should perhaps caution us on taking an essentialist perspective by tagging them as perpetually 'incurious'. If that was the case, you'd expect it to remain a constant constraint and that doesn't appear to be true, or at least far less than many thought 10-15 years ago. Thoughts?

    Also, there was plenty of Chinese innovation pre-1500 AD and one could argue that if you focus from 0 AD to 1500 AD, it is not clear that Europeans did better. We innovated in a shorter burst and as technological output accelerated, it was more tightly packed in a shorter timespan, though I will concede that the last 500 years were vastly more important than anything than came before it put together.

    However, as Kurzweil has noted, human innovation has sped up consistently over the last 10 000 years. The introduction of each technology has been shorter and shorter, which perhaps shows to a generalised pattern that makes the industrial revolution less of a unique European phenomena in the sense that "without us, it would never have happened" and more a logical end-conclusion of ever-faster innovation over the course of human history. Perhaps we were simply doing better at this particular juncture, which is why it was us, but had it begun in 1300 AD, maybe I would have written this in Mandarin.


    P.S. For what it's worth, there are questions over whether we measure productivity adequately today. Some, like prof Diane Coyle, argue that we are underestimating it and research institutions like the Conference Board has taken in her research and the result of those models is that East Asian GDPpc is higher than it is today due to higher productivity.

    It is particularly technological productivity that is undermeasured, and that would remove a lot of this 'underperformance'. SK has lower productivity than Spain according to the OECD, which is somewhat implausible.

    Is there a credible estimate of Indian IQ? I am not convinced by Lynn & Vanhanen’s low-80s estimate.

    We are still waiting for Jason Malloy to chime in with his promised study. But I think that low 80s are plausible, with potential to go up to low-to-mid 90s.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-puzzle-of-indian-iq-a-country-of-gypsies-and-jews/

    Speaking of Jason Richwine, Steve Sailer on his twitter mentioned a few days ago, in response to a direct question on this very topic from an Indian, that the mean IQ of 2nd-gen Indian-Americans is something around 112 IQ, so quite close to mean Ashkenazi IQ.

    Something like 50% of Indian-Americans are Brahmins IIRC, and Americans did very thorough cognitive filtering on which Indians got in.

    I know that Jason Malloy once commented that Brahmins in India DON’T have superior IQs, but since it’s just one short comment and goes against a lot of other evidence (e.g. almost all of the people who developed Indian nukes were South Indian Brahmins), plus the heterogeneity of the Brahmin caste itself, I don’t take this seriously.

    That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins.

    British Indians do much worse than Indian-Americans, they are at best only equal to British Whites on academic tests. Ergo for IQ tests.

    Isn’t this an old stereotype(or even a slur) repackaged in a new exterior? I’ve gone back and read some articles from ~2005 recently and it is astonishing how dismissive many Western media outlets were of the Chinese.

    Well I never did that from the very start so I think I have some credibility on the matter.

    This is from 2008, less than a year after I began blogging!: http://akarlin.com/2008/08/a-long-wait-at-the-gate-of-delusions/

    Also http://akarlin.com/2011/07/top-10-sinophobe-myths/

    Yet as you yourself have pointed out, the Chinese have risen very fast at cutting-edge research in the academies. Their AI efforts are already world-class.

    Correct.

    However, as I have also long pointed out, Japan has less elite scientific level output than the UK or Germany: http://www.unz.com/freed/affirmative-action-and-the-american-mind-if-any/#comment-2349841

    South Korea is equal to Spain (!) and Switzerland (!!!).

    Assuming China converges to somewhere between Korea’s and Japan’s level, its elite scientific output will max out at 100%-150% of the US level. Which will make it the world’s premier scientific power, but not an overwhelmingly dominant one, which is what you would expect from its demographics + average IQ.

    This ofc assumes that the US will not keep on declining due to internal demographic changes and SJWization.

    Incidentally, in the deeper past, I actually long resisted the claim that East Asians are somehow less curious and so forth. However, things like the Nature Science Index, Kura’s arguments, the data on East Asian participation in “out of left field” communities, etc. have gradually convinced me that there is something to those stereotypes.

    Though their extreme versions (e.g. Wingrove’s Chung Kuo series) remain ridiculous exaggerations.

    Also, there was plenty of Chinese innovation pre-1500 AD and one could argue that if you focus from 0 AD to 1500 AD, it is not clear that Europeans did better. We innovated in a shorter burst and as technological output accelerated, it was more tightly packed in a shorter timespan, though I will concede that the last 500 years were vastly more important than anything than came before it put together.

    Lead was very much restricted, from around 300 AD when Rome began to fall into obscurantism, to 1100 AD, which correlated to the rise of medieval scholasticism (not even the Renaissance!): https://www.unz.com/akarlin/graphing-the-dark-ages/

    Also, China’s peak during that period was very modest relative to the earlier Greek peak, to say nothing of course of post-1100 developments in Europe.

    There is also the structure of Chinese developments: Much more practical, heavily loaded towards tech (compass, paper, gunpowder, printing press), including even the basic research (didn’t bother with proofs until arrival of modern Western mathematics; but 18th century Japan independently developed advanced numerical techniques). In contrast, India (Kerala)… developed the zero.

    Perhaps we were simply doing better at this particular juncture, which is why it was us, but had it begun in 1300 AD, maybe I would have written this in Mandarin.

    I believe core Europe was already more advanced in important respects than China by 1300. By then, IIRC, they were even producing more manuscripts, despite China having the printing press.

    However, if Europe was to vanish off the face of the Earth c. 1300, I do think China would have been by far the next best candidate to reach the Industrial Revolution soonest. Maybe around 2200-2300.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    This is anecdotal, but based on my experience in India working-class people are much dumber than their equivalents in the West.

    Carpenters will for instance simply run out of nails on the job and expect you to provide them with more nails.

    Hotel employees misunderstand very simple instructions, and not just in English. Instructions given in native dialects are also misunderstood. Bizarre things like asking for three chairs to be brought up to the room and ending up with ten chairs and a bunch of soda pop.

    There are electricians who don't even know the difference between single-phase and three-phase and have never heard of grounding.

    The quality of welding is abysmal and would be rejected by quality control in any Western country.

    The emigration of so many talented Indians to the West is also a very serious problem, and something which the Indian government irrationally continues to insist on as part of its foreign policy. Indians are perversely proud that some of their most talented sons are now employed as coolie CEOs of M$FT and Goolag instead of lending their talents to their own country.

    The achievements, or lack thereof, of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and the Defence Research and Development Organization are embarrassing. The Tejas (light fighter) and Arjun (main battle tank) projects are fiascos. Indian space program appears to be a rare bright spot.

    Now granted India is still a very poor country and has problems with illiteracy (only Kerala has reached 100% primary school enrollment), malnutrition, and certainly pathogen burden as well. There wasn't much to boast about in China 30 years ago either (the delusions of Godfree Roberts aside).

    , @Twinkie

    Incidentally, in the deeper past, I actually long resisted the claim that East Asians are somehow less curious and so forth. However, things like the Nature Science Index, Kura’s arguments, the data on East Asian participation in “out of left field” communities, etc. have gradually convinced me that there is something to those stereotypes.
     
    I don’t think it’s lower “curiosity.” East Asians are actually quite curious about, for example, new gadgets.

    My own observation is that East Asians tend to be highly risk-averse, thus driving them toward more the practical than the abstract (hence the massive government funding toward basic research in the West vs. corporation-driven applied science/technological research in Japan and South Korea).

    I even see this comparative tendency even in - of all things - Judo. My decades of coaching youth Judo in the U.S. has confirmed for me that East Asian youngsters are, on average, much more risk-averse than white youngsters. Stereotypically, East Asian kids won’t use a newly learned technique right away in randori and shiai. They’ll drill it for a very long time and only use it once they feel comfortable and confident of a high rate of success. White kids on average tend to jump into using newly learned techniques “live” much sooner... even when they are pretty bad at executing them and invariably get smashed/countered backwards.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @AaronB
    English teacher, eh?

    I see it as my duty to expose Asians to quality white people - can't have them thinking you're typical :)

    English teacher, eh?

    Not that old, comrade-kun.

    I see it as my duty to expose Asians to quality white people – can’t have them thinking you’re typical

    While I do make my general leanings visible occasionally, I generally try to avoid talking about topics that range within the political sphere IRL.

    I get told I am very well-mannered and courteous, so clearly their impression of me can’t be all bad (well considering that it is Mainland Chinese perhaps the bar is not too high…)

    Online I don’t care quite as much about decorum (which is mainly here at UR as I don’t comment at any other blog I read), although I am sure I am not the worst offender.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @Daniel Chieh
    Eh, I think he'll be happy with the Taoists.

    I was thinking about normal people, our dearest friend seems quite fond of proselytising…

    Read More
    • LOL: Daniel Chieh
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. DFH says:
    @Polish Perspective

    There isn’t near as much to explain about the Middle East and India. They are simply less intelligent – significantly so – than the Europeans or East Asians.
     
    Is there a credible estimate of Indian IQ? I am not convinced by Lynn & Vanhanen's low-80s estimate. You have mentioned high parasitic load and malnourishment as potential factors holding the subcontinent in general back. Malnourishment in India is higher than even the average Sub-Saharan African country.

    You go on to state that you view the g-loaded PISA tests to be better guides, but India notoriously underperformed the (only) time they participated, probably for the same reason(s). Speaking of Jason Richwine, Steve Sailer on his twitter mentioned a few days ago, in response to a direct question on this very topic from an Indian, that the mean IQ of 2nd-gen Indian-Americans is something around 112 IQ, so quite close to mean Ashkenazi IQ. This would imply that 'regression to the mean' is quite high, and as such would throw cold water on the idea that the average Indian IQ is low on a genetic basis.

    Of course, as most people know, India has many subpopulations and many castes have extremely high endogamy, which makes determining Indian IQ so difficult, especially as most immigrants to the US are high caste(implied as Brahmin). That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins. Then again, some Indians on /pol/ have thrown cold water on this Brahmin = high caste theory.

    https://i.imgur.com/a2Uv6yM.png

    https://i.imgur.com/ViCWhFT.png

    I say this in the context of recman1's comments on UK Indians, and his focus on Brahmin's as high caste, which, if the-above comments is anything to go by, is misleading since 'high caste' is not synonymous with Brahmin in a strict socio-economic sense (but more so in a cultural sense).

    Verbal skills are much more important for economic productivity than recognizing patterns in weird shapes, ergo GDP per capita and development levels showing the highest levels of correlation precisely with verbal IQ.
     

    This is interesting, and I've heard this before. Additionally, I do not remember which author - perhaps it was Murray - who once wrote that mathematical IQ is actually better correlated with verbal IQ than the other way around. In other words, someone with a verbal IQ of 130 will have a higher mathematical IQ on average than someone with a mathematical IQ of 130 will have a verbal IQ. I do not know if this is true, do you know something about this? It goes against the stereotype of "clever humanist but worthless on math", which is why I was skeptical when I read it. It'd be interesting if true.

    My guess is that this underperformance can be ascribed to greater East Asian conformism, relative to the other major races of man (Kura et al., 2015).
     
    Isn't this an old stereotype(or even a slur) repackaged in a new exterior? I've gone back and read some articles from ~2005 recently and it is astonishing how dismissive many Western media outlets were of the Chinese. Sure, they write, the Chinese are growing fast but [insert litany of thinly-veiled dismissive insults about 'robotic' Asians who lack innovation]. Yet as you yourself have pointed out, the Chinese have risen very fast at cutting-edge research in the academies. Their AI efforts are already world-class. This does not disprove their historical lag, but it should perhaps caution us on taking an essentialist perspective by tagging them as perpetually 'incurious'. If that was the case, you'd expect it to remain a constant constraint and that doesn't appear to be true, or at least far less than many thought 10-15 years ago. Thoughts?

    Also, there was plenty of Chinese innovation pre-1500 AD and one could argue that if you focus from 0 AD to 1500 AD, it is not clear that Europeans did better. We innovated in a shorter burst and as technological output accelerated, it was more tightly packed in a shorter timespan, though I will concede that the last 500 years were vastly more important than anything than came before it put together.

    However, as Kurzweil has noted, human innovation has sped up consistently over the last 10 000 years. The introduction of each technology has been shorter and shorter, which perhaps shows to a generalised pattern that makes the industrial revolution less of a unique European phenomena in the sense that "without us, it would never have happened" and more a logical end-conclusion of ever-faster innovation over the course of human history. Perhaps we were simply doing better at this particular juncture, which is why it was us, but had it begun in 1300 AD, maybe I would have written this in Mandarin.


    P.S. For what it's worth, there are questions over whether we measure productivity adequately today. Some, like prof Diane Coyle, argue that we are underestimating it and research institutions like the Conference Board has taken in her research and the result of those models is that East Asian GDPpc is higher than it is today due to higher productivity.

    It is particularly technological productivity that is undermeasured, and that would remove a lot of this 'underperformance'. SK has lower productivity than Spain according to the OECD, which is somewhat implausible.

    That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins

    Not really

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. DFH says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    The Chinese invented the cannon but they did not really develop it because they ultimately had relatively little use for it. Chinese adventures were things like invading Vietnam, where they had no problems at all blasting into the place without cannons but the issue became holding it in a high attrition jungle full of guerrillas which cannons don’t really help with
     
    Chinese walls were built in a fashion that cannons did not seem like they could possibly defeat them, as even 20th century cannons had difficulty defeating city walls, which were made of alternating slanted hard portions to deflect and soft portions within in order to dampen surviving impact:

    We fought our way to Nanking and joined in the attack on the enemy capital in December. It was our unit which stormed the Chunghua Gate. We attacked continuously for about a week, battering the brick and earth walls with artillery, but they never collapsed. The night of December 11, men in my unit breached the wall. The morning came with most of our unit still behind us, but we were beyond the wall. Behind the gate great heaps of sandbags were piled up. We 'cleared them away, removed the lock, and opened the gates, with a great creaking noise. We'd done it! We'd opened the fortress! All the enemy ran away, so we didn't take any fire. The residents too were gone. When we passed beyond the fortress wall we thought we had occupied this city
     
    As a result, development in increasing cannon size was pretty much halted, with larger bores developed later to basically fire grapeshot-equivalents in order to try to maximize their utility against soft targets like horsemen.

    It testifies to something of the entire siege mentality of China which I hope has slowly slipped away a bit, but one historian, noted that the walls of the marketplace of Chang'an were thicker than the walls of major European capitals.

    Chinese walls were built in a fashion that cannons did not seem like they could possibly defeat them, as even 20th century cannons had difficulty defeating city walls, which were made of alternating slanted hard portions to deflect and soft portions within in order to dampen surviving impact:

    This doesn’t explain why they lagged behind in shipborne cannons, which were by far the most important European technological advantage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    The war junks could beat the wokou, there really wasn't anyone else to shoot at. For that part, the Ming Dynasty after the Yongle Emperor stopped developing the navy(the largest at the time) as a whole as a Neoconfucian faction won out and aimed to shut out the world.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @DFH

    Chinese walls were built in a fashion that cannons did not seem like they could possibly defeat them, as even 20th century cannons had difficulty defeating city walls, which were made of alternating slanted hard portions to deflect and soft portions within in order to dampen surviving impact:
     
    This doesn't explain why they lagged behind in shipborne cannons, which were by far the most important European technological advantage.

    The war junks could beat the wokou, there really wasn’t anyone else to shoot at. For that part, the Ming Dynasty after the Yongle Emperor stopped developing the navy(the largest at the time) as a whole as a Neoconfucian faction won out and aimed to shut out the world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    Neoconfucian faction won out
     
    Frickin' Neocons - always screwing things up - bastards!

    Peace.
    , @Lars Porsena
    A lack of necessity. Euros actually developed those naval cannons because they needed them to survive each other. I think the terrain helped too. The southeast asians have jungle, the japanese and southeast islanders have the sea, the koreans have a mountain range cutting off their peninsula. There was a lot of tendency toward stable isolationism in east asia, which is probably a good thing at least until it causes you to fall technologically too far behind barbarians that you can't defend yourself.

    If only the Japanese had gone into a Viking phase 1000 years earlier China would probably have ended up having to develop naval cannons first.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Talha says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    The war junks could beat the wokou, there really wasn't anyone else to shoot at. For that part, the Ming Dynasty after the Yongle Emperor stopped developing the navy(the largest at the time) as a whole as a Neoconfucian faction won out and aimed to shut out the world.

    Neoconfucian faction won out

    Frickin’ Neocons – always screwing things up – bastards!

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @Anatoly Karlin

    Is there a credible estimate of Indian IQ? I am not convinced by Lynn & Vanhanen’s low-80s estimate.
     
    We are still waiting for Jason Malloy to chime in with his promised study. But I think that low 80s are plausible, with potential to go up to low-to-mid 90s.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-puzzle-of-indian-iq-a-country-of-gypsies-and-jews/

    Speaking of Jason Richwine, Steve Sailer on his twitter mentioned a few days ago, in response to a direct question on this very topic from an Indian, that the mean IQ of 2nd-gen Indian-Americans is something around 112 IQ, so quite close to mean Ashkenazi IQ.
     
    Something like 50% of Indian-Americans are Brahmins IIRC, and Americans did very thorough cognitive filtering on which Indians got in.

    I know that Jason Malloy once commented that Brahmins in India DON'T have superior IQs, but since it's just one short comment and goes against a lot of other evidence (e.g. almost all of the people who developed Indian nukes were South Indian Brahmins), plus the heterogeneity of the Brahmin caste itself, I don't take this seriously.

    That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins.
     
    British Indians do much worse than Indian-Americans, they are at best only equal to British Whites on academic tests. Ergo for IQ tests.

    Isn’t this an old stereotype(or even a slur) repackaged in a new exterior? I’ve gone back and read some articles from ~2005 recently and it is astonishing how dismissive many Western media outlets were of the Chinese.
     
    Well I never did that from the very start so I think I have some credibility on the matter.

    This is from 2008, less than a year after I began blogging!: http://akarlin.com/2008/08/a-long-wait-at-the-gate-of-delusions/

    Also http://akarlin.com/2011/07/top-10-sinophobe-myths/

    Yet as you yourself have pointed out, the Chinese have risen very fast at cutting-edge research in the academies. Their AI efforts are already world-class.
     
    Correct.

    However, as I have also long pointed out, Japan has less elite scientific level output than the UK or Germany: http://www.unz.com/freed/affirmative-action-and-the-american-mind-if-any/#comment-2349841

    South Korea is equal to Spain (!) and Switzerland (!!!).

    Assuming China converges to somewhere between Korea's and Japan's level, its elite scientific output will max out at 100%-150% of the US level. Which will make it the world's premier scientific power, but not an overwhelmingly dominant one, which is what you would expect from its demographics + average IQ.

    This ofc assumes that the US will not keep on declining due to internal demographic changes and SJWization.

    Incidentally, in the deeper past, I actually long resisted the claim that East Asians are somehow less curious and so forth. However, things like the Nature Science Index, Kura's arguments, the data on East Asian participation in "out of left field" communities, etc. have gradually convinced me that there is something to those stereotypes.

    Though their extreme versions (e.g. Wingrove's Chung Kuo series) remain ridiculous exaggerations.

    Also, there was plenty of Chinese innovation pre-1500 AD and one could argue that if you focus from 0 AD to 1500 AD, it is not clear that Europeans did better. We innovated in a shorter burst and as technological output accelerated, it was more tightly packed in a shorter timespan, though I will concede that the last 500 years were vastly more important than anything than came before it put together.
     
    Lead was very much restricted, from around 300 AD when Rome began to fall into obscurantism, to 1100 AD, which correlated to the rise of medieval scholasticism (not even the Renaissance!): https://www.unz.com/akarlin/graphing-the-dark-ages/

    https://www.unzcloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/kirkegaard-human-accomplishment-2.png

    Also, China's peak during that period was very modest relative to the earlier Greek peak, to say nothing of course of post-1100 developments in Europe.

    There is also the structure of Chinese developments: Much more practical, heavily loaded towards tech (compass, paper, gunpowder, printing press), including even the basic research (didn't bother with proofs until arrival of modern Western mathematics; but 18th century Japan independently developed advanced numerical techniques). In contrast, India (Kerala)... developed the zero.

    Perhaps we were simply doing better at this particular juncture, which is why it was us, but had it begun in 1300 AD, maybe I would have written this in Mandarin.
     
    I believe core Europe was already more advanced in important respects than China by 1300. By then, IIRC, they were even producing more manuscripts, despite China having the printing press.

    However, if Europe was to vanish off the face of the Earth c. 1300, I do think China would have been by far the next best candidate to reach the Industrial Revolution soonest. Maybe around 2200-2300.

    This is anecdotal, but based on my experience in India working-class people are much dumber than their equivalents in the West.

    Carpenters will for instance simply run out of nails on the job and expect you to provide them with more nails.

    Hotel employees misunderstand very simple instructions, and not just in English. Instructions given in native dialects are also misunderstood. Bizarre things like asking for three chairs to be brought up to the room and ending up with ten chairs and a bunch of soda pop.

    There are electricians who don’t even know the difference between single-phase and three-phase and have never heard of grounding.

    The quality of welding is abysmal and would be rejected by quality control in any Western country.

    The emigration of so many talented Indians to the West is also a very serious problem, and something which the Indian government irrationally continues to insist on as part of its foreign policy. Indians are perversely proud that some of their most talented sons are now employed as coolie CEOs of M$FT and Goolag instead of lending their talents to their own country.

    The achievements, or lack thereof, of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and the Defence Research and Development Organization are embarrassing. The Tejas (light fighter) and Arjun (main battle tank) projects are fiascos. Indian space program appears to be a rare bright spot.

    Now granted India is still a very poor country and has problems with illiteracy (only Kerala has reached 100% primary school enrollment), malnutrition, and certainly pathogen burden as well. There wasn’t much to boast about in China 30 years ago either (the delusions of Godfree Roberts aside).

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    Indian space program appears to be a rare bright spot.
     
    Indian accomplishment just seems to be so ridiculously loaded on the coolest, most abstract and/or impractical domains.

    The sort of thing Brahmin big brain nibbas would enjoy doing.

    Invention of the zero. Number theory. Beautiful metaphysics systems. Developed nukes as a Third World poorhouse. Successful space program.

    But also crap welding. And designated shitting streets, at least until Modi started to tidy that up.

    The Chinese seem to be the polar opposite.
    , @Philip Owen
    Chinese firms manage to buy peanuts in India, clean them in China and undercut, with better quality, the original Indian growers in Russia. Russia has banned Indian peanuts for years at a time because of fungal disease. I know this from direct involvement. As go peanuts so goes much other Indian produce and manufactures. Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness. They also expect the Russian side to pay for everything and intermediates like me to work for nothing. There are reasons why most countries have not seen the demands of India in Free Trade Deals as worth the exposure to Indian trade goods. Russia buys some guar gum and bentonite both used in drilling muds but inconsequential food and goods.
    , @Anon
    The government of India has strict affirmative action for the low IQ lower castes.

    So the upper castes migrate to America where they are hired instead of White men because they are high IQ POCs and keep the EEOC gestapo and black Hispanic and women activists away.
    , @Chet Bradley

    ...employees misunderstand very simple instructions...
     
    I went to India once on business. Three of us were getting a car at our nice hotel to go to a meeting. Our four bags were on the sidewalk by the lobby and we were telling the porters that we needed an SUV parked nearby due to the volume of our luggage - it was obvious the bags weren't going to fit into a trunk of a sedan which was also one of the cars offered by the hotel. But the porters kept insisting that our bags were going to fit. After trying unsuccessfully for 5 or 10 minutes to fit our bags into the trunk of the sedan in any orientation possible (not the handles out, of course; wheels out), they gave up and put our bags in the SUV.

    Our parting words were "we told you so." And to think they did this for a living...
    , @anon
    If Indian workers are so stupid, what makes you believe Indian CEO are somehow talented?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Daniel Chieh
    The war junks could beat the wokou, there really wasn't anyone else to shoot at. For that part, the Ming Dynasty after the Yongle Emperor stopped developing the navy(the largest at the time) as a whole as a Neoconfucian faction won out and aimed to shut out the world.

    A lack of necessity. Euros actually developed those naval cannons because they needed them to survive each other. I think the terrain helped too. The southeast asians have jungle, the japanese and southeast islanders have the sea, the koreans have a mountain range cutting off their peninsula. There was a lot of tendency toward stable isolationism in east asia, which is probably a good thing at least until it causes you to fall technologically too far behind barbarians that you can’t defend yourself.

    If only the Japanese had gone into a Viking phase 1000 years earlier China would probably have ended up having to develop naval cannons first.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @Thorfinnsson
    This is anecdotal, but based on my experience in India working-class people are much dumber than their equivalents in the West.

    Carpenters will for instance simply run out of nails on the job and expect you to provide them with more nails.

    Hotel employees misunderstand very simple instructions, and not just in English. Instructions given in native dialects are also misunderstood. Bizarre things like asking for three chairs to be brought up to the room and ending up with ten chairs and a bunch of soda pop.

    There are electricians who don't even know the difference between single-phase and three-phase and have never heard of grounding.

    The quality of welding is abysmal and would be rejected by quality control in any Western country.

    The emigration of so many talented Indians to the West is also a very serious problem, and something which the Indian government irrationally continues to insist on as part of its foreign policy. Indians are perversely proud that some of their most talented sons are now employed as coolie CEOs of M$FT and Goolag instead of lending their talents to their own country.

    The achievements, or lack thereof, of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and the Defence Research and Development Organization are embarrassing. The Tejas (light fighter) and Arjun (main battle tank) projects are fiascos. Indian space program appears to be a rare bright spot.

    Now granted India is still a very poor country and has problems with illiteracy (only Kerala has reached 100% primary school enrollment), malnutrition, and certainly pathogen burden as well. There wasn't much to boast about in China 30 years ago either (the delusions of Godfree Roberts aside).

    Indian space program appears to be a rare bright spot.

    Indian accomplishment just seems to be so ridiculously loaded on the coolest, most abstract and/or impractical domains.

    The sort of thing Brahmin big brain nibbas would enjoy doing.

    Invention of the zero. Number theory. Beautiful metaphysics systems. Developed nukes as a Third World poorhouse. Successful space program.

    But also crap welding. And designated shitting streets, at least until Modi started to tidy that up.

    The Chinese seem to be the polar opposite.

    Read More
    • Agree: AaronB
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    I supplied Russian components for fibre optic gyros to the Indian space program. The weapons control bureaucracy was formidable as they shipped via the UK. (Russian and Indian commercial paper work is not compatible). Letters of credit used in each country are not compatible. BRICS is an hysterical joke so far as non weapons trade between India and Russia are concerned. The Indian national oil company OGNC was ripped off in a massive fraud by Russians (with state backing) the first time they tried investing. Mind you, being too mean to pay for consultancy, they did not know simple things such as Russia taxes oil selling for more than $35 a barrel at over 90% give or take a regional tax break to drill above the Arctic Circle. Serve the lazy, greedy fools right.
    , @Dmitry

    The Chinese seem to be the polar opposite.

     

    Although, India and China can perhaps both be noted for their desire for excellent cuisine, and abstention from the international football tournaments.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @Thorfinnsson
    This is anecdotal, but based on my experience in India working-class people are much dumber than their equivalents in the West.

    Carpenters will for instance simply run out of nails on the job and expect you to provide them with more nails.

    Hotel employees misunderstand very simple instructions, and not just in English. Instructions given in native dialects are also misunderstood. Bizarre things like asking for three chairs to be brought up to the room and ending up with ten chairs and a bunch of soda pop.

    There are electricians who don't even know the difference between single-phase and three-phase and have never heard of grounding.

    The quality of welding is abysmal and would be rejected by quality control in any Western country.

    The emigration of so many talented Indians to the West is also a very serious problem, and something which the Indian government irrationally continues to insist on as part of its foreign policy. Indians are perversely proud that some of their most talented sons are now employed as coolie CEOs of M$FT and Goolag instead of lending their talents to their own country.

    The achievements, or lack thereof, of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and the Defence Research and Development Organization are embarrassing. The Tejas (light fighter) and Arjun (main battle tank) projects are fiascos. Indian space program appears to be a rare bright spot.

    Now granted India is still a very poor country and has problems with illiteracy (only Kerala has reached 100% primary school enrollment), malnutrition, and certainly pathogen burden as well. There wasn't much to boast about in China 30 years ago either (the delusions of Godfree Roberts aside).

    Chinese firms manage to buy peanuts in India, clean them in China and undercut, with better quality, the original Indian growers in Russia. Russia has banned Indian peanuts for years at a time because of fungal disease. I know this from direct involvement. As go peanuts so goes much other Indian produce and manufactures. Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness. They also expect the Russian side to pay for everything and intermediates like me to work for nothing. There are reasons why most countries have not seen the demands of India in Free Trade Deals as worth the exposure to Indian trade goods. Russia buys some guar gum and bentonite both used in drilling muds but inconsequential food and goods.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh

    Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness.
     
    Do Russians dislike mangos?
    , @Anatoly Karlin

    Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness.
     
    Well, they have at least one loyal customer here. I stock up at Индийские Специи three or four times a year.

    And while not many other Russians need garam masala, mangoes really are quite popular here, I think.
    , @Thorfinnsson


    Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness.
     
    This is another odd thing about Indians. I've never met more insular people. Civilizationally, they're completely self-absorbed. They have less curiosity about other cultures, religions, and races than any other group of (intelligent) people I've ever encountered.

    In fact if I understand their religions correctly, there was even some sort of taboo about venturing outside of India itself. The Indian Ocean was something you weren't supposed to venture out into.

    You can see this in their diaspora as well. Racially speaking they're a lot more similar to whites than Northeast Asians. But Northeast Asians in white countries adopt white names (even when simply travelling on business), date whites, don't wear traditional costumes, happily enjoy white foods, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @Philip Owen
    Chinese firms manage to buy peanuts in India, clean them in China and undercut, with better quality, the original Indian growers in Russia. Russia has banned Indian peanuts for years at a time because of fungal disease. I know this from direct involvement. As go peanuts so goes much other Indian produce and manufactures. Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness. They also expect the Russian side to pay for everything and intermediates like me to work for nothing. There are reasons why most countries have not seen the demands of India in Free Trade Deals as worth the exposure to Indian trade goods. Russia buys some guar gum and bentonite both used in drilling muds but inconsequential food and goods.

    Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness.

    Do Russians dislike mangos?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    Someone unprepared to invest to promote mangoes is never going to find out. I will guess yes. They are quite bland. Mango pulp can be sold as a food additive but quality ... I don't want to spend a year on the project without pay and be let down by failure to meet food standards.

    Engineered parts for cars have the same problems.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @Anatoly Karlin

    Indian space program appears to be a rare bright spot.
     
    Indian accomplishment just seems to be so ridiculously loaded on the coolest, most abstract and/or impractical domains.

    The sort of thing Brahmin big brain nibbas would enjoy doing.

    Invention of the zero. Number theory. Beautiful metaphysics systems. Developed nukes as a Third World poorhouse. Successful space program.

    But also crap welding. And designated shitting streets, at least until Modi started to tidy that up.

    The Chinese seem to be the polar opposite.

    I supplied Russian components for fibre optic gyros to the Indian space program. The weapons control bureaucracy was formidable as they shipped via the UK. (Russian and Indian commercial paper work is not compatible). Letters of credit used in each country are not compatible. BRICS is an hysterical joke so far as non weapons trade between India and Russia are concerned. The Indian national oil company OGNC was ripped off in a massive fraud by Russians (with state backing) the first time they tried investing. Mind you, being too mean to pay for consultancy, they did not know simple things such as Russia taxes oil selling for more than $35 a barrel at over 90% give or take a regional tax break to drill above the Arctic Circle. Serve the lazy, greedy fools right.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @Unknown128
    I think that the great variability between male and female IQ is also a very important factor. On the very high IQ level, there are far fewer women than men.

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed). Eastern Europe on the other hand was regularly devastated by warlike tribes from the steppe, who’s ways of war were infinitely more devastating then thus of western European states. Eastern Europe did not exactly develop much, before the Nomad problem wasn’t finally handled in the late 18th century (when the Crimean horde was conquered by Russia), after which the east started to catch up with the west.

    We just don’t know how a Song China would have developed, had the Jurchen and Mongols not destroyed it. Europe took over 600 years to recover from the fall of Rome after all. And if anything the Mongols were far more brutal and devastating then any of the tribes, that brought down the Roman Empire. The Manchu conquest also surpassed the religious wars of Europe by far in brutality and devastation.

    Meanwhile, the Malthusian crisis of western Europe, like the one that ended in the black death in the 14th and in the religious wars of the 17th, was not accompanied by barbarian invasions, so while population did decline, material wealth and social order did remain far more preserved, for instance opening the way for the early capitalist revolution of the post black death era.

    No matter what Pommeranz says....post Song china always had a very small part of its population living in cities. See K Dengs work on "Agrocracy" for a detailed explanation. The Chinese social and political system was developed in a way that encouraged population flow from cities into the countryside, where of course people were generally less intellectually productive. The comercial classes were also far less influential in China then in the most productive areas of western Europe (16th century Northern Italy, 17th century Netherlands and 18th century England). By 1600 around 8% of western Europeans were living in cities with over 10 000 inhabitants, vs only 4% in CHina (the numbers are not much different over the regions of China, while Western Europe had several areas of high urban concentration). By 1800 the highest rate of urbanisation in any province of China was 5,6%, while in Western Europe it was 30%.

    I would also say that the Hajnal Line and the institutions it encouraged, does play a role in economic development and might have had an impact on western European IQ.

    Sorry for my bad English.

    Sorry for my bad English.

    You must be kidding. Your English is very good (better than mine for sure) and your comment above is very informative. Thank you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @Daniel Chieh

    Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness.
     
    Do Russians dislike mangos?

    Someone unprepared to invest to promote mangoes is never going to find out. I will guess yes. They are quite bland. Mango pulp can be sold as a food additive but quality … I don’t want to spend a year on the project without pay and be let down by failure to meet food standards.

    Engineered parts for cars have the same problems.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh

    Someone unprepared to invest to promote mangoes is never going to find out. I will guess yes.
     
    Someone should do a study on chupatz. To have the audacity to get people - even highly experienced, credentialed, etc - to work for free for you for the opportunity to help you make money is a pretty classic example of that. Its interesting how it can often work, by framed in the right way, and by aiming at the right people.

    I suspect its one example of behavior that's probably individually beneficially, but societially negative especially as it becomes adaptive to have the skills needed to convince others to do so. At some point, it basically is a form of legal business in hoodwinking.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @Philip Owen
    Chinese firms manage to buy peanuts in India, clean them in China and undercut, with better quality, the original Indian growers in Russia. Russia has banned Indian peanuts for years at a time because of fungal disease. I know this from direct involvement. As go peanuts so goes much other Indian produce and manufactures. Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness. They also expect the Russian side to pay for everything and intermediates like me to work for nothing. There are reasons why most countries have not seen the demands of India in Free Trade Deals as worth the exposure to Indian trade goods. Russia buys some guar gum and bentonite both used in drilling muds but inconsequential food and goods.

    Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness.

    Well, they have at least one loyal customer here. I stock up at Индийские Специи three or four times a year.

    And while not many other Russians need garam masala, mangoes really are quite popular here, I think.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. @Philip Owen
    Chinese firms manage to buy peanuts in India, clean them in China and undercut, with better quality, the original Indian growers in Russia. Russia has banned Indian peanuts for years at a time because of fungal disease. I know this from direct involvement. As go peanuts so goes much other Indian produce and manufactures. Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness. They also expect the Russian side to pay for everything and intermediates like me to work for nothing. There are reasons why most countries have not seen the demands of India in Free Trade Deals as worth the exposure to Indian trade goods. Russia buys some guar gum and bentonite both used in drilling muds but inconsequential food and goods.

    Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness.

    This is another odd thing about Indians. I’ve never met more insular people. Civilizationally, they’re completely self-absorbed. They have less curiosity about other cultures, religions, and races than any other group of (intelligent) people I’ve ever encountered.

    In fact if I understand their religions correctly, there was even some sort of taboo about venturing outside of India itself. The Indian Ocean was something you weren’t supposed to venture out into.

    You can see this in their diaspora as well. Racially speaking they’re a lot more similar to whites than Northeast Asians. But Northeast Asians in white countries adopt white names (even when simply travelling on business), date whites, don’t wear traditional costumes, happily enjoy white foods, etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    In terms of cultural assimilation, Indians are the least assimilated of all ethnic groups in the USA:

    https://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/cr_59.pdf

    (scroll down to page 6)
    , @Anon

    In fact if I understand their religions correctly, there was even some sort of taboo about venturing outside of India itself. The Indian Ocean was something you weren’t supposed to venture out into.
     
    That was for Brahmins; the result was loss-of-caste. I imagine that was probably some sort of power play on some group's behalf five hundred years or so ago.
    , @Anon
    19th early 20th century Indian travelers to Europe went by ship and took barrels of Ganges water with them for religious reasons.

    It’s sacred and Hindus are not supposed to go to far from the Ganges. Ganges water is for purification and to worship the Goddess of the Ganges.
    Now days Ganges water is exported from India in plastic pouches.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @Unknown128
    I think that the great variability between male and female IQ is also a very important factor. On the very high IQ level, there are far fewer women than men.

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed). Eastern Europe on the other hand was regularly devastated by warlike tribes from the steppe, who’s ways of war were infinitely more devastating then thus of western European states. Eastern Europe did not exactly develop much, before the Nomad problem wasn’t finally handled in the late 18th century (when the Crimean horde was conquered by Russia), after which the east started to catch up with the west.

    We just don’t know how a Song China would have developed, had the Jurchen and Mongols not destroyed it. Europe took over 600 years to recover from the fall of Rome after all. And if anything the Mongols were far more brutal and devastating then any of the tribes, that brought down the Roman Empire. The Manchu conquest also surpassed the religious wars of Europe by far in brutality and devastation.

    Meanwhile, the Malthusian crisis of western Europe, like the one that ended in the black death in the 14th and in the religious wars of the 17th, was not accompanied by barbarian invasions, so while population did decline, material wealth and social order did remain far more preserved, for instance opening the way for the early capitalist revolution of the post black death era.

    No matter what Pommeranz says....post Song china always had a very small part of its population living in cities. See K Dengs work on "Agrocracy" for a detailed explanation. The Chinese social and political system was developed in a way that encouraged population flow from cities into the countryside, where of course people were generally less intellectually productive. The comercial classes were also far less influential in China then in the most productive areas of western Europe (16th century Northern Italy, 17th century Netherlands and 18th century England). By 1600 around 8% of western Europeans were living in cities with over 10 000 inhabitants, vs only 4% in CHina (the numbers are not much different over the regions of China, while Western Europe had several areas of high urban concentration). By 1800 the highest rate of urbanisation in any province of China was 5,6%, while in Western Europe it was 30%.

    I would also say that the Hajnal Line and the institutions it encouraged, does play a role in economic development and might have had an impact on western European IQ.

    Sorry for my bad English.

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed).

    E.L. Jones makes this point in The European Miracle. More capital in China was destroyed during nomad invasions than in Europe.

    Of course, one aspect of this is just China’s plain back luck in being a giant plane abutting the Eurasian steppe, which could masses of steppe cavalry on home soil. Largest plain in Europe west of the Wild Fields is in Hungary, which, however, is relatively small and can only support 1-2 tyumens. Main reason the Mongols decided to call off their invasion.

    Still, while acknowledging that the nomads did nothing good for China, I don’t really buy the idea that they explain why Europe “won” instead of China. Nomad dynasties inevitably became Sinicized; populations bounced back; the Confucian bureaucracy seems to have been remarkably resilient, and provided continuity of governance. And of course Japan did not have that problem, but in many respects followed in China’s footsteps (self-imposed isolation; improvement over innovation).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    the Confucian bureaucracy seems to have been remarkably resilient, and provided continuity of governance. And of course Japan did not have that problem, but in many respects followed in China’s footsteps (self-imposed isolation; improvement over innovation).
     
    A modern divergence - between Japan and China - emerges in choice whether to modernize or not, in response to external threats, in the 19th century.

    Japan successfully modernizes, and as a result of intentional decisions of its political elite in the middle of 19th century. China, takes a different path, and in fact modernization attempts resisted above all from its rulers, who protested, for example, the introduction of railway. The differences are perhaps first exposed to observers of the First Sino-Japanese War, and another 10 years of modernization, and Japan has defeated the Russian Empire, and which result has amazed the world.

    The question why the two countries (or their elites) consciously choose such different paths in this era, is interesting.

    , @Unknown128
    The main fault of the Nomads in China was to interrupt its continuous advancement and most importantly, by destroying the Song Dynasty.

    The Song were unique in Chinese history for being far more commercial and Urban then most, it was also the most naval oriented dynasty. We see isolation and hostility to all things outside start under the Ming, which might have been partially a reaction to the Mongol devastation and things that were seen as failures of the previous (Song) dynasty. Just as the Song reacted to what it perceived to have been the failures of the militarist Tang, by horribly weakening the military, so did the Ming react to the failures of the Song, by returning to a peasant focused economic and social order. The founder of the Dynasty Hongwu wrote as much in his will...that largely dictated the policy of his successors. The attempts of Yongle to go against it were met with widespread hostility from the bureaucratic elite. China never became as wealthy as it was by 1100 till around 1990, I wouldnt say this is an unimportant factor. Also several technologies were forgotten and bearly anything new was invented. Romes decline and fall also shows how barbarian invasions can stop progress in the west for centuries.

    As for Japan, it was culturally bound to China and not really able to start any scientific revolution on its own.

    As I said above, between 1250 and about 2000 China barely made a single invention, while previously it made hundreds. Had Europe been devastated by Nomads and lost half of its population by 1500, do you think that the Industrial revolution would have still occurred around 1800?

    The large disparity between eastern Europe and the west (with the east barely inventing anything till 1800) shows how much of a role barbarian neighbors play and how lucky Europe was to have a set of "just war" traditions to limit the destructive capacities of warfare between Europeans. I would say that the Mongol invasion of Russia or China caused more (%) damage, then all the wars between Europeans from 1200 to 1900 combined (including the religious wars of the 17th century.)
    , @Noname Guy
    Imagine that Newton, an extremely high IQ man (one would assume), was born in China in the 1600s. Could he have invented Calculus & Mechanics? That is to ask: without Euclid and Kepler, can it happen? One might answer: with the IQ situation of China, there should have been Kepler and Euclid around, no? Why? But we don't really know the IQ situation in China 2000 years ago. Something happened in Greece and it had profound impact down the road that is not to be explained away by only looking at the world of recent two hundreds years, I think.
    , @Noname Guy
    Next, imagine Newton was born in England in 1600s, but this time as a woman. What might happen afterwards? I guess that she would be extremely clever at picking herself a nice husband, and she might become the mother of inventors of Calculus. Of course I don't really know, but the biological situation is there...
    , @Stephen R. Diamond

    while acknowledging that the nomads did nothing good for China
     
    Do you dismiss Peter Turchin's analysis that frontiers between very different cultures are where powerful nations develop, the conflict promoting the growth of asabiya (social solidarity)?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. BlackFlag says:

    Where does mathematical ability fit? Does it fall under spatial or verbal? I would imagine this aspect of intelligence to be the most important one.

    Nonconformity is overrated. Scientific/technogical discoveries are driven by people obsessed with figuring out how something works. They mull over it all hours of the day. The key word is *passion.* You can also call it intelectual curiosity though at the extremes required for innovation it is intelectual obsession.
    It’s probably maladaptive. Just think, what benefit did Mendel get for doing his plant experiments? Sure, some discoverers make it big but material rewards are rarely the key driver. Think Nikola Tesla. Put another way, Asians are more practical.

    Read More
    • Agree: AaronB
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The saddest thing is that being a great composer or musician is probably maladaptive, too. Some better than average musical ability is probably adaptive.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. AP says:
    @Thorfinnsson


    Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness.
     
    This is another odd thing about Indians. I've never met more insular people. Civilizationally, they're completely self-absorbed. They have less curiosity about other cultures, religions, and races than any other group of (intelligent) people I've ever encountered.

    In fact if I understand their religions correctly, there was even some sort of taboo about venturing outside of India itself. The Indian Ocean was something you weren't supposed to venture out into.

    You can see this in their diaspora as well. Racially speaking they're a lot more similar to whites than Northeast Asians. But Northeast Asians in white countries adopt white names (even when simply travelling on business), date whites, don't wear traditional costumes, happily enjoy white foods, etc.

    In terms of cultural assimilation, Indians are the least assimilated of all ethnic groups in the USA:

    https://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/cr_59.pdf

    (scroll down to page 6)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @AaronB

    Almost everything can be explained by IQ, and differential rates in the appearance of intensive agriculture, urbanization, and literacy.
     
    Bah!

    It is all almost spiritual factors.



    Some people will invest all their energy into developing materially and uproot, destabilize, and reorganize their entire culture to achieve material advantage - other people's will prefer spiritual happiness, or at least a better balance.

    East Asians simply aren't willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage - which reminds me I really need to live there!

    And the people who invest all their energy into material advantage eventually burn out and become gloomy and apathetic and self hating and try and destroy themselves or get overrun by people who invest more of their energy in spiritual happiness - so it's a short term strategy, a few centuries at most.

    And that is is the TRUE history of the world - not this incoherent genetic nonsense.

    This is a funny comment. Its down right hilarious! As someone who lived for a decade in the East Asian countries, I can tell you that they are the most materialistic people on the planet, way more than most Americans. You see, I don’t give a rat’s ass what people believe as long as they don’t keep me from doing what I want with my own life.

    You know, people use the word “spritual” a lot and I still have no idea WTF they mean by it. The only thing I can come up with is that “spritual” is just a state of mind, nothing more.

    You know, there is the concept that the human personality is not an integrated whole, but rather a system of subselves. Eric Berne was the first to talk about this with his theory of “ego states”. Later, there are others to come up with thier own variants of this concept. Julian Jaynes bicameral mind theory is a specific variant of this concept. By his theory, reliigious belief in modern humans is a vestigial remnent of the bicameral mind. I see no reason to reject this explanation out of hand.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    I can tell you that they are the most materialistic people on the planet, way more than most Americans.
     
    Absolutely. Middle and upper middle class Indians are dreadfully materialistic to the point of disgusting. Chinese are much more guarded and circumspect so they do not appear as greedy as Indians. This also may explain observed lower inventiveness of Asians. I would attribute it to different relation to abstraction which in the West is related to Platonic forms and Christian transcendence. In the West we know that we don't know and that there is more out there which objectively exists and we can reach it by means of our effort which is independent of some mumbo jumbo good mood of some ghosts of our ancestors that need to be bribed with offerings. Fathers of the Church were obsessed with free will and fortunately this propagated to out culture though Calvinism in its most primitive forms was a step back towards mumbo jumbo.
    , @Daniel Chieh

    By his theory, reliigious belief in modern humans is a vestigial remnent of the bicameral mind.
     
    I'm sympathetic to some materialistic explanations for religious belief, but the notion that all humans were once all schizophrenic and we "grew sane" seems as likely as fairies in the backyard. Pop psychological history really does deserve to be together with Freud: entertaining fictions.
    , @AaronB
    Its a different kind of materialism.

    Western materialism is 'transcendental' while Asian materialism is normal human interest in acquiring stuff.

    The West seeks salvation in developing the material world - its literally religious. So we pour all our energy and willpower into it. The most important thing to us is to come up with some new way to control or affect the physical world - because we literally expect salvation from it. See transhumanism.

    Asians have the ordinary materialism, they just like stuff - sometimes a bit too much, u admit, esp lately :)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Dmitry says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Indian space program appears to be a rare bright spot.
     
    Indian accomplishment just seems to be so ridiculously loaded on the coolest, most abstract and/or impractical domains.

    The sort of thing Brahmin big brain nibbas would enjoy doing.

    Invention of the zero. Number theory. Beautiful metaphysics systems. Developed nukes as a Third World poorhouse. Successful space program.

    But also crap welding. And designated shitting streets, at least until Modi started to tidy that up.

    The Chinese seem to be the polar opposite.

    The Chinese seem to be the polar opposite.

    Although, India and China can perhaps both be noted for their desire for excellent cuisine, and abstention from the international football tournaments.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Dmitry says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed).
     
    E.L. Jones makes this point in The European Miracle. More capital in China was destroyed during nomad invasions than in Europe.

    Of course, one aspect of this is just China's plain back luck in being a giant plane abutting the Eurasian steppe, which could masses of steppe cavalry on home soil. Largest plain in Europe west of the Wild Fields is in Hungary, which, however, is relatively small and can only support 1-2 tyumens. Main reason the Mongols decided to call off their invasion.

    Still, while acknowledging that the nomads did nothing good for China, I don't really buy the idea that they explain why Europe "won" instead of China. Nomad dynasties inevitably became Sinicized; populations bounced back; the Confucian bureaucracy seems to have been remarkably resilient, and provided continuity of governance. And of course Japan did not have that problem, but in many respects followed in China's footsteps (self-imposed isolation; improvement over innovation).

    the Confucian bureaucracy seems to have been remarkably resilient, and provided continuity of governance. And of course Japan did not have that problem, but in many respects followed in China’s footsteps (self-imposed isolation; improvement over innovation).

    A modern divergence – between Japan and China – emerges in choice whether to modernize or not, in response to external threats, in the 19th century.

    Japan successfully modernizes, and as a result of intentional decisions of its political elite in the middle of 19th century. China, takes a different path, and in fact modernization attempts resisted above all from its rulers, who protested, for example, the introduction of railway. The differences are perhaps first exposed to observers of the First Sino-Japanese War, and another 10 years of modernization, and Japan has defeated the Russian Empire, and which result has amazed the world.

    The question why the two countries (or their elites) consciously choose such different paths in this era, is interesting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. utu says:

    This has translated to an approximately one S.D. improvement in general intelligence.

    The diffrent rates of Flynn effects on verbal and Raven matrices imply that ‘general intelligence’ may not exist as a single component (factor), i.e., a scalar quantity. Factorization of the same battery of tests now and 40 years ago would yield two different g factors that would not be mutually parallel, meaning that another factor, let’s call it s orthogonal to g, must be introduced. At this point it must be admitted that the church erected by Spearman and refurbished with new mathematical facade by Jensen is crumbling. Instead of scalar ‘general intelligence’ we have a 2-D vector in space spanned by two orthogonal vectors g and s and the Flynn effect consists of rotation of the ‘general intelligence vector’ in this space and also in change of its absolute magnitude. It is a significant departure form the dogma of Spearman. Further consequence is that each orthogonal component of the ‘general intelligence vector’ may have different heritability, however this is of secondary importance as the heritability tests have very poor repeatability.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond

    The different rates of Flynn effects on verbal and Raven matrices imply that ‘general intelligence’ may not exist as a single component (factor), i.e., a scalar quantity. Factorization of the same battery of tests now and 40 years ago would yield two different g factors that would not be mutually parallel, meaning that another factor, let’s call it s orthogonal to g, must be introduced.
     
    You don't need Flynn to make this argument regarding the inconstancy of g. The same argument was made by Horn against Carroll. Horn argued against g conceived as a third order factor. The problem is that the apparent nature of g changes with the second order factors included in the analysis. Say there are 12 second order factors (there are more), then if you select six of them randomly, obviously you will get a different g than if you chose the other six second order factors.

    The argument stumped Carroll for a while, but finally he thought he had the answer. Horn was confusing a factor, which is a latent variable, with its expression. If the counter-argument is valid, it applies to the argument based on Flynn as well (probably more readily).

    I won't try to adjudicate. Perhaps Dr. Thompson will weigh in.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. utu says:
    @Abelard Lindsey
    This is a funny comment. Its down right hilarious! As someone who lived for a decade in the East Asian countries, I can tell you that they are the most materialistic people on the planet, way more than most Americans. You see, I don't give a rat's ass what people believe as long as they don't keep me from doing what I want with my own life.

    You know, people use the word "spritual" a lot and I still have no idea WTF they mean by it. The only thing I can come up with is that "spritual" is just a state of mind, nothing more.

    You know, there is the concept that the human personality is not an integrated whole, but rather a system of subselves. Eric Berne was the first to talk about this with his theory of "ego states". Later, there are others to come up with thier own variants of this concept. Julian Jaynes bicameral mind theory is a specific variant of this concept. By his theory, reliigious belief in modern humans is a vestigial remnent of the bicameral mind. I see no reason to reject this explanation out of hand.

    I can tell you that they are the most materialistic people on the planet, way more than most Americans.

    Absolutely. Middle and upper middle class Indians are dreadfully materialistic to the point of disgusting. Chinese are much more guarded and circumspect so they do not appear as greedy as Indians. This also may explain observed lower inventiveness of Asians. I would attribute it to different relation to abstraction which in the West is related to Platonic forms and Christian transcendence. In the West we know that we don’t know and that there is more out there which objectively exists and we can reach it by means of our effort which is independent of some mumbo jumbo good mood of some ghosts of our ancestors that need to be bribed with offerings. Fathers of the Church were obsessed with free will and fortunately this propagated to out culture though Calvinism in its most primitive forms was a step back towards mumbo jumbo.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Spandrell says: • Website

    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it’s hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it’s done. It doesn’t affect your brain.

    Japan has had phonetic writing forever now. Koreans have had phonetic writing for a while. Now it’s the only one they got. Didn’t make them smarter or more innovative.

    Asians are just like that. Practical, authoritarian people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @songbird
    I've been wondering about the various writing systems of East Asia, particularly China's, but I don't know really anything about it.

    One thought had occurred to me, perhaps there's a formal quality to it, that means even when you go phonetic it has to (for practical purposes) correspond to an already existing logograph. I assume there are exceptions for technology, but it might be harder to coin silly political words, like "racist." Oh, don't get me wrong - I'd be surprised if "racist" did not exist, but other, even more ridiculous terms like homophobe or transphobe, cis-gendered, etc. probably can't exist past a threshold, and so can't take root.

    Maybe, a word coined in Pinyin would naturally be seen as foreign.

    All that is pure ignorant theory. The Chinese, Koreans, and probably the Japanese have clearly all had crazy ideas at times, but maybe they still have a certain innate protection, from certain crazy ideas.

    Conversely, English could possibly be the easiest language to have crazy ideas in. It has the largest vocabulary, I think. Easier grammar than many other languages. Spelling is bad, but that is easily fixed nowadays by spellcheck. When your nouns all have genders, is it as easy to question gender, as when they have no gender? Probably not.
    , @Anatoly Karlin

    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it’s hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it’s done. It doesn’t affect your brain.
     
    I am not saying that it affects the brain (too deeply, anyway).

    However, it seems pretty clear acquiring literacy, especially truly fluent literacy, is far, far harder with Chinese than with alphabetic languages. There is a good reason why pretty much everyone west of the Himalayas transitioned to that when literacy began to spread beyond a narrow priestly caste, which happened first in Phoenicia and then Greece.

    In alphabetic languages, you can go to school for four years and come out literate - or at least able to read most things and sign your name, if not write complex essays. With Chinese, you will forget most of the characters not relevant to your job, resulting in a thing one author calls "fish literacy." Good for doing your job as an urban fishmonger, not enough for buying educational treatises on how to do fishing more effectively (the sort of thing even fairly ordinary Englishmen were doing from the 17th century).

    So in my view, with China, it was conformism (which is bad enough for progress by itself) feeding into a specific form of cultural conservatism, namely sticking with a logographic script (which is thrice bad for progress, as it greatly constrains general literacy in pre-modern societies where writing/reading is not a ubiquitous activity), which moreover possibly has some conformism-reinforcing effects of its own (as Danial Chieh has argued, though I'm not sure I buy it 100%).
    , @Alliumnsk
    Yes it does affect your brain.
    Japanese and Chinese themselves now often forget how to draw some symbols, because often they type it on computer which does it for them. They are able to recognize symbol visually but can't handwrite it.
    As for Japanese having phonetic writing, it was never meant to displace kanji (except for little children). Even worse, Japanese has a lot of homophones which require kanji to tell them apart. Yes, English has similar problem too but it pales in comparison to Japanese.
    Korean phonetic writing gained widespread usage only in 20th century.
    , @Daniel Chieh

    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it’s hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it’s done. It doesn’t affect your brain.

     

    But there is evidence that it does, or something in the culture does if not the language, affecting perception which is a pretty significant part of how you use your brain.

    This is the classic Nisbettian work based on the Morris & Peng studies on Asian versus European perceptions of the world which found that Asians generally saw the world as contextual and holistic rather than specific and detailed(the latter which would be better for scientific association). What's less known though is that in a followup study, however, Hong Kong participants(who had grown up in British schools and spoke English) could be primed to think in "Western" ways simply by showing them images of Western culture(Mickey Mouse, cowboys, etc). Showing them pictures indicative of Chinese culture reinforced their "Eastern" thinking. Showing them neutral pictures kept results in the middle.

    Another study by Ara Norenzayan in 1999 looked to see if the Japanese participants could make the correct "rule-making" associations for criteria judgment(something likely relevant for science), and found that Japanese participants made twice as many errors as European tested. However. Asian Americans did not make more errors, so it seems unlikely to be purely genetic unless there's some self-selection for immigration that involves rule-making associations.


    Incidentally, Mr. Karlin, there is a study which supports the idea of East Asians being more similar to women in terms of group behavior/conformity. Japanese participants sought to escape from unpleasant situations by seeking to be in a group, similar to American women in the study. American men, on the other hand, sought to escape unpleasant situations alone. No objective reason was provided for either to be more likely.
    , @BlackFlag
    Do blogs/forums where people spend countless hours of their lives discussing abstruse topics that give them no material benefit exist in East Asian countries?

    I don't get how AK goes from deciding it's not IQ to thinking it must be conformity. Conformity explains differentials in number of rebellious teens. Intellectual obsession explains differentials in innovation.

    It's a small percentage of innovations that require upending a tabboo. Euclid's geometry didn't. Neither did coming up with the ideal gas law.

    Even if some do, I doubt being a non-conformist is a significant factor. Did Galileo develop his idea about the sun and the earth cause he was a rebel? Doubt it. After all, only one of his many innovations challenged a taboo. Intellectual obsession explains all of them.

    Let's look at one of the most innovative people of the 20th century - Jon Von Neumann. There are lots of stories about how smart he was. What else did he have? Edward Teller thought it was this: "For most people thinking is painful. Jonny loves to think; in fact, it's the only thing he enjoys doing."

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. songbird says:
    @Spandrell
    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it's hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it's done. It doesn't affect your brain.

    Japan has had phonetic writing forever now. Koreans have had phonetic writing for a while. Now it's the only one they got. Didn't make them smarter or more innovative.

    Asians are just like that. Practical, authoritarian people.

    I’ve been wondering about the various writing systems of East Asia, particularly China’s, but I don’t know really anything about it.

    One thought had occurred to me, perhaps there’s a formal quality to it, that means even when you go phonetic it has to (for practical purposes) correspond to an already existing logograph. I assume there are exceptions for technology, but it might be harder to coin silly political words, like “racist.” Oh, don’t get me wrong – I’d be surprised if “racist” did not exist, but other, even more ridiculous terms like homophobe or transphobe, cis-gendered, etc. probably can’t exist past a threshold, and so can’t take root.

    Maybe, a word coined in Pinyin would naturally be seen as foreign.

    All that is pure ignorant theory. The Chinese, Koreans, and probably the Japanese have clearly all had crazy ideas at times, but maybe they still have a certain innate protection, from certain crazy ideas.

    Conversely, English could possibly be the easiest language to have crazy ideas in. It has the largest vocabulary, I think. Easier grammar than many other languages. Spelling is bad, but that is easily fixed nowadays by spellcheck. When your nouns all have genders, is it as easy to question gender, as when they have no gender? Probably not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Spandrell
    Languages don't have vocabularies. People do. English just happens to have more speakers who engage in a variety of scientific endeavors so the words used in English texts are on average more varied than others.

    And yes, English as a semi-isolating grammar language makes it somewhat easier to adopt foreign words. But much of that it's culture. English speakers just have a culture of liberal pedantry where foreign words aren't rejected as being weird.

    Korean and Japanese have loads of foreign words in them, mostly English these days. Hasn't made them that more creative. Mainland China has a habit of translating everything, which the language allows for. Taiwanese in contrast just use English words for many new concepts. Are Taiwanese more innovative? No.

    Let nobody be fooled: language is culture. It changes when required. Language determinism is yet another liberal theory to avoid dealing with HBD. That's all there is to it.
    , @Anatoly Karlin

    I assume there are exceptions for technology, but it might be harder to coin silly political words, like “racist.”
     
    Commenter Daniel Chieh has an interesting theory about this: http://www.unz.com/isteve/at-what-age-to-teach-foreign-languages-in-schools/#comment-2323390
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Spandrell says: • Website
    @songbird
    I've been wondering about the various writing systems of East Asia, particularly China's, but I don't know really anything about it.

    One thought had occurred to me, perhaps there's a formal quality to it, that means even when you go phonetic it has to (for practical purposes) correspond to an already existing logograph. I assume there are exceptions for technology, but it might be harder to coin silly political words, like "racist." Oh, don't get me wrong - I'd be surprised if "racist" did not exist, but other, even more ridiculous terms like homophobe or transphobe, cis-gendered, etc. probably can't exist past a threshold, and so can't take root.

    Maybe, a word coined in Pinyin would naturally be seen as foreign.

    All that is pure ignorant theory. The Chinese, Koreans, and probably the Japanese have clearly all had crazy ideas at times, but maybe they still have a certain innate protection, from certain crazy ideas.

    Conversely, English could possibly be the easiest language to have crazy ideas in. It has the largest vocabulary, I think. Easier grammar than many other languages. Spelling is bad, but that is easily fixed nowadays by spellcheck. When your nouns all have genders, is it as easy to question gender, as when they have no gender? Probably not.

    Languages don’t have vocabularies. People do. English just happens to have more speakers who engage in a variety of scientific endeavors so the words used in English texts are on average more varied than others.

    And yes, English as a semi-isolating grammar language makes it somewhat easier to adopt foreign words. But much of that it’s culture. English speakers just have a culture of liberal pedantry where foreign words aren’t rejected as being weird.

    Korean and Japanese have loads of foreign words in them, mostly English these days. Hasn’t made them that more creative. Mainland China has a habit of translating everything, which the language allows for. Taiwanese in contrast just use English words for many new concepts. Are Taiwanese more innovative? No.

    Let nobody be fooled: language is culture. It changes when required. Language determinism is yet another liberal theory to avoid dealing with HBD. That’s all there is to it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Spandrell says: • Website

    For what it’s worth, Japanese writing is much more of a pain in the ass than Chinese. Way more. It’s irregular and arbitrary and just plain bad.
    Japan didn’t even have a standard system until 1900!

    Are the Japanese any less smart and scientific minded than the Chinese?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abelard Lindsey
    I disagree.

    The Japanese kanji are simplified compared to the traditional Chinese kanji, and they have hana as well. Kana, both hiragan and katakana are alphabets and are very easy to learn because they are purely phonetic. Of course, the mainland Chinese also simplified their kanji, but in a manner different from that of Japan (this was shortly after the war and they were not about to copy anything from Japan). Hongkong and Taiwan still use the traditional kanji. South Korea uses it for place names but not much else since they have their hangul written system (which I know nothing about).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Excal says:

    … it’s hard to deny that Christianity’s influence in late Antiquity was highly negative, helping push the Roman sphere further into obscurantism. It did play a role in conserving knowledge during the Dark Ages, and in advancing knowledge after 1100, but it’s not clear how it did that, or promoted literacy, beyond what it would have been the case under a different religion …

    Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy, by Emmet Scott, offers an explanation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. songbird says:
    @Polish Perspective

    There isn’t near as much to explain about the Middle East and India. They are simply less intelligent – significantly so – than the Europeans or East Asians.
     
    Is there a credible estimate of Indian IQ? I am not convinced by Lynn & Vanhanen's low-80s estimate. You have mentioned high parasitic load and malnourishment as potential factors holding the subcontinent in general back. Malnourishment in India is higher than even the average Sub-Saharan African country.

    You go on to state that you view the g-loaded PISA tests to be better guides, but India notoriously underperformed the (only) time they participated, probably for the same reason(s). Speaking of Jason Richwine, Steve Sailer on his twitter mentioned a few days ago, in response to a direct question on this very topic from an Indian, that the mean IQ of 2nd-gen Indian-Americans is something around 112 IQ, so quite close to mean Ashkenazi IQ. This would imply that 'regression to the mean' is quite high, and as such would throw cold water on the idea that the average Indian IQ is low on a genetic basis.

    Of course, as most people know, India has many subpopulations and many castes have extremely high endogamy, which makes determining Indian IQ so difficult, especially as most immigrants to the US are high caste(implied as Brahmin). That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins. Then again, some Indians on /pol/ have thrown cold water on this Brahmin = high caste theory.

    https://i.imgur.com/a2Uv6yM.png

    https://i.imgur.com/ViCWhFT.png

    I say this in the context of recman1's comments on UK Indians, and his focus on Brahmin's as high caste, which, if the-above comments is anything to go by, is misleading since 'high caste' is not synonymous with Brahmin in a strict socio-economic sense (but more so in a cultural sense).

    Verbal skills are much more important for economic productivity than recognizing patterns in weird shapes, ergo GDP per capita and development levels showing the highest levels of correlation precisely with verbal IQ.
     

    This is interesting, and I've heard this before. Additionally, I do not remember which author - perhaps it was Murray - who once wrote that mathematical IQ is actually better correlated with verbal IQ than the other way around. In other words, someone with a verbal IQ of 130 will have a higher mathematical IQ on average than someone with a mathematical IQ of 130 will have a verbal IQ. I do not know if this is true, do you know something about this? It goes against the stereotype of "clever humanist but worthless on math", which is why I was skeptical when I read it. It'd be interesting if true.

    My guess is that this underperformance can be ascribed to greater East Asian conformism, relative to the other major races of man (Kura et al., 2015).
     
    Isn't this an old stereotype(or even a slur) repackaged in a new exterior? I've gone back and read some articles from ~2005 recently and it is astonishing how dismissive many Western media outlets were of the Chinese. Sure, they write, the Chinese are growing fast but [insert litany of thinly-veiled dismissive insults about 'robotic' Asians who lack innovation]. Yet as you yourself have pointed out, the Chinese have risen very fast at cutting-edge research in the academies. Their AI efforts are already world-class. This does not disprove their historical lag, but it should perhaps caution us on taking an essentialist perspective by tagging them as perpetually 'incurious'. If that was the case, you'd expect it to remain a constant constraint and that doesn't appear to be true, or at least far less than many thought 10-15 years ago. Thoughts?

    Also, there was plenty of Chinese innovation pre-1500 AD and one could argue that if you focus from 0 AD to 1500 AD, it is not clear that Europeans did better. We innovated in a shorter burst and as technological output accelerated, it was more tightly packed in a shorter timespan, though I will concede that the last 500 years were vastly more important than anything than came before it put together.

    However, as Kurzweil has noted, human innovation has sped up consistently over the last 10 000 years. The introduction of each technology has been shorter and shorter, which perhaps shows to a generalised pattern that makes the industrial revolution less of a unique European phenomena in the sense that "without us, it would never have happened" and more a logical end-conclusion of ever-faster innovation over the course of human history. Perhaps we were simply doing better at this particular juncture, which is why it was us, but had it begun in 1300 AD, maybe I would have written this in Mandarin.


    P.S. For what it's worth, there are questions over whether we measure productivity adequately today. Some, like prof Diane Coyle, argue that we are underestimating it and research institutions like the Conference Board has taken in her research and the result of those models is that East Asian GDPpc is higher than it is today due to higher productivity.

    It is particularly technological productivity that is undermeasured, and that would remove a lot of this 'underperformance'. SK has lower productivity than Spain according to the OECD, which is somewhat implausible.

    Based on acquaintances, I can easily believe 112 for Jews, 105-106 for NE Asians, but I can’t believe 112 for US Indians, and I believe immigration here makes them more selected than in India.

    Two provisions: I did not know many growing up, (the number has since wildly exploded), and I don’t live near Silicon Valley.

    By my observation alone, ave. US dot-Indians maybe 100. Many work in convenience or liquor stores, which seems to give the lie to the idea that they are here based on skills. First generation, (at least) has more stable marriages than whites in general, not sure about compared to white immigrants. Horribly, tribal, compared to most other groups. Most of their women are blah to frumpy. Exceptions rare, though notable.

    I wouldn’t mind living next to Indians, but still it is obvious they are sharpening their knives politically, and would gut any European country, the whole continent, without one iota of shame, if it meant bringing in more Indians. Same for the US, or any other Western country.

    I recently saw a travel commercial for India. It seemed to be targeted toward whites and began with an Indian bookseller in Rome. While it did have two white children in it, I thought that was a lot of effrontery – a wise Indian in the Eternal City of Europe, spreading his knowledge to Europeans, when selling to your own country as a tourist destination to Europeans – which you would not see from any other people, even Jews.

    A pity, because I don’t believe the average Indian in India is anywhere as malignant as the average African. Many even have a certain goofy charm and optimism about their country, but they are Malthusian people – tribalistically Malthusian. And the tribal ones ruin any practical possibility of getting along with the others.

    Is there any reason to suppose native Indian average is any greater than MENA countries? I don’t believe so. Maybe, 90 in ideal conditions. Can they achieve this in their own country? I don’t know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    Based on acquaintances, I can easily believe 112 for Jews, 105-106 for NE Asians, but I can’t believe 112 for US Indians
     
    Did you test your acquaintances or did they tell you their scores? Does "I can easily believe" mean you are credulous? Or you are not really thoughtful when expressing yourself?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. utu says:
    @songbird
    Based on acquaintances, I can easily believe 112 for Jews, 105-106 for NE Asians, but I can't believe 112 for US Indians, and I believe immigration here makes them more selected than in India.

    Two provisions: I did not know many growing up, (the number has since wildly exploded), and I don't live near Silicon Valley.

    By my observation alone, ave. US dot-Indians maybe 100. Many work in convenience or liquor stores, which seems to give the lie to the idea that they are here based on skills. First generation, (at least) has more stable marriages than whites in general, not sure about compared to white immigrants. Horribly, tribal, compared to most other groups. Most of their women are blah to frumpy. Exceptions rare, though notable.

    I wouldn't mind living next to Indians, but still it is obvious they are sharpening their knives politically, and would gut any European country, the whole continent, without one iota of shame, if it meant bringing in more Indians. Same for the US, or any other Western country.

    I recently saw a travel commercial for India. It seemed to be targeted toward whites and began with an Indian bookseller in Rome. While it did have two white children in it, I thought that was a lot of effrontery - a wise Indian in the Eternal City of Europe, spreading his knowledge to Europeans, when selling to your own country as a tourist destination to Europeans - which you would not see from any other people, even Jews.

    A pity, because I don't believe the average Indian in India is anywhere as malignant as the average African. Many even have a certain goofy charm and optimism about their country, but they are Malthusian people - tribalistically Malthusian. And the tribal ones ruin any practical possibility of getting along with the others.

    Is there any reason to suppose native Indian average is any greater than MENA countries? I don't believe so. Maybe, 90 in ideal conditions. Can they achieve this in their own country? I don't know.

    Based on acquaintances, I can easily believe 112 for Jews, 105-106 for NE Asians, but I can’t believe 112 for US Indians

    Did you test your acquaintances or did they tell you their scores? Does “I can easily believe” mean you are credulous? Or you are not really thoughtful when expressing yourself?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    Does “I can easily believe” mean you are credulous? Or you are not really thoughtful when expressing yourself?
     
    Presumably he means 'the Jewish and North-East Asian scores sound reasonable, while the Indian scores do not'.

    Absolute literalness is not always useful when interpreting statements, ex. if someone says 'I am afraid that [insert some issue]...' they are not literally afraid but merely wish to express their apologies.
    , @songbird

    Does “I can easily believe” mean you are credulous? Or you are not really thoughtful when expressing yourself?
     
    Now, now... “I can easily believe” is an expression, just as is "I find it hard to believe." Maybe, it is as others have inferred and you aren't a native English speaker?

    Let me put it this way, so it is more understandable for you: I did not live in a Jewish neighborhood (though probably a more Jewish part of the country). The nearest synagogue I knew of was two towns over, but many of my smarter than average classmates were Jews, based on what classes they were in: honors and advanced placement, based on their SAT scores, and what colleges they went to: Harvard, John-Hopkins, etc. Who their fathers were: doctors, a concert player, etc.

    The smartest guy I ever knew was probably Chinese. He drew a complicated phase diagram from memory. I once heard his intelligence remarked on, by someone I had no reason to suspect even knew him - I recognized who he was talking about immediately, even though I did not myself know him very well either.

    The only out and out dumb East Asian I ever knew had Down Syndrome. In contrast, one of the few Indians I knew as a boy was a complete dumb-ass. I knew another one who was about average, but a pothead. I did not know any obviously smart ones in college. I am sure there were some, but I did not know them.

    Meanwhile, I have repeatedly been struck by how stupid many of the blacks I've known seem to be. Now, none of this is scientific or statistical, but Asians and Ashenazis seem to punch above their weight, while the American dot-Indians I've known seem at best to have the intelligence of whites. Maybe, they don't. Maybe, it is statistically higher, and/or maybe the mean has risen, as new ones have come ashore.

    Could the official Ashkenazi IQ estimate be off? Higher than it actually is? Quite possibly. The true average seems higher than the white average though. Maybe, there are even subgroups of whites that are the same, but whites aren't as tribalistic, so it is harder to know when someone is an Episcopalian than a Jew.

    BTW, contra Ron Unz and I believe also you, two of the stupidest people I ever knew were Hispanic. They had AIDS that they had gotten from sharing needles, and decided to have a baby, I was literally gawking at how stupid they were, and the dysgenics of it all, so that my teacher noticed, probably misinterpreted it, and smiled at me, probably thinking I was impressed with the technology that gave the baby a good chance of being born HIV-free. Now, of course that is incident, but I never knew a smart Hispanic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. Bliss says:

    East Asians (Chinese, Koreans, Japanese) tend to have larger brains and larger visuospatial IQs than Caucasians

    So how come their higher visuospatial IQ does not make them better drivers?

    http://www.apa.org/monitor/apr04/cognitive.aspx

    Overall, they found a significant correlation between the cognitive indicators and driving skill. Visuospatial skills–like those that would be used to accurately position and maneuver a car or judge distances–had the highest correlation.

    It takes superior visuospatial skills to loop a basketball into a hoop, catch a long pass on the run, hit a curve ball with a baseball bat, bicycle kick a soccer ball etc. Guess which race is the best at doing all that?

    People of african ancestry also make good drivers, pilots, space shuttle commanders etc

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    So how come their higher visuospatial IQ does not make them better drivers?
     
    Aren't you assuming that the car drivers care about the people outside? It is hard to be a 'good driver' if one doesn't care in the first place.
    , @utu

    It takes superior visuospatial skills to [...] catch a long pass on the run [...]. Guess which race is the best at doing all that?
     
    Dogs.
    , @Guillaume Tell

    People of african ancestry also make good drivers
     
    Sure:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate#/media/File:Road_traffic_accidents_world_map_-_Death_-_WHO2012.svg

    pilots,
     
    Totally:

    Jet hull loss rates by region of operator (per millions departures)
    REGION 2012- 2016
    Africa 2.21
    Asia Pacific 0.48
    Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) 1.17
    Europe 0.14
    Latin America and the Caribbean 0.53
    Middle East and North Africa 0.74
    North America 0.22
    North Asia 0.00​


    space shuttle commanders
     
    no doubt about that:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JElBybOoFUE

    "Bliss" a.k.a. "the southward-pointing compass".

    , @Daniel Chieh

    So how come their higher visuospatial IQ does not make them better drivers?


     

    That's because its an incorrect heuristic.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration crash fatality rates for the African American populations are 12.31 deaths per 100,000 people and its pretty similar with other races(except for Native Americans, who have insanely high driving fatality rates). For Asians, the fatality rate was only 4 per 100k. That could be attributed to reduced alcoholism, however, in just crash numbers, Australia's University of Sydney found in 2010 that Asians are involved in only half as many automotive accidents, and a Canadian study replicated this in 2011.

    The reason why this heuristic exists, nonetheless, is because Asians(especially in Asia) do not seem to acknowledge traffic rules often enough, which can be incredibly annoying and makes driving in Asian countries extremely unpleasant. Niceties such as communicating with the other driver, or even signaling are often just not done; the fact that it doesn't result in more accidents actually means that such behavior will keep continuing. But all of the spatial awareness in the world won't help your fellow drivers if you don't think the rules apply to you, or more specifically, just don't care about them.

    At any rate, the WHO rundown of the most dangerous countries to be on the road has only one vaguely East Asian country, Thailand, and several African states.

    https://www.therichest.com/rich-list/poorest-list/10-countries-with-the-worst-drivers-in-the-world/

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @utu

    Based on acquaintances, I can easily believe 112 for Jews, 105-106 for NE Asians, but I can’t believe 112 for US Indians
     
    Did you test your acquaintances or did they tell you their scores? Does "I can easily believe" mean you are credulous? Or you are not really thoughtful when expressing yourself?

    Does “I can easily believe” mean you are credulous? Or you are not really thoughtful when expressing yourself?

    Presumably he means ‘the Jewish and North-East Asian scores sound reasonable, while the Indian scores do not’.

    Absolute literalness is not always useful when interpreting statements, ex. if someone says ‘I am afraid that [insert some issue]…’ they are not literally afraid but merely wish to express their apologies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    He used specific numbers 112 and 105-106 so I asked a specific question. Did he mean that his Jewish acquaintances (how many) seems to be smarter than his Asian acquaintances (how many)? Or did the differences in their smartness really felt like 6-7 points? How does 6-7 points feel? The reason I am asking because I think the guy is careless and at the same time he is cementing a meme which might be right or wrong.

    Actually you can kind of solve the problem exactly w/o making measurements under assumption that distribution is normal and you know its standard deviation. Let suppose your own IQ score is X and you met n random Jews who were definitively smarter than you and m random Jews who were definitively less smart than you. From values of n and m you could estimate the mean of Jewish IQ score providing that m+n is large and that the sample of Jews was truly random and proving that you can be objective when judging whether somebody is smarter than you or not.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @Bliss

    East Asians (Chinese, Koreans, Japanese) tend to have larger brains and larger visuospatial IQs than Caucasians
     
    So how come their higher visuospatial IQ does not make them better drivers?

    http://www.apa.org/monitor/apr04/cognitive.aspx

    Overall, they found a significant correlation between the cognitive indicators and driving skill. Visuospatial skills--like those that would be used to accurately position and maneuver a car or judge distances--had the highest correlation.

    It takes superior visuospatial skills to loop a basketball into a hoop, catch a long pass on the run, hit a curve ball with a baseball bat, bicycle kick a soccer ball etc. Guess which race is the best at doing all that?

    People of african ancestry also make good drivers, pilots, space shuttle commanders etc

    So how come their higher visuospatial IQ does not make them better drivers?

    Aren’t you assuming that the car drivers care about the people outside? It is hard to be a ‘good driver’ if one doesn’t care in the first place.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @songbird
    I've been wondering about the various writing systems of East Asia, particularly China's, but I don't know really anything about it.

    One thought had occurred to me, perhaps there's a formal quality to it, that means even when you go phonetic it has to (for practical purposes) correspond to an already existing logograph. I assume there are exceptions for technology, but it might be harder to coin silly political words, like "racist." Oh, don't get me wrong - I'd be surprised if "racist" did not exist, but other, even more ridiculous terms like homophobe or transphobe, cis-gendered, etc. probably can't exist past a threshold, and so can't take root.

    Maybe, a word coined in Pinyin would naturally be seen as foreign.

    All that is pure ignorant theory. The Chinese, Koreans, and probably the Japanese have clearly all had crazy ideas at times, but maybe they still have a certain innate protection, from certain crazy ideas.

    Conversely, English could possibly be the easiest language to have crazy ideas in. It has the largest vocabulary, I think. Easier grammar than many other languages. Spelling is bad, but that is easily fixed nowadays by spellcheck. When your nouns all have genders, is it as easy to question gender, as when they have no gender? Probably not.

    I assume there are exceptions for technology, but it might be harder to coin silly political words, like “racist.”

    Commenter Daniel Chieh has an interesting theory about this: http://www.unz.com/isteve/at-what-age-to-teach-foreign-languages-in-schools/#comment-2323390

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Spandrell
    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it's hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it's done. It doesn't affect your brain.

    Japan has had phonetic writing forever now. Koreans have had phonetic writing for a while. Now it's the only one they got. Didn't make them smarter or more innovative.

    Asians are just like that. Practical, authoritarian people.

    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it’s hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it’s done. It doesn’t affect your brain.

    I am not saying that it affects the brain (too deeply, anyway).

    However, it seems pretty clear acquiring literacy, especially truly fluent literacy, is far, far harder with Chinese than with alphabetic languages. There is a good reason why pretty much everyone west of the Himalayas transitioned to that when literacy began to spread beyond a narrow priestly caste, which happened first in Phoenicia and then Greece.

    In alphabetic languages, you can go to school for four years and come out literate – or at least able to read most things and sign your name, if not write complex essays. With Chinese, you will forget most of the characters not relevant to your job, resulting in a thing one author calls “fish literacy.” Good for doing your job as an urban fishmonger, not enough for buying educational treatises on how to do fishing more effectively (the sort of thing even fairly ordinary Englishmen were doing from the 17th century).

    So in my view, with China, it was conformism (which is bad enough for progress by itself) feeding into a specific form of cultural conservatism, namely sticking with a logographic script (which is thrice bad for progress, as it greatly constrains general literacy in pre-modern societies where writing/reading is not a ubiquitous activity), which moreover possibly has some conformism-reinforcing effects of its own (as Danial Chieh has argued, though I’m not sure I buy it 100%).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Spandrell
    But acquiring literacy is not hard for children. It takes time, of course, but no way as much as often implied. The script is systematic in many ways, once you got 500 down the rest can be deduced easily.

    It is excruciating for adults, which is why foreigners complain so much. But that does not reflect real feelings on the ground, which is what matter.

    Agreed on conformism, but again that's in their blood. Hangul can be learned in a week but it hasn't made Koreans any more drone-like.

    By the way most texts found in Han dynasty tombs show a semi phonetic system, with generic characters being used for their sound value in many places. That didn't stick.
    , @anonymous coward

    However, it seems pretty clear acquiring literacy, especially truly fluent literacy, is far, far harder with Chinese than with alphabetic languages.
     
    This has nothing to do with the writing system. Literate Chinese is just a very complex and huge language in general, because they rolled in various dialects, sociolects and classical languages into one huge (mostly unified) thing.

    Imagine having to learn Spanish, Italian and Classical Latin at the same time, with the whole result called 'Romance'.

    That's kinda what Mandarin is like.

    Chinese kids still have to learn (and pass tests on!) their ancient classical language. Europe ditched Latin a long, long time ago.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. utu says:
    @Hyperborean

    Does “I can easily believe” mean you are credulous? Or you are not really thoughtful when expressing yourself?
     
    Presumably he means 'the Jewish and North-East Asian scores sound reasonable, while the Indian scores do not'.

    Absolute literalness is not always useful when interpreting statements, ex. if someone says 'I am afraid that [insert some issue]...' they are not literally afraid but merely wish to express their apologies.

    He used specific numbers 112 and 105-106 so I asked a specific question. Did he mean that his Jewish acquaintances (how many) seems to be smarter than his Asian acquaintances (how many)? Or did the differences in their smartness really felt like 6-7 points? How does 6-7 points feel? The reason I am asking because I think the guy is careless and at the same time he is cementing a meme which might be right or wrong.

    Actually you can kind of solve the problem exactly w/o making measurements under assumption that distribution is normal and you know its standard deviation. Let suppose your own IQ score is X and you met n random Jews who were definitively smarter than you and m random Jews who were definitively less smart than you. From values of n and m you could estimate the mean of Jewish IQ score providing that m+n is large and that the sample of Jews was truly random and proving that you can be objective when judging whether somebody is smarter than you or not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    He used specific numbers 112 and 105-106 so I asked a specific question.
     
    But he was using other people's numbers, right? So probably it fell within a larger range that he would have accepted.

    But I agree with you that it would be good if he elaborated a bit more on his thought process.

    , @Guillaume Tell

    that you can be objective when judging whether somebody is smarter than you or not.
     
    I think that is the crux of the problem! In my case for example, n is always equal to 0 :)
    , @RaceRealist88
    "How does 6-7 points feel?"

    What does 6-7 points mean in terms of brain states?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. utu says:
    @Bliss

    East Asians (Chinese, Koreans, Japanese) tend to have larger brains and larger visuospatial IQs than Caucasians
     
    So how come their higher visuospatial IQ does not make them better drivers?

    http://www.apa.org/monitor/apr04/cognitive.aspx

    Overall, they found a significant correlation between the cognitive indicators and driving skill. Visuospatial skills--like those that would be used to accurately position and maneuver a car or judge distances--had the highest correlation.

    It takes superior visuospatial skills to loop a basketball into a hoop, catch a long pass on the run, hit a curve ball with a baseball bat, bicycle kick a soccer ball etc. Guess which race is the best at doing all that?

    People of african ancestry also make good drivers, pilots, space shuttle commanders etc

    It takes superior visuospatial skills to [...] catch a long pass on the run [...]. Guess which race is the best at doing all that?

    Dogs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    German Shepherds are considered the most intelligent of dogs based on ability to learn commands. I wonder what is their cranial capacity versus other dogs? Are toy dogs mentally more impaired in some way?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @utu
    He used specific numbers 112 and 105-106 so I asked a specific question. Did he mean that his Jewish acquaintances (how many) seems to be smarter than his Asian acquaintances (how many)? Or did the differences in their smartness really felt like 6-7 points? How does 6-7 points feel? The reason I am asking because I think the guy is careless and at the same time he is cementing a meme which might be right or wrong.

    Actually you can kind of solve the problem exactly w/o making measurements under assumption that distribution is normal and you know its standard deviation. Let suppose your own IQ score is X and you met n random Jews who were definitively smarter than you and m random Jews who were definitively less smart than you. From values of n and m you could estimate the mean of Jewish IQ score providing that m+n is large and that the sample of Jews was truly random and proving that you can be objective when judging whether somebody is smarter than you or not.

    He used specific numbers 112 and 105-106 so I asked a specific question.

    But he was using other people’s numbers, right? So probably it fell within a larger range that he would have accepted.

    But I agree with you that it would be good if he elaborated a bit more on his thought process.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Anonymous[381] • Disclaimer says:

    “Why Chinese Is So Damn Hard”

    http://pinyin.info/readings/texts/moser.html

    The problem of reading is often a touchy one for those in the China field. How many of us would dare stand up in front of a group of colleagues and read a randomly-selected passage out loud? Yet inferiority complexes or fear of losing face causes many teachers and students to become unwitting cooperators in a kind of conspiracy of silence wherein everyone pretends that after four years of Chinese the diligent student should be whizzing through anything from Confucius to Lu Xun, pausing only occasionally to look up some pesky low-frequency character (in their Chinese-Chinese dictionary, of course). Others, of course, are more honest about the difficulties. The other day one of my fellow graduate students, someone who has been studying Chinese for ten years or more, said to me “My research is really hampered by the fact that I still just can’t read Chinese. It takes me hours to get through two or three pages, and I can’t skim to save my life.” This would be an astonishing admission for a tenth-year student of, say, French literature, yet it is a comment I hear all the time among my peers (at least in those unguarded moments when one has had a few too many Tsingtao beers and has begun to lament how slowly work on the thesis is coming).

    A teacher of mine once told me of a game he and a colleague would sometimes play: The contest involved pulling a book at random from the shelves of the Chinese section of the Asia Library and then seeing who could be the first to figure out what the book was about. Anyone who has spent time working in an East Asia collection can verify that this can indeed be a difficult enough task — never mind reading the book in question. This state of affairs is very disheartening for the student who is impatient to begin feasting on the vast riches of Chinese literature, but must subsist on a bland diet of canned handouts, textbook examples, and carefully edited appetizers for the first few years.

    The comparison with learning the usual western languages is striking. After about a year of studying French, I was able to read a lot. I went through the usual kinds of novels — La nausée by Sartre, Voltaire’s Candide, L’étranger by Camus — plus countless newspapers, magazines, comic books, etc. It was a lot of work but fairly painless; all I really needed was a good dictionary and a battered French grammar book I got at a garage sale.

    This kind of “sink or swim” approach just doesn’t work in Chinese. At the end of three years of learning Chinese, I hadn’t yet read a single complete novel. I found it just too hard, impossibly slow, and unrewarding. Newspapers, too, were still too daunting. I couldn’t read an article without looking up about every tenth character, and it was not uncommon for me to scan the front page of the People’s Daily and not be able to completely decipher a single headline. Someone at that time suggested I read The Dream of the Red Chamber and gave me a nice three-volume edition. I just have to laugh. It still sits on my shelf like a fat, smug Buddha, only the first twenty or so pages filled with scribbled definitions and question marks, the rest crisp and virgin. After six years of studying Chinese, I’m still not at a level where I can actually read it without an English translation to consult. (By “read it”, I mean, of course, “read it for pleasure”. I suppose if someone put a gun to my head and a dictionary in my hand, I could get through it.) Simply diving into the vast pool of Chinese in the beginning is not only foolhardy, it can even be counterproductive. As George Kennedy writes, “The difficulty of memorizing a Chinese ideograph as compared with the difficulty of learning a new word in a European language, is such that a rigid economy of mental effort is imperative.”6 This is, if anything, an understatement. With the risk of drowning so great, the student is better advised to spend more time in the shallow end treading water before heading toward the deep end.

    Whereas modern Mandarin is merely perversely hard, classical Chinese is deliberately impossible. Here’s a secret that sinologists won’t tell you: A passage in classical Chinese can be understood only if you already know what the passage says in the first place. This is because classical Chinese really consists of several centuries of esoteric anecdotes and in-jokes written in a kind of terse, miserly code for dissemination among a small, elite group of intellectually-inbred bookworms who already knew the whole literature backwards and forwards, anyway. An uninitiated westerner can no more be expected to understand such writing than Confucius himself, if transported to the present, could understand the entries in the “personal” section of the classified ads that say things like: “Hndsm. SWGM, 24, 160, sks BGM or WGM for gentle S&M, mod. bndg., some lthr., twosm or threesm ok, have own equip., wheels, 988-8752 lv. mssg. on ans. mach., no weirdos please.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  59. utu says:

    Karlin’s Theory of Almost Everything

    Almost everything can be explained by IQ, and differential rates in the appearance of intensive agriculture, urbanization, and literacy. The two biggest factors that can’t be are the relative underperformance (relative to IQ!) of East Asians vs. everyone else, and women vs. men.

    Since women and East Asians constitute about 60% of the world population the almost everything is under 40%. Karlin’s theory of almost everything is not even 50% theory.

    The slight of hand was to use PISA instead of IQ which suppose to correlated better with GDP than IQ, right? So with IQ the ‘almost’ gets even smaller than 40%.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    "Almost everything can be explained by IQ"

    If you craft just-so stories sure "Almost everything can be explained by IQ", but if no novel predictions are made than who cares that "Almost everything can be explained by IQ", since no novel predictions are made to possibly falsify the "IQ hypothesis"?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Anatoly Karlin

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed).
     
    E.L. Jones makes this point in The European Miracle. More capital in China was destroyed during nomad invasions than in Europe.

    Of course, one aspect of this is just China's plain back luck in being a giant plane abutting the Eurasian steppe, which could masses of steppe cavalry on home soil. Largest plain in Europe west of the Wild Fields is in Hungary, which, however, is relatively small and can only support 1-2 tyumens. Main reason the Mongols decided to call off their invasion.

    Still, while acknowledging that the nomads did nothing good for China, I don't really buy the idea that they explain why Europe "won" instead of China. Nomad dynasties inevitably became Sinicized; populations bounced back; the Confucian bureaucracy seems to have been remarkably resilient, and provided continuity of governance. And of course Japan did not have that problem, but in many respects followed in China's footsteps (self-imposed isolation; improvement over innovation).

    The main fault of the Nomads in China was to interrupt its continuous advancement and most importantly, by destroying the Song Dynasty.

    The Song were unique in Chinese history for being far more commercial and Urban then most, it was also the most naval oriented dynasty. We see isolation and hostility to all things outside start under the Ming, which might have been partially a reaction to the Mongol devastation and things that were seen as failures of the previous (Song) dynasty. Just as the Song reacted to what it perceived to have been the failures of the militarist Tang, by horribly weakening the military, so did the Ming react to the failures of the Song, by returning to a peasant focused economic and social order. The founder of the Dynasty Hongwu wrote as much in his will…that largely dictated the policy of his successors. The attempts of Yongle to go against it were met with widespread hostility from the bureaucratic elite. China never became as wealthy as it was by 1100 till around 1990, I wouldnt say this is an unimportant factor. Also several technologies were forgotten and bearly anything new was invented. Romes decline and fall also shows how barbarian invasions can stop progress in the west for centuries.

    As for Japan, it was culturally bound to China and not really able to start any scientific revolution on its own.

    As I said above, between 1250 and about 2000 China barely made a single invention, while previously it made hundreds. Had Europe been devastated by Nomads and lost half of its population by 1500, do you think that the Industrial revolution would have still occurred around 1800?

    The large disparity between eastern Europe and the west (with the east barely inventing anything till 1800) shows how much of a role barbarian neighbors play and how lucky Europe was to have a set of “just war” traditions to limit the destructive capacities of warfare between Europeans. I would say that the Mongol invasion of Russia or China caused more (%) damage, then all the wars between Europeans from 1200 to 1900 combined (including the religious wars of the 17th century.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alliumnsk
    I agree about devastation by Mongols, but then... Mongols didn't raze India and Egypt. But we don't see major difference compared to the nearby countries where Mongols did invade.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Phille says:

    I am somewhat dismayed that you scooped my brilliant theory that visuo-spatial-mathematical IQ depends on brain size while handling of sequences does not, and that this explains asian underperformance, jewish brain size and the flynn effect, as well as some male-female differences.

    But I think I can add a few thoughts: The handling of sequences as the second factor of intelligence seems to depend on dendritic growth or the ability to create synapses quickly. The jewish genetic diseases indicate that boosting this ability is the main factor behind their high verbal IQ. I also assume that they repurposed part of the spatial processing cortex to handle more high level patterns. So they basically shuffled IQ points from visuo-spatial to mathematical IQ without increasing brain size.

    Now, the interesting thing about synapses is that there are lateral synapses, that according to some theories are necessary for sequence learning, and top-down synapses, which might be necessary for creating grand theories that unify many lower level facts. To me it is pretty clear that this is what Ashkenazim excel at. Coming up with just-so-stories. Sometimes correct, sometimes not, but often brilliant. It also seems to me that the European advantage over Asians might be along the same dimension. So verbal IQ might just correlate highly with GDP because it correlates with this ability of high-level conceptual thinking made possible by the ability to quickly create top-down synapses.

    This would be an alternative explanation to conformity, though the male-female gap doesn’t drop out of it as naturally.

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @ussr andy

    To me it is pretty clear that this is what Ashkenazim excel at. Coming up with just-so-stories.
     
    here's one, if I may: the male-female gap in innovation is because it's all ultimately a mating display.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Spandrell says: • Website
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it’s hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it’s done. It doesn’t affect your brain.
     
    I am not saying that it affects the brain (too deeply, anyway).

    However, it seems pretty clear acquiring literacy, especially truly fluent literacy, is far, far harder with Chinese than with alphabetic languages. There is a good reason why pretty much everyone west of the Himalayas transitioned to that when literacy began to spread beyond a narrow priestly caste, which happened first in Phoenicia and then Greece.

    In alphabetic languages, you can go to school for four years and come out literate - or at least able to read most things and sign your name, if not write complex essays. With Chinese, you will forget most of the characters not relevant to your job, resulting in a thing one author calls "fish literacy." Good for doing your job as an urban fishmonger, not enough for buying educational treatises on how to do fishing more effectively (the sort of thing even fairly ordinary Englishmen were doing from the 17th century).

    So in my view, with China, it was conformism (which is bad enough for progress by itself) feeding into a specific form of cultural conservatism, namely sticking with a logographic script (which is thrice bad for progress, as it greatly constrains general literacy in pre-modern societies where writing/reading is not a ubiquitous activity), which moreover possibly has some conformism-reinforcing effects of its own (as Danial Chieh has argued, though I'm not sure I buy it 100%).

    But acquiring literacy is not hard for children. It takes time, of course, but no way as much as often implied. The script is systematic in many ways, once you got 500 down the rest can be deduced easily.

    It is excruciating for adults, which is why foreigners complain so much. But that does not reflect real feelings on the ground, which is what matter.

    Agreed on conformism, but again that’s in their blood. Hangul can be learned in a week but it hasn’t made Koreans any more drone-like.

    By the way most texts found in Han dynasty tombs show a semi phonetic system, with generic characters being used for their sound value in many places. That didn’t stick.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. “I am certainly not one of those militant atheist types, but it’s hard to deny that Christianity’s influence in late Antiquity was highly negative, helping push the Roman sphere further into obscurantism.”

    Ok but by how much? This sounds very similar to the atheist larping that says “Christianity held the west back 1000 years”. Was Christianity the reason the Roman(Western) empire collapsed?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  64. Alliumnsk says:
    @Spandrell
    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it's hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it's done. It doesn't affect your brain.

    Japan has had phonetic writing forever now. Koreans have had phonetic writing for a while. Now it's the only one they got. Didn't make them smarter or more innovative.

    Asians are just like that. Practical, authoritarian people.

    Yes it does affect your brain.
    Japanese and Chinese themselves now often forget how to draw some symbols, because often they type it on computer which does it for them. They are able to recognize symbol visually but can’t handwrite it.
    As for Japanese having phonetic writing, it was never meant to displace kanji (except for little children). Even worse, Japanese has a lot of homophones which require kanji to tell them apart. Yes, English has similar problem too but it pales in comparison to Japanese.
    Korean phonetic writing gained widespread usage only in 20th century.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sparkon

    As for Japanese having phonetic writing, it was never meant to displace kanji (except for little children).
     
    Not quite. In Japanese, one of the two syllabaries, or phonetic sets - Hiragana - is used for grammatical endings, the verb "to be," conjunctions, exclamations, etc. while the other - Katakana - is used for foreign words and names. Any Japanese word can be written in hiragana.

    For example:

    食べる (たべる) ( taberu = to eat )
    私は食べている ( Watashi-wa tabete-iru = I am eating. )
    これは食べ物です ( Kore-wa tabemono desu = This is food. )
    まさか! ( Masaka! = No kidding ! )

    シカゴ ( Shikago = Chicago )

    The most reliable way for a non-speaker to distinguish between Chinese and Japanese writing is the regular presence of kana among the kanji in the Japanese, but just dense hanzi in the Chinese.

    Japanese 1st graders learn 80 kanji as 5-year olds. I don't know what the load is for Chinese kids learning hanzi, but throughout the Orient, beautiful calligraphy is considered one of the high arts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Alliumnsk says:
    @Unknown128
    The main fault of the Nomads in China was to interrupt its continuous advancement and most importantly, by destroying the Song Dynasty.

    The Song were unique in Chinese history for being far more commercial and Urban then most, it was also the most naval oriented dynasty. We see isolation and hostility to all things outside start under the Ming, which might have been partially a reaction to the Mongol devastation and things that were seen as failures of the previous (Song) dynasty. Just as the Song reacted to what it perceived to have been the failures of the militarist Tang, by horribly weakening the military, so did the Ming react to the failures of the Song, by returning to a peasant focused economic and social order. The founder of the Dynasty Hongwu wrote as much in his will...that largely dictated the policy of his successors. The attempts of Yongle to go against it were met with widespread hostility from the bureaucratic elite. China never became as wealthy as it was by 1100 till around 1990, I wouldnt say this is an unimportant factor. Also several technologies were forgotten and bearly anything new was invented. Romes decline and fall also shows how barbarian invasions can stop progress in the west for centuries.

    As for Japan, it was culturally bound to China and not really able to start any scientific revolution on its own.

    As I said above, between 1250 and about 2000 China barely made a single invention, while previously it made hundreds. Had Europe been devastated by Nomads and lost half of its population by 1500, do you think that the Industrial revolution would have still occurred around 1800?

    The large disparity between eastern Europe and the west (with the east barely inventing anything till 1800) shows how much of a role barbarian neighbors play and how lucky Europe was to have a set of "just war" traditions to limit the destructive capacities of warfare between Europeans. I would say that the Mongol invasion of Russia or China caused more (%) damage, then all the wars between Europeans from 1200 to 1900 combined (including the religious wars of the 17th century.)

    I agree about devastation by Mongols, but then… Mongols didn’t raze India and Egypt. But we don’t see major difference compared to the nearby countries where Mongols did invade.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Unknown128
    Mongols did raze India in a way...as did Turks and Pushtuns before them. India was raided so often from the steppe, that it might have lost 80 million people in these raids and invasions.

    Also India has a naturally lower IQ. It is Chinas underperformance, that needs to be explained. One can see a vast difference between pre and postmongol china, booth in innovation and GDP per capita (which I think correlate strongly, no use having a vast rural subsistence population really). Still when it comes to scientific output, the less raided south of India did produce substantially more than the more raided north. One should not forget that western Europe was just about the only large part of civilized Eurasia, that was not frequently raided by barbarians.

    As for the Islamic world......One should not forget that by 1800 the population in most of the middle east was about the same as at year 1...while the population of Europe, China and even India grew strongly. Islam brought the Nomad into power there, leading to frequent subsequent nomad invasions and clan wars, which kept population down. Also Egypt did become the center of Islamic learning for a while, Cairo replacing Baghdad...but one should not forget that it was a country of a mere 4-5 million and was ruled by an extremely chaotic mamluk elite, which spent much of its free time behaving as if they were looting a conquered enemy country.

    Also the Mongols are just the strongest expression of a far more larger phenomena.

    On average civilized states wage wars in a milder and less destructive way then barbarians do. This is especially true for Europeans, when they waged war amongst themselves from the middle ages till WW2.

    Among barbarians the Turanian/Altaic steppe nomads stand out for waging war in a particularly devastating way, which is why their invasions, be it into the middle east, or Europe or India or China were recorded as being uniquely destructive. Now once said nomads convert to Islam, they become on average less destructive then in their Tengri/Pagan ancestors, but still show a marked brutality. European interstate wars on the other hand were probably more beneficial in the long term. They caused relatively little destruction, while at the same time encouraging innovation trough interstate competition.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @BlackFlag
    Where does mathematical ability fit? Does it fall under spatial or verbal? I would imagine this aspect of intelligence to be the most important one.

    Nonconformity is overrated. Scientific/technogical discoveries are driven by people obsessed with figuring out how something works. They mull over it all hours of the day. The key word is *passion.* You can also call it intelectual curiosity though at the extremes required for innovation it is intelectual obsession.
    It's probably maladaptive. Just think, what benefit did Mendel get for doing his plant experiments? Sure, some discoverers make it big but material rewards are rarely the key driver. Think Nikola Tesla. Put another way, Asians are more practical.

    The saddest thing is that being a great composer or musician is probably maladaptive, too. Some better than average musical ability is probably adaptive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BlackFlag
    I suspect that virtually everything we value is now maladaptive. Good luck to us.
    , @Not Raul
    I’d be interested in seeing a statistical analysis of evidence for and against that claim.

    Rimsky-Korsakov and his wife had seven children.

    Having relatively large families may have been typical of people with his class background, though.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @Alliumnsk
    I agree about devastation by Mongols, but then... Mongols didn't raze India and Egypt. But we don't see major difference compared to the nearby countries where Mongols did invade.

    Mongols did raze India in a way…as did Turks and Pushtuns before them. India was raided so often from the steppe, that it might have lost 80 million people in these raids and invasions.

    Also India has a naturally lower IQ. It is Chinas underperformance, that needs to be explained. One can see a vast difference between pre and postmongol china, booth in innovation and GDP per capita (which I think correlate strongly, no use having a vast rural subsistence population really). Still when it comes to scientific output, the less raided south of India did produce substantially more than the more raided north. One should not forget that western Europe was just about the only large part of civilized Eurasia, that was not frequently raided by barbarians.

    As for the Islamic world……One should not forget that by 1800 the population in most of the middle east was about the same as at year 1…while the population of Europe, China and even India grew strongly. Islam brought the Nomad into power there, leading to frequent subsequent nomad invasions and clan wars, which kept population down. Also Egypt did become the center of Islamic learning for a while, Cairo replacing Baghdad…but one should not forget that it was a country of a mere 4-5 million and was ruled by an extremely chaotic mamluk elite, which spent much of its free time behaving as if they were looting a conquered enemy country.

    Also the Mongols are just the strongest expression of a far more larger phenomena.

    On average civilized states wage wars in a milder and less destructive way then barbarians do. This is especially true for Europeans, when they waged war amongst themselves from the middle ages till WW2.

    Among barbarians the Turanian/Altaic steppe nomads stand out for waging war in a particularly devastating way, which is why their invasions, be it into the middle east, or Europe or India or China were recorded as being uniquely destructive. Now once said nomads convert to Islam, they become on average less destructive then in their Tengri/Pagan ancestors, but still show a marked brutality. European interstate wars on the other hand were probably more beneficial in the long term. They caused relatively little destruction, while at the same time encouraging innovation trough interstate competition.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. how China was not first to the Industrial Revolution must be one of the biggest puzzles of Intelligence Theory

    There’s no such thing as an ‘Industrial Revolution’, it’s a moronic Anglo meme. (Gott strafe England.)

    According to Charles Murray’s calculations, women only account for about 2% of human accomplishment across most scientific or cultural domains, and this figure hasn’t budged upwards despite the appearance of feminism and affirmative action. Women are, of course, far more conformist than men, less willing to challenge the dominant paradigms, and there is good reason to think East Asians are “tilted” in a similar direction.

    You don’t need to ‘challenge dominant paradigms’ to invent stuff. Women don’t invent for the same reason they don’t do Super Mario speedruns: both activities require a level of autism to an extreme intensity that women don’t have.

    As anyone who has studied Mandarin can confirm, literacy is MUCH simpler to acquire with alphabetic systems

    I studied Mandarin and I have a basic proficiency. I do not confirm. Reading logographic Chinese is significantly easier than reading pinyin. (Pinyin Chinese is like a phonetic English except without spaces or punctuation; i.e., a nightmare.)

    The Chinese knew of alphabetic writing systems since very ancient times and in fact used them for their non-Chinese official languages. They reason they keep using a logographic system is not stupidity or masochism. It’s simply easier to use for their language.

    Read More
    • Replies: @DFH

    Gott strafe England
     
    Based Jew memes
    , @Anon

    I studied Mandarin and I have a basic proficiency. I do not confirm. Reading logographic Chinese is significantly easier than reading pinyin. (Pinyin Chinese is like a phonetic English except without spaces or punctuation; i.e., a nightmare.)
     
    You do realize Chinese students in China use pinyin to help them learn the characters, right? It's not a perfect complete system but it's easier to acquire, which is what Karlin said.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. notanon says:

    haven’t read the comments yet so may have already been mentioned but…

    Finally, I don’t think Jaychick’s ideas about clannishness played a major role either…

    The two biggest factors that can’t be are the relative underperformance (relative to IQ!) of East Asians vs. everyone else, and women vs. men. Common factor there seems to be higher conformism.

    so the question then would be does reduced clannishness reduce conformism?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  70. notanon says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Certainly a major factor, but assuming equal IQs, an female S.D. of 13.5 vs. 15 for men (James Thompson usually uses 14), and a discovery threshold of 145, women would still account for almost a quarter of eminent figures; at a discovery threshold of 160, they would still account for ~12% of eminent figures. Whereas the actual number is just 2%. So other factors must clearly play a role.

    My pet theory is that even though female capacity to contribute to innovation has been getting progressively better throughout history - absolute conditions may be even better than for men, these days - the threshold discovery rate has also been steadily going up. The two factors have canceled each other out, resulting in zero net progress in the percentage of female eminent figures. They might even fall this century, since female access is now maxed out, whereas the problems that need to be solved will continue getting harder.

    if innovation is a combination of brains + wildness

    (where wildness = anti-conformism in your formulation)

    then females should have less wildness for “sperm is cheap, eggs are expensive” reasons

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @Bliss

    East Asians (Chinese, Koreans, Japanese) tend to have larger brains and larger visuospatial IQs than Caucasians
     
    So how come their higher visuospatial IQ does not make them better drivers?

    http://www.apa.org/monitor/apr04/cognitive.aspx

    Overall, they found a significant correlation between the cognitive indicators and driving skill. Visuospatial skills--like those that would be used to accurately position and maneuver a car or judge distances--had the highest correlation.

    It takes superior visuospatial skills to loop a basketball into a hoop, catch a long pass on the run, hit a curve ball with a baseball bat, bicycle kick a soccer ball etc. Guess which race is the best at doing all that?

    People of african ancestry also make good drivers, pilots, space shuttle commanders etc

    People of african ancestry also make good drivers

    Sure:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate#/media/File:Road_traffic_accidents_world_map_-_Death_-_WHO2012.svg

    pilots,

    Totally:

    Jet hull loss rates by region of operator (per millions departures)
    REGION 2012- 2016
    Africa 2.21
    Asia Pacific 0.48
    Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) 1.17
    Europe 0.14
    Latin America and the Caribbean 0.53
    Middle East and North Africa 0.74
    North America 0.22
    North Asia 0.00​

    space shuttle commanders

    no doubt about that:

    “Bliss” a.k.a. “the southward-pointing compass”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Anatoly Karlin

    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it’s hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it’s done. It doesn’t affect your brain.
     
    I am not saying that it affects the brain (too deeply, anyway).

    However, it seems pretty clear acquiring literacy, especially truly fluent literacy, is far, far harder with Chinese than with alphabetic languages. There is a good reason why pretty much everyone west of the Himalayas transitioned to that when literacy began to spread beyond a narrow priestly caste, which happened first in Phoenicia and then Greece.

    In alphabetic languages, you can go to school for four years and come out literate - or at least able to read most things and sign your name, if not write complex essays. With Chinese, you will forget most of the characters not relevant to your job, resulting in a thing one author calls "fish literacy." Good for doing your job as an urban fishmonger, not enough for buying educational treatises on how to do fishing more effectively (the sort of thing even fairly ordinary Englishmen were doing from the 17th century).

    So in my view, with China, it was conformism (which is bad enough for progress by itself) feeding into a specific form of cultural conservatism, namely sticking with a logographic script (which is thrice bad for progress, as it greatly constrains general literacy in pre-modern societies where writing/reading is not a ubiquitous activity), which moreover possibly has some conformism-reinforcing effects of its own (as Danial Chieh has argued, though I'm not sure I buy it 100%).

    However, it seems pretty clear acquiring literacy, especially truly fluent literacy, is far, far harder with Chinese than with alphabetic languages.

    This has nothing to do with the writing system. Literate Chinese is just a very complex and huge language in general, because they rolled in various dialects, sociolects and classical languages into one huge (mostly unified) thing.

    Imagine having to learn Spanish, Italian and Classical Latin at the same time, with the whole result called ‘Romance’.

    That’s kinda what Mandarin is like.

    Chinese kids still have to learn (and pass tests on!) their ancient classical language. Europe ditched Latin a long, long time ago.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @utu
    He used specific numbers 112 and 105-106 so I asked a specific question. Did he mean that his Jewish acquaintances (how many) seems to be smarter than his Asian acquaintances (how many)? Or did the differences in their smartness really felt like 6-7 points? How does 6-7 points feel? The reason I am asking because I think the guy is careless and at the same time he is cementing a meme which might be right or wrong.

    Actually you can kind of solve the problem exactly w/o making measurements under assumption that distribution is normal and you know its standard deviation. Let suppose your own IQ score is X and you met n random Jews who were definitively smarter than you and m random Jews who were definitively less smart than you. From values of n and m you could estimate the mean of Jewish IQ score providing that m+n is large and that the sample of Jews was truly random and proving that you can be objective when judging whether somebody is smarter than you or not.

    that you can be objective when judging whether somebody is smarter than you or not.

    I think that is the crux of the problem! In my case for example, n is always equal to 0 :)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Oh dear! That is indeed a very manly thing to say! But not because of IQ at all, it is rather an impulse, a striving to construct, to achieve, to conquer and hold. A properly formed conscience is indispensable for the 'constructive' part. Otherwise the IQ losses much of its charm, imo.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @Anatoly Karlin
    Certainly a major factor, but assuming equal IQs, an female S.D. of 13.5 vs. 15 for men (James Thompson usually uses 14), and a discovery threshold of 145, women would still account for almost a quarter of eminent figures; at a discovery threshold of 160, they would still account for ~12% of eminent figures. Whereas the actual number is just 2%. So other factors must clearly play a role.

    My pet theory is that even though female capacity to contribute to innovation has been getting progressively better throughout history - absolute conditions may be even better than for men, these days - the threshold discovery rate has also been steadily going up. The two factors have canceled each other out, resulting in zero net progress in the percentage of female eminent figures. They might even fall this century, since female access is now maxed out, whereas the problems that need to be solved will continue getting harder.

    The drawing of the homunculus with the elephant-shaped brain is very spooky!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @Bliss

    East Asians (Chinese, Koreans, Japanese) tend to have larger brains and larger visuospatial IQs than Caucasians
     
    So how come their higher visuospatial IQ does not make them better drivers?

    http://www.apa.org/monitor/apr04/cognitive.aspx

    Overall, they found a significant correlation between the cognitive indicators and driving skill. Visuospatial skills--like those that would be used to accurately position and maneuver a car or judge distances--had the highest correlation.

    It takes superior visuospatial skills to loop a basketball into a hoop, catch a long pass on the run, hit a curve ball with a baseball bat, bicycle kick a soccer ball etc. Guess which race is the best at doing all that?

    People of african ancestry also make good drivers, pilots, space shuttle commanders etc

    So how come their higher visuospatial IQ does not make them better drivers?

    That’s because its an incorrect heuristic.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration crash fatality rates for the African American populations are 12.31 deaths per 100,000 people and its pretty similar with other races(except for Native Americans, who have insanely high driving fatality rates). For Asians, the fatality rate was only 4 per 100k. That could be attributed to reduced alcoholism, however, in just crash numbers, Australia’s University of Sydney found in 2010 that Asians are involved in only half as many automotive accidents, and a Canadian study replicated this in 2011.

    The reason why this heuristic exists, nonetheless, is because Asians(especially in Asia) do not seem to acknowledge traffic rules often enough, which can be incredibly annoying and makes driving in Asian countries extremely unpleasant. Niceties such as communicating with the other driver, or even signaling are often just not done; the fact that it doesn’t result in more accidents actually means that such behavior will keep continuing. But all of the spatial awareness in the world won’t help your fellow drivers if you don’t think the rules apply to you, or more specifically, just don’t care about them.

    At any rate, the WHO rundown of the most dangerous countries to be on the road has only one vaguely East Asian country, Thailand, and several African states.

    https://www.therichest.com/rich-list/poorest-list/10-countries-with-the-worst-drivers-in-the-world/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    the WHO rundown of the most dangerous countries to be on the road has only one vaguely East Asian country, Thailand, and several African states.
     
    90% of all fatalities on the road are in low to middle income countries. Chaotic conditions, bad roads, few lights and crosswalks, over crowded vehicles, lack of ambulances and hospitals, untrained drivers etc skew the numbers. Better to compare developed countries:

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/korea_irtad-2015-26-en#page4

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/australia_irtad-2015-7-en#page4

    In Australia deaths per billion km in 2000 was 9.1, in South Korea it was 49.5. South Korea must have taken some safety measures, for deaths in 2013 went down to 17.2, but that was still 3.4 times the deaths (5) in Australia that year.

    For the year 2013 here is how it looked for East Asian vs West European countries in deaths per billion km:

    S. Korea—>17.2
    Japan ——>6.9

    Germany->4.6
    Norway—->4.3
    UK————>3.5
    Sweden—-> 3.4

    South Korea has 5 times and Japan 2 times the death rate of UK and Sweden. Maybe there is some truth in the stereotype after all?

    Another comparison of driving IQ is to look at the very best drivers: the race car drivers. Formula One racing is the gold standard here. The field is dominated by Europeans but the very best driver is an Afro-Brit, Lewis Hamilton. No East Asians to be found at this level, even though F1 racing is popular in Japan, China and Singapore (they all host a Grand Prix).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Michael Hart’s book Understanding Human History is good entertainment and just-so stories, not good if you’re trying to actually learn about human history.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  77. songbird says:
    @utu

    Based on acquaintances, I can easily believe 112 for Jews, 105-106 for NE Asians, but I can’t believe 112 for US Indians
     
    Did you test your acquaintances or did they tell you their scores? Does "I can easily believe" mean you are credulous? Or you are not really thoughtful when expressing yourself?

    Does “I can easily believe” mean you are credulous? Or you are not really thoughtful when expressing yourself?

    Now, now… “I can easily believe” is an expression, just as is “I find it hard to believe.” Maybe, it is as others have inferred and you aren’t a native English speaker?

    Let me put it this way, so it is more understandable for you: I did not live in a Jewish neighborhood (though probably a more Jewish part of the country). The nearest synagogue I knew of was two towns over, but many of my smarter than average classmates were Jews, based on what classes they were in: honors and advanced placement, based on their SAT scores, and what colleges they went to: Harvard, John-Hopkins, etc. Who their fathers were: doctors, a concert player, etc.

    The smartest guy I ever knew was probably Chinese. He drew a complicated phase diagram from memory. I once heard his intelligence remarked on, by someone I had no reason to suspect even knew him – I recognized who he was talking about immediately, even though I did not myself know him very well either.

    The only out and out dumb East Asian I ever knew had Down Syndrome. In contrast, one of the few Indians I knew as a boy was a complete dumb-ass. I knew another one who was about average, but a pothead. I did not know any obviously smart ones in college. I am sure there were some, but I did not know them.

    Meanwhile, I have repeatedly been struck by how stupid many of the blacks I’ve known seem to be. Now, none of this is scientific or statistical, but Asians and Ashenazis seem to punch above their weight, while the American dot-Indians I’ve known seem at best to have the intelligence of whites. Maybe, they don’t. Maybe, it is statistically higher, and/or maybe the mean has risen, as new ones have come ashore.

    Could the official Ashkenazi IQ estimate be off? Higher than it actually is? Quite possibly. The true average seems higher than the white average though. Maybe, there are even subgroups of whites that are the same, but whites aren’t as tribalistic, so it is harder to know when someone is an Episcopalian than a Jew.

    BTW, contra Ron Unz and I believe also you, two of the stupidest people I ever knew were Hispanic. They had AIDS that they had gotten from sharing needles, and decided to have a baby, I was literally gawking at how stupid they were, and the dysgenics of it all, so that my teacher noticed, probably misinterpreted it, and smiled at me, probably thinking I was impressed with the technology that gave the baby a good chance of being born HIV-free. Now, of course that is incident, but I never knew a smart Hispanic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    You said " I can easily believe 112 for Jews, 105-106 for NE Asians." And you know that 112 is larger than 106, right? And your experience of Asians and Jews does not lend support to your "easy belief" that Jews are smarter than Asians. Nonetheless, you exactly stated that "based on acquaintances, I can easily believe [Jews are smarter than Asians]."

    And yes, English is not my native language but I do not think it is the issue of my understanding English but it is about you being careless/sloppy in expressing some kind of thought. Actually what was your thought?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Unknown128
    I think that the great variability between male and female IQ is also a very important factor. On the very high IQ level, there are far fewer women than men.

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed). Eastern Europe on the other hand was regularly devastated by warlike tribes from the steppe, who’s ways of war were infinitely more devastating then thus of western European states. Eastern Europe did not exactly develop much, before the Nomad problem wasn’t finally handled in the late 18th century (when the Crimean horde was conquered by Russia), after which the east started to catch up with the west.

    We just don’t know how a Song China would have developed, had the Jurchen and Mongols not destroyed it. Europe took over 600 years to recover from the fall of Rome after all. And if anything the Mongols were far more brutal and devastating then any of the tribes, that brought down the Roman Empire. The Manchu conquest also surpassed the religious wars of Europe by far in brutality and devastation.

    Meanwhile, the Malthusian crisis of western Europe, like the one that ended in the black death in the 14th and in the religious wars of the 17th, was not accompanied by barbarian invasions, so while population did decline, material wealth and social order did remain far more preserved, for instance opening the way for the early capitalist revolution of the post black death era.

    No matter what Pommeranz says....post Song china always had a very small part of its population living in cities. See K Dengs work on "Agrocracy" for a detailed explanation. The Chinese social and political system was developed in a way that encouraged population flow from cities into the countryside, where of course people were generally less intellectually productive. The comercial classes were also far less influential in China then in the most productive areas of western Europe (16th century Northern Italy, 17th century Netherlands and 18th century England). By 1600 around 8% of western Europeans were living in cities with over 10 000 inhabitants, vs only 4% in CHina (the numbers are not much different over the regions of China, while Western Europe had several areas of high urban concentration). By 1800 the highest rate of urbanisation in any province of China was 5,6%, while in Western Europe it was 30%.

    I would also say that the Hajnal Line and the institutions it encouraged, does play a role in economic development and might have had an impact on western European IQ.

    Sorry for my bad English.

    “I think that the great variability between male and female IQ is also a very important factor”

    It’s built into the test.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @Polish Perspective

    There isn’t near as much to explain about the Middle East and India. They are simply less intelligent – significantly so – than the Europeans or East Asians.
     
    Is there a credible estimate of Indian IQ? I am not convinced by Lynn & Vanhanen's low-80s estimate. You have mentioned high parasitic load and malnourishment as potential factors holding the subcontinent in general back. Malnourishment in India is higher than even the average Sub-Saharan African country.

    You go on to state that you view the g-loaded PISA tests to be better guides, but India notoriously underperformed the (only) time they participated, probably for the same reason(s). Speaking of Jason Richwine, Steve Sailer on his twitter mentioned a few days ago, in response to a direct question on this very topic from an Indian, that the mean IQ of 2nd-gen Indian-Americans is something around 112 IQ, so quite close to mean Ashkenazi IQ. This would imply that 'regression to the mean' is quite high, and as such would throw cold water on the idea that the average Indian IQ is low on a genetic basis.

    Of course, as most people know, India has many subpopulations and many castes have extremely high endogamy, which makes determining Indian IQ so difficult, especially as most immigrants to the US are high caste(implied as Brahmin). That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins. Then again, some Indians on /pol/ have thrown cold water on this Brahmin = high caste theory.

    https://i.imgur.com/a2Uv6yM.png

    https://i.imgur.com/ViCWhFT.png

    I say this in the context of recman1's comments on UK Indians, and his focus on Brahmin's as high caste, which, if the-above comments is anything to go by, is misleading since 'high caste' is not synonymous with Brahmin in a strict socio-economic sense (but more so in a cultural sense).

    Verbal skills are much more important for economic productivity than recognizing patterns in weird shapes, ergo GDP per capita and development levels showing the highest levels of correlation precisely with verbal IQ.
     

    This is interesting, and I've heard this before. Additionally, I do not remember which author - perhaps it was Murray - who once wrote that mathematical IQ is actually better correlated with verbal IQ than the other way around. In other words, someone with a verbal IQ of 130 will have a higher mathematical IQ on average than someone with a mathematical IQ of 130 will have a verbal IQ. I do not know if this is true, do you know something about this? It goes against the stereotype of "clever humanist but worthless on math", which is why I was skeptical when I read it. It'd be interesting if true.

    My guess is that this underperformance can be ascribed to greater East Asian conformism, relative to the other major races of man (Kura et al., 2015).
     
    Isn't this an old stereotype(or even a slur) repackaged in a new exterior? I've gone back and read some articles from ~2005 recently and it is astonishing how dismissive many Western media outlets were of the Chinese. Sure, they write, the Chinese are growing fast but [insert litany of thinly-veiled dismissive insults about 'robotic' Asians who lack innovation]. Yet as you yourself have pointed out, the Chinese have risen very fast at cutting-edge research in the academies. Their AI efforts are already world-class. This does not disprove their historical lag, but it should perhaps caution us on taking an essentialist perspective by tagging them as perpetually 'incurious'. If that was the case, you'd expect it to remain a constant constraint and that doesn't appear to be true, or at least far less than many thought 10-15 years ago. Thoughts?

    Also, there was plenty of Chinese innovation pre-1500 AD and one could argue that if you focus from 0 AD to 1500 AD, it is not clear that Europeans did better. We innovated in a shorter burst and as technological output accelerated, it was more tightly packed in a shorter timespan, though I will concede that the last 500 years were vastly more important than anything than came before it put together.

    However, as Kurzweil has noted, human innovation has sped up consistently over the last 10 000 years. The introduction of each technology has been shorter and shorter, which perhaps shows to a generalised pattern that makes the industrial revolution less of a unique European phenomena in the sense that "without us, it would never have happened" and more a logical end-conclusion of ever-faster innovation over the course of human history. Perhaps we were simply doing better at this particular juncture, which is why it was us, but had it begun in 1300 AD, maybe I would have written this in Mandarin.


    P.S. For what it's worth, there are questions over whether we measure productivity adequately today. Some, like prof Diane Coyle, argue that we are underestimating it and research institutions like the Conference Board has taken in her research and the result of those models is that East Asian GDPpc is higher than it is today due to higher productivity.

    It is particularly technological productivity that is undermeasured, and that would remove a lot of this 'underperformance'. SK has lower productivity than Spain according to the OECD, which is somewhat implausible.

    PISA are scholastic achievement tests; not tests of “intelligence” (whatever that is).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @utu
    He used specific numbers 112 and 105-106 so I asked a specific question. Did he mean that his Jewish acquaintances (how many) seems to be smarter than his Asian acquaintances (how many)? Or did the differences in their smartness really felt like 6-7 points? How does 6-7 points feel? The reason I am asking because I think the guy is careless and at the same time he is cementing a meme which might be right or wrong.

    Actually you can kind of solve the problem exactly w/o making measurements under assumption that distribution is normal and you know its standard deviation. Let suppose your own IQ score is X and you met n random Jews who were definitively smarter than you and m random Jews who were definitively less smart than you. From values of n and m you could estimate the mean of Jewish IQ score providing that m+n is large and that the sample of Jews was truly random and proving that you can be objective when judging whether somebody is smarter than you or not.

    “How does 6-7 points feel?”

    What does 6-7 points mean in terms of brain states?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @utu

    Karlin's Theory of Almost Everything
     

    Almost everything can be explained by IQ, and differential rates in the appearance of intensive agriculture, urbanization, and literacy. The two biggest factors that can’t be are the relative underperformance (relative to IQ!) of East Asians vs. everyone else, and women vs. men.
     
    Since women and East Asians constitute about 60% of the world population the almost everything is under 40%. Karlin's theory of almost everything is not even 50% theory.

    The slight of hand was to use PISA instead of IQ which suppose to correlated better with GDP than IQ, right? So with IQ the 'almost' gets even smaller than 40%.

    “Almost everything can be explained by IQ”

    If you craft just-so stories sure “Almost everything can be explained by IQ”, but if no novel predictions are made than who cares that “Almost everything can be explained by IQ”, since no novel predictions are made to possibly falsify the “IQ hypothesis”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Just-so stories of evolution are unfalsifiable. This is the ultimate strength of the theory of evolution. Even Karl Popper had doubts whether the theory of evolution was a theory at all beyond being a tautology that must be true ex definitione and thus can't be falsified. But the theory of evolution can be falsified but not on the level of the just-so stories that are being commonly told. The stories are destined to be true. That's why that they so much fun telling them because making utterance that are always true is very empowering. The truth is the ultimate rhetorical device.

    The IQism however is entirely different matter. Its popularity and success hinges on sneaky reifications that blind people to notice serious epistemological issues.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. BlackFlag says:
    @reiner Tor
    The saddest thing is that being a great composer or musician is probably maladaptive, too. Some better than average musical ability is probably adaptive.

    I suspect that virtually everything we value is now maladaptive. Good luck to us.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Rat Utopia!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @Spandrell
    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it's hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it's done. It doesn't affect your brain.

    Japan has had phonetic writing forever now. Koreans have had phonetic writing for a while. Now it's the only one they got. Didn't make them smarter or more innovative.

    Asians are just like that. Practical, authoritarian people.

    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it’s hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it’s done. It doesn’t affect your brain.

    But there is evidence that it does, or something in the culture does if not the language, affecting perception which is a pretty significant part of how you use your brain.

    This is the classic Nisbettian work based on the Morris & Peng studies on Asian versus European perceptions of the world which found that Asians generally saw the world as contextual and holistic rather than specific and detailed(the latter which would be better for scientific association). What’s less known though is that in a followup study, however, Hong Kong participants(who had grown up in British schools and spoke English) could be primed to think in “Western” ways simply by showing them images of Western culture(Mickey Mouse, cowboys, etc). Showing them pictures indicative of Chinese culture reinforced their “Eastern” thinking. Showing them neutral pictures kept results in the middle.

    Another study by Ara Norenzayan in 1999 looked to see if the Japanese participants could make the correct “rule-making” associations for criteria judgment(something likely relevant for science), and found that Japanese participants made twice as many errors as European tested. However. Asian Americans did not make more errors, so it seems unlikely to be purely genetic unless there’s some self-selection for immigration that involves rule-making associations.

    Incidentally, Mr. Karlin, there is a study which supports the idea of East Asians being more similar to women in terms of group behavior/conformity. Japanese participants sought to escape from unpleasant situations by seeking to be in a group, similar to American women in the study. American men, on the other hand, sought to escape unpleasant situations alone. No objective reason was provided for either to be more likely.

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Spandrell
    Priming, and most psychology is fake science. Don't believe any of it.

    At any rate none of it has anything to do with the language and much less with the script.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @BlackFlag
    I suspect that virtually everything we value is now maladaptive. Good luck to us.

    Rat Utopia!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. BlackFlag says:
    @Spandrell
    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it's hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it's done. It doesn't affect your brain.

    Japan has had phonetic writing forever now. Koreans have had phonetic writing for a while. Now it's the only one they got. Didn't make them smarter or more innovative.

    Asians are just like that. Practical, authoritarian people.

    Do blogs/forums where people spend countless hours of their lives discussing abstruse topics that give them no material benefit exist in East Asian countries?

    I don’t get how AK goes from deciding it’s not IQ to thinking it must be conformity. Conformity explains differentials in number of rebellious teens. Intellectual obsession explains differentials in innovation.

    It’s a small percentage of innovations that require upending a tabboo. Euclid’s geometry didn’t. Neither did coming up with the ideal gas law.

    Even if some do, I doubt being a non-conformist is a significant factor. Did Galileo develop his idea about the sun and the earth cause he was a rebel? Doubt it. After all, only one of his many innovations challenged a taboo. Intellectual obsession explains all of them.

    Let’s look at one of the most innovative people of the 20th century – Jon Von Neumann. There are lots of stories about how smart he was. What else did he have? Edward Teller thought it was this: “For most people thinking is painful. Jonny loves to think; in fact, it’s the only thing he enjoys doing.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Conformity can affect scientific production in many ways. I had a friend who was studying an brain/machine emulation in Beijing University, and was doing well on it until his family pressured him to get a "real job" instead of an academic job that paid nothing. He eventually gave in.

    He's still smart and he's still very capable, but now he's just yet another software design architect crunching for a big company rather than advancing the frontiers of human knowledge.
    , @DFH

    Do blogs/forums where people spend countless hours of their lives discussing abstruse topics that give them no material benefit exist in East Asian countries?
     
    The Japanese invented imageboards
    , @Spandrell
    Japan does not have that. All online activity is either 2chan, where people go to shitpost, and Twitter, which is mostly networking.

    China also does not have a blog culture. It does have Zhihu, a very popular Quora clone where very smart people discuss abstruse topics anonymously for no observable benefit besides feeling smart, so yeah, it's somewhat close to this. There's also Douban which is a review site for movies and books and people discuss stuff there too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @Philip Owen
    Someone unprepared to invest to promote mangoes is never going to find out. I will guess yes. They are quite bland. Mango pulp can be sold as a food additive but quality ... I don't want to spend a year on the project without pay and be let down by failure to meet food standards.

    Engineered parts for cars have the same problems.

    Someone unprepared to invest to promote mangoes is never going to find out. I will guess yes.

    Someone should do a study on chupatz. To have the audacity to get people – even highly experienced, credentialed, etc – to work for free for you for the opportunity to help you make money is a pretty classic example of that. Its interesting how it can often work, by framed in the right way, and by aiming at the right people.

    I suspect its one example of behavior that’s probably individually beneficially, but societially negative especially as it becomes adaptive to have the skills needed to convince others to do so. At some point, it basically is a form of legal business in hoodwinking.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon

    To have the audacity to get people – even highly experienced, credentialed, etc – to work for free for you for the opportunity to help you make money is a pretty classic example of that. Its interesting how it can often work, by framed in the right way, and by aiming at the right people.
     
    the central banking mafia being the perfect example: "hey guys let's you make us rich by letting us legally counterfeit your currency!"

    chutzpah is mostly just sociopathy - the big lie works cos

    1) sociopaths enjoy big lies - they get a kick out of fooling people, the bigger the better

    2) normal people are only comfortable telling small lies

    3) normal people assume everyone else thinks like them i.e. mostly honest people think others are mostly honest

    -> normal people find it hard to believe big lies are possible
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. neutral says:

    Check this out:

    https://www.rt.com/news/431692-latvia-racist-political-ad/

    Good to see that not everyone in Latvia is a complete cuck or neoliberal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  88. @BlackFlag
    Do blogs/forums where people spend countless hours of their lives discussing abstruse topics that give them no material benefit exist in East Asian countries?

    I don't get how AK goes from deciding it's not IQ to thinking it must be conformity. Conformity explains differentials in number of rebellious teens. Intellectual obsession explains differentials in innovation.

    It's a small percentage of innovations that require upending a tabboo. Euclid's geometry didn't. Neither did coming up with the ideal gas law.

    Even if some do, I doubt being a non-conformist is a significant factor. Did Galileo develop his idea about the sun and the earth cause he was a rebel? Doubt it. After all, only one of his many innovations challenged a taboo. Intellectual obsession explains all of them.

    Let's look at one of the most innovative people of the 20th century - Jon Von Neumann. There are lots of stories about how smart he was. What else did he have? Edward Teller thought it was this: "For most people thinking is painful. Jonny loves to think; in fact, it's the only thing he enjoys doing."

    Conformity can affect scientific production in many ways. I had a friend who was studying an brain/machine emulation in Beijing University, and was doing well on it until his family pressured him to get a “real job” instead of an academic job that paid nothing. He eventually gave in.

    He’s still smart and he’s still very capable, but now he’s just yet another software design architect crunching for a big company rather than advancing the frontiers of human knowledge.

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @BlackFlag
    Fair enough, I didn't think of that type of conformity.
    Innovation results from:
    1) Challenging taboo.
    2) Innovator disregarding disapproval from relatives and society by pursuing an impractical project.

    Still seems weak. Innovation normally occurs in line with a good career or a harmless pastime. Pretty sure Darwin was advancing his career by sailing on the Beagle. Did Zheng He have a naturalist? If so, what was he doing? If not, why didn't the Mandarins put one on his boat?

    There aren't that many of these great innovations that Murray lists. Someone with intellectual curiosity could go through them and see if non-conformity was a key requirement.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. Anon[298] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson


    Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness.
     
    This is another odd thing about Indians. I've never met more insular people. Civilizationally, they're completely self-absorbed. They have less curiosity about other cultures, religions, and races than any other group of (intelligent) people I've ever encountered.

    In fact if I understand their religions correctly, there was even some sort of taboo about venturing outside of India itself. The Indian Ocean was something you weren't supposed to venture out into.

    You can see this in their diaspora as well. Racially speaking they're a lot more similar to whites than Northeast Asians. But Northeast Asians in white countries adopt white names (even when simply travelling on business), date whites, don't wear traditional costumes, happily enjoy white foods, etc.

    In fact if I understand their religions correctly, there was even some sort of taboo about venturing outside of India itself. The Indian Ocean was something you weren’t supposed to venture out into.

    That was for Brahmins; the result was loss-of-caste. I imagine that was probably some sort of power play on some group’s behalf five hundred years or so ago.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @Abelard Lindsey
    This is a funny comment. Its down right hilarious! As someone who lived for a decade in the East Asian countries, I can tell you that they are the most materialistic people on the planet, way more than most Americans. You see, I don't give a rat's ass what people believe as long as they don't keep me from doing what I want with my own life.

    You know, people use the word "spritual" a lot and I still have no idea WTF they mean by it. The only thing I can come up with is that "spritual" is just a state of mind, nothing more.

    You know, there is the concept that the human personality is not an integrated whole, but rather a system of subselves. Eric Berne was the first to talk about this with his theory of "ego states". Later, there are others to come up with thier own variants of this concept. Julian Jaynes bicameral mind theory is a specific variant of this concept. By his theory, reliigious belief in modern humans is a vestigial remnent of the bicameral mind. I see no reason to reject this explanation out of hand.

    By his theory, reliigious belief in modern humans is a vestigial remnent of the bicameral mind.

    I’m sympathetic to some materialistic explanations for religious belief, but the notion that all humans were once all schizophrenic and we “grew sane” seems as likely as fairies in the backyard. Pop psychological history really does deserve to be together with Freud: entertaining fictions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abelard Lindsey
    Really?

    Because I have yet to run across an explanation for the origin of religion, especially the Abrahamic ones, that comes even close to being as good as Julien Jaynes' theory. For one, his theory explains 100% perfectly what is called "the Fall" in Christianity. No other theory that I know of even comes close on this one.

    The bicameral mind theory is a specific version of the more general concept of the human personality being a system of subselves. Eric Berne has his version of such with his concept of "Ego States", which he describes in "Transactional Analysis", which is still the best psychology book available.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. BlackFlag says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    Conformity can affect scientific production in many ways. I had a friend who was studying an brain/machine emulation in Beijing University, and was doing well on it until his family pressured him to get a "real job" instead of an academic job that paid nothing. He eventually gave in.

    He's still smart and he's still very capable, but now he's just yet another software design architect crunching for a big company rather than advancing the frontiers of human knowledge.

    Fair enough, I didn’t think of that type of conformity.
    Innovation results from:
    1) Challenging taboo.
    2) Innovator disregarding disapproval from relatives and society by pursuing an impractical project.

    Still seems weak. Innovation normally occurs in line with a good career or a harmless pastime. Pretty sure Darwin was advancing his career by sailing on the Beagle. Did Zheng He have a naturalist? If so, what was he doing? If not, why didn’t the Mandarins put one on his boat?

    There aren’t that many of these great innovations that Murray lists. Someone with intellectual curiosity could go through them and see if non-conformity was a key requirement.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Charles Darwin, a religious man, struggled for many years of his life with the theory of evolution because he was aware of what it might mean for the theistic creation of life. A more conformist Darwin might just decide that its not worth it, or water down his findings significantly to fit the zeitgeist of the time. And as expected, Darwin did get condemned by many religious authorities during his lifetime.
    , @notanon

    2) Innovator disregarding disapproval from relatives and society by pursuing an impractical project.
     
    I think that's a good (and common) hurdle in more clannish societies but more widely all innovation comes about as a conflict with the current way of doing things as "conservative" is the safe option: your ancestors survived by doing things this way so don't change it.

    Still seems weak. Innovation normally occurs in line with a good career or a harmless pastime. Pretty sure Darwin was advancing his career by sailing on the Beagle.
     
    "normally" - in the West since the industrial revolution - sure but other times and places proto science was witchcraft.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @BlackFlag
    Fair enough, I didn't think of that type of conformity.
    Innovation results from:
    1) Challenging taboo.
    2) Innovator disregarding disapproval from relatives and society by pursuing an impractical project.

    Still seems weak. Innovation normally occurs in line with a good career or a harmless pastime. Pretty sure Darwin was advancing his career by sailing on the Beagle. Did Zheng He have a naturalist? If so, what was he doing? If not, why didn't the Mandarins put one on his boat?

    There aren't that many of these great innovations that Murray lists. Someone with intellectual curiosity could go through them and see if non-conformity was a key requirement.

    Charles Darwin, a religious man, struggled for many years of his life with the theory of evolution because he was aware of what it might mean for the theistic creation of life. A more conformist Darwin might just decide that its not worth it, or water down his findings significantly to fit the zeitgeist of the time. And as expected, Darwin did get condemned by many religious authorities during his lifetime.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028393201000677

    Random, but possibly connected.

    The effect of testosterone (T) on sexual function in men is well established. However, less is known about its effects on cognitive function. The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between T levels and sex-typed cognitive abilities in both eugonadal and hypogonadal men…These results offer support to the notion that increased T has a differential effect on cognitive function, inhibiting spatial abilities while improving verbal fluency in eugonadal men.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Toronto Russian

    These results offer support to the notion that increased T has a differential effect on cognitive function, inhibiting spatial abilities while improving verbal fluency in eugonadal men.
     
    The "Chad" is canonically a horrible driver.
    https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/265/115/cc7.png
    , @Zylonet
    Testosterone is a key part of this equation. I am sure of it based on personal experience. By age 26 I was a trusted adviser to one of the wealthiest men in the nation. My creative intelligence for systematizing business strategies was exceedingly rare. Late in my 20s I suffered an injury to a testicle and my life was instantly transformed. The dynamism that once made me mock everyone for being so boring, so compliant and so lacking in passion was gone, as was my creativity. It has been 15 years and even though I am on TRT, and can manipulate my t-levels as I so desire, it has been more than three years since I had one day where I felt like I did everyday between about ages 15-29. In my readings, it appears that LH may be primary driver of libido; this from a study on trannies I found on pubmed. Since gonadal weight seems to follow the normal Asian-White-African spectrum, we can assume that the rare white guy will be most likely to peak across the various success factors be they intelligence, openness, disagreeableness, dynamism (aka libido/testosterone) and whatever else may matter. Depending on the subject matter, a man need not be in the highest percentiles to reap a compounding effect leading to dynamic results. Anyone who is paying attention will instantly realize the legitimacy of the brains vs brawn divide, so if you give a very smart man, some degree of openness, some degree of disagreeableness and some degree of perversion then the sky is the limit. Jews are one such people. People who disregard this are missing something that is real; I have lived it. As I came to terms with it, I remember thinking, "this is what it must be like to be average." Removing the perversion/lust just makes the system slow down. There is no longer sex in the thought. This is great for daily work, but it's not the stuff dreams are made of.

    I believe I was one of the first to remark on this "testicular role" as some type of weird driver of dynamic intellect, but I also recall Jason Malloy making similar observations. Black people have easily the greatest IDGAF attitude and also an unmatched dynamic creativity. There are no JB Smooves in China or Europe. I am sure you have to have a strong desire to screw non-stop in order to be this funny:
    https://youtu.be/8GzAmLozd6Y
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @utu

    It takes superior visuospatial skills to [...] catch a long pass on the run [...]. Guess which race is the best at doing all that?
     
    Dogs.

    German Shepherds are considered the most intelligent of dogs based on ability to learn commands. I wonder what is their cranial capacity versus other dogs? Are toy dogs mentally more impaired in some way?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Toronto Russian
    Dog owners agree that one of the smartest breeds is papillon, a toy breed.
    https://youtu.be/uY4-J-5C-3E
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. DFH says:
    @anonymous coward

    how China was not first to the Industrial Revolution must be one of the biggest puzzles of Intelligence Theory
     
    There's no such thing as an 'Industrial Revolution', it's a moronic Anglo meme. (Gott strafe England.)

    According to Charles Murray’s calculations, women only account for about 2% of human accomplishment across most scientific or cultural domains, and this figure hasn’t budged upwards despite the appearance of feminism and affirmative action. Women are, of course, far more conformist than men, less willing to challenge the dominant paradigms, and there is good reason to think East Asians are “tilted” in a similar direction.
     
    You don't need to 'challenge dominant paradigms' to invent stuff. Women don't invent for the same reason they don't do Super Mario speedruns: both activities require a level of autism to an extreme intensity that women don't have.

    As anyone who has studied Mandarin can confirm, literacy is MUCH simpler to acquire with alphabetic systems
     
    I studied Mandarin and I have a basic proficiency. I do not confirm. Reading logographic Chinese is significantly easier than reading pinyin. (Pinyin Chinese is like a phonetic English except without spaces or punctuation; i.e., a nightmare.)

    The Chinese knew of alphabetic writing systems since very ancient times and in fact used them for their non-Chinese official languages. They reason they keep using a logographic system is not stupidity or masochism. It's simply easier to use for their language.

    Gott strafe England

    Based Jew memes

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. DFH says:
    @BlackFlag
    Do blogs/forums where people spend countless hours of their lives discussing abstruse topics that give them no material benefit exist in East Asian countries?

    I don't get how AK goes from deciding it's not IQ to thinking it must be conformity. Conformity explains differentials in number of rebellious teens. Intellectual obsession explains differentials in innovation.

    It's a small percentage of innovations that require upending a tabboo. Euclid's geometry didn't. Neither did coming up with the ideal gas law.

    Even if some do, I doubt being a non-conformist is a significant factor. Did Galileo develop his idea about the sun and the earth cause he was a rebel? Doubt it. After all, only one of his many innovations challenged a taboo. Intellectual obsession explains all of them.

    Let's look at one of the most innovative people of the 20th century - Jon Von Neumann. There are lots of stories about how smart he was. What else did he have? Edward Teller thought it was this: "For most people thinking is painful. Jonny loves to think; in fact, it's the only thing he enjoys doing."

    Do blogs/forums where people spend countless hours of their lives discussing abstruse topics that give them no material benefit exist in East Asian countries?

    The Japanese invented imageboards

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Anon[298] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous coward

    how China was not first to the Industrial Revolution must be one of the biggest puzzles of Intelligence Theory
     
    There's no such thing as an 'Industrial Revolution', it's a moronic Anglo meme. (Gott strafe England.)

    According to Charles Murray’s calculations, women only account for about 2% of human accomplishment across most scientific or cultural domains, and this figure hasn’t budged upwards despite the appearance of feminism and affirmative action. Women are, of course, far more conformist than men, less willing to challenge the dominant paradigms, and there is good reason to think East Asians are “tilted” in a similar direction.
     
    You don't need to 'challenge dominant paradigms' to invent stuff. Women don't invent for the same reason they don't do Super Mario speedruns: both activities require a level of autism to an extreme intensity that women don't have.

    As anyone who has studied Mandarin can confirm, literacy is MUCH simpler to acquire with alphabetic systems
     
    I studied Mandarin and I have a basic proficiency. I do not confirm. Reading logographic Chinese is significantly easier than reading pinyin. (Pinyin Chinese is like a phonetic English except without spaces or punctuation; i.e., a nightmare.)

    The Chinese knew of alphabetic writing systems since very ancient times and in fact used them for their non-Chinese official languages. They reason they keep using a logographic system is not stupidity or masochism. It's simply easier to use for their language.

    I studied Mandarin and I have a basic proficiency. I do not confirm. Reading logographic Chinese is significantly easier than reading pinyin. (Pinyin Chinese is like a phonetic English except without spaces or punctuation; i.e., a nightmare.)

    You do realize Chinese students in China use pinyin to help them learn the characters, right? It’s not a perfect complete system but it’s easier to acquire, which is what Karlin said.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    You do realize Chinese students in China use pinyin to help them learn the characters, right?
     
    Of course I do. How do you think I learn the characters myself?

    It’s not a perfect complete system but it’s easier to acquire, which is what Karlin said.
     
    Read my post again and don't be stupid this time around.

    Literacy (i.e., the ability to read and understand complex texts) is much harder in pinyin than in characters. Recognizing and sounding out words is maybe like 5% of being literate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Inuit and Yakuts have some of the biggest brains on the planet … their visuospatial abilities are legendary

    All that fish (omega-3 etc)? I get a vague impression that fish-eating people (Scandinavians, Japanese) always seem to be better at visual design.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  99. Dmitry says:

    This may be offtopip or little relevant – an interesting article this week in Nature’s website, about various problems in the research culture in South Korea.

    South Korean science needs restructuring

    Something is wrong with the South Korean R&D system, and everyone knows it. The country invests a lot but gets less and less back. Scientists feel disenfranchised by the government’s opaque system for funding. The public is not seeing solutions to pressing problems, such as air pollution. Even government ministers and economists complain that all those highly cited papers are not generating enough new technologies.

    Full article:

    https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05508-z

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    The South Koreans piggybacked their way into display and other technologies on the back of Russian scientists and engineers brought to Korea on short term contracts. At the time they thought this was cheaper than funding whole teams in Russia. Just cherry pick to top talent. It did't work sustainably. The eco system to support them wasn't there. It's not just about having the best equipment. It would have been better to hire the whole team in Russia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. AaronB says:
    @Abelard Lindsey
    This is a funny comment. Its down right hilarious! As someone who lived for a decade in the East Asian countries, I can tell you that they are the most materialistic people on the planet, way more than most Americans. You see, I don't give a rat's ass what people believe as long as they don't keep me from doing what I want with my own life.

    You know, people use the word "spritual" a lot and I still have no idea WTF they mean by it. The only thing I can come up with is that "spritual" is just a state of mind, nothing more.

    You know, there is the concept that the human personality is not an integrated whole, but rather a system of subselves. Eric Berne was the first to talk about this with his theory of "ego states". Later, there are others to come up with thier own variants of this concept. Julian Jaynes bicameral mind theory is a specific variant of this concept. By his theory, reliigious belief in modern humans is a vestigial remnent of the bicameral mind. I see no reason to reject this explanation out of hand.

    Its a different kind of materialism.

    Western materialism is ‘transcendental’ while Asian materialism is normal human interest in acquiring stuff.

    The West seeks salvation in developing the material world – its literally religious. So we pour all our energy and willpower into it. The most important thing to us is to come up with some new way to control or affect the physical world – because we literally expect salvation from it. See transhumanism.

    Asians have the ordinary materialism, they just like stuff – sometimes a bit too much, u admit, esp lately :)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Not Raul says:
    @reiner Tor
    The saddest thing is that being a great composer or musician is probably maladaptive, too. Some better than average musical ability is probably adaptive.

    I’d be interested in seeing a statistical analysis of evidence for and against that claim.

    Rimsky-Korsakov and his wife had seven children.

    Having relatively large families may have been typical of people with his class background, though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Bach had twenty children. But then I think very few descendants down the line. Most of the greatest composers left few or no descendants. Mozart left no descendants (both of his children surviving to adulthood were childless). Beethoven had no children. Schubert, Bruckner, Brahms: no children. Haydn had just one child. (I don’t know if he has descendants today, but I think unlikely.) Mahler had one surviving daughter, who had maybe two children. Wagner had three children (which was probably not more than average at the time), and so still has a number of descendants.

    That’s not much, on average. Maybe it’s not a representative sample, though I’d wager it already contains the very best.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Spandrell says: • Website
    @Daniel Chieh

    Only foreigners complain about Chinese writing. Yes, it’s hard to learn. But then you learn it, and it’s done. It doesn’t affect your brain.

     

    But there is evidence that it does, or something in the culture does if not the language, affecting perception which is a pretty significant part of how you use your brain.

    This is the classic Nisbettian work based on the Morris & Peng studies on Asian versus European perceptions of the world which found that Asians generally saw the world as contextual and holistic rather than specific and detailed(the latter which would be better for scientific association). What's less known though is that in a followup study, however, Hong Kong participants(who had grown up in British schools and spoke English) could be primed to think in "Western" ways simply by showing them images of Western culture(Mickey Mouse, cowboys, etc). Showing them pictures indicative of Chinese culture reinforced their "Eastern" thinking. Showing them neutral pictures kept results in the middle.

    Another study by Ara Norenzayan in 1999 looked to see if the Japanese participants could make the correct "rule-making" associations for criteria judgment(something likely relevant for science), and found that Japanese participants made twice as many errors as European tested. However. Asian Americans did not make more errors, so it seems unlikely to be purely genetic unless there's some self-selection for immigration that involves rule-making associations.


    Incidentally, Mr. Karlin, there is a study which supports the idea of East Asians being more similar to women in terms of group behavior/conformity. Japanese participants sought to escape from unpleasant situations by seeking to be in a group, similar to American women in the study. American men, on the other hand, sought to escape unpleasant situations alone. No objective reason was provided for either to be more likely.

    Priming, and most psychology is fake science. Don’t believe any of it.

    At any rate none of it has anything to do with the language and much less with the script.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Spandrell says: • Website
    @BlackFlag
    Do blogs/forums where people spend countless hours of their lives discussing abstruse topics that give them no material benefit exist in East Asian countries?

    I don't get how AK goes from deciding it's not IQ to thinking it must be conformity. Conformity explains differentials in number of rebellious teens. Intellectual obsession explains differentials in innovation.

    It's a small percentage of innovations that require upending a tabboo. Euclid's geometry didn't. Neither did coming up with the ideal gas law.

    Even if some do, I doubt being a non-conformist is a significant factor. Did Galileo develop his idea about the sun and the earth cause he was a rebel? Doubt it. After all, only one of his many innovations challenged a taboo. Intellectual obsession explains all of them.

    Let's look at one of the most innovative people of the 20th century - Jon Von Neumann. There are lots of stories about how smart he was. What else did he have? Edward Teller thought it was this: "For most people thinking is painful. Jonny loves to think; in fact, it's the only thing he enjoys doing."

    Japan does not have that. All online activity is either 2chan, where people go to shitpost, and Twitter, which is mostly networking.

    China also does not have a blog culture. It does have Zhihu, a very popular Quora clone where very smart people discuss abstruse topics anonymously for no observable benefit besides feeling smart, so yeah, it’s somewhat close to this. There’s also Douban which is a review site for movies and books and people discuss stuff there too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. @Spandrell
    For what it's worth, Japanese writing is much more of a pain in the ass than Chinese. Way more. It's irregular and arbitrary and just plain bad.
    Japan didn't even have a standard system until 1900!

    Are the Japanese any less smart and scientific minded than the Chinese?

    I disagree.

    The Japanese kanji are simplified compared to the traditional Chinese kanji, and they have hana as well. Kana, both hiragan and katakana are alphabets and are very easy to learn because they are purely phonetic. Of course, the mainland Chinese also simplified their kanji, but in a manner different from that of Japan (this was shortly after the war and they were not about to copy anything from Japan). Hongkong and Taiwan still use the traditional kanji. South Korea uses it for place names but not much else since they have their hangul written system (which I know nothing about).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. @Daniel Chieh

    By his theory, reliigious belief in modern humans is a vestigial remnent of the bicameral mind.
     
    I'm sympathetic to some materialistic explanations for religious belief, but the notion that all humans were once all schizophrenic and we "grew sane" seems as likely as fairies in the backyard. Pop psychological history really does deserve to be together with Freud: entertaining fictions.

    Really?

    Because I have yet to run across an explanation for the origin of religion, especially the Abrahamic ones, that comes even close to being as good as Julien Jaynes’ theory. For one, his theory explains 100% perfectly what is called “the Fall” in Christianity. No other theory that I know of even comes close on this one.

    The bicameral mind theory is a specific version of the more general concept of the human personality being a system of subselves. Eric Berne has his version of such with his concept of “Ego States”, which he describes in “Transactional Analysis”, which is still the best psychology book available.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I'm very familiar with the Society of Mind which originates with Dr. Marvin Minsky(and its opposite, Sir Roger Penrose's quantum brain) . Its interesting. I think its probably not totally accurate since there is a "semantic default network" observed in the brain, so its not merely a series of isolated subsystems. Its probably still relatively accurate, but I think to some extent, we assume a more mechanistic view of the mind than is warranted. Biological systems don't isolate as much as our mechanical systems do, so the effects of, for example, hormones and neurotransmitters can wander and cause emergent effects. Even the blood-brain barrier is quite permeable and there is a lot of evidence of the influence of the enteric nervous system which is external to the skull.

    You can trigger religious feelings with DMT without the need for internal voices, and this feels much more consistent with what we know of how the brain works, for example with the striatum having a strong association with positivity(so called "reward center") but with the actual interpretation of the "good feelings" being filtered through the brain. Dr. Heath's experiments had one woman experience her "reward" stimulation as seduced; another one of his patients simply experienced it as happiness, and so on. Such religious experiences would be varied: euphoria, seeing beings, and so on. To exactly indicate voices which are then fading away now seems dubious, a kind of precision in evolution without exact mechanism of selection. When in doubt, I favor the more parsimonious explanation especially since DMT is created endogenously by the body.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @Abelard Lindsey
    Really?

    Because I have yet to run across an explanation for the origin of religion, especially the Abrahamic ones, that comes even close to being as good as Julien Jaynes' theory. For one, his theory explains 100% perfectly what is called "the Fall" in Christianity. No other theory that I know of even comes close on this one.

    The bicameral mind theory is a specific version of the more general concept of the human personality being a system of subselves. Eric Berne has his version of such with his concept of "Ego States", which he describes in "Transactional Analysis", which is still the best psychology book available.

    I’m very familiar with the Society of Mind which originates with Dr. Marvin Minsky(and its opposite, Sir Roger Penrose’s quantum brain) . Its interesting. I think its probably not totally accurate since there is a “semantic default network” observed in the brain, so its not merely a series of isolated subsystems. Its probably still relatively accurate, but I think to some extent, we assume a more mechanistic view of the mind than is warranted. Biological systems don’t isolate as much as our mechanical systems do, so the effects of, for example, hormones and neurotransmitters can wander and cause emergent effects. Even the blood-brain barrier is quite permeable and there is a lot of evidence of the influence of the enteric nervous system which is external to the skull.

    You can trigger religious feelings with DMT without the need for internal voices, and this feels much more consistent with what we know of how the brain works, for example with the striatum having a strong association with positivity(so called “reward center”) but with the actual interpretation of the “good feelings” being filtered through the brain. Dr. Heath’s experiments had one woman experience her “reward” stimulation as seduced; another one of his patients simply experienced it as happiness, and so on. Such religious experiences would be varied: euphoria, seeing beings, and so on. To exactly indicate voices which are then fading away now seems dubious, a kind of precision in evolution without exact mechanism of selection. When in doubt, I favor the more parsimonious explanation especially since DMT is created endogenously by the body.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Abelard Lindsey
    DMT eh? I'll have to give it a try sometime.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @Not Raul
    I’d be interested in seeing a statistical analysis of evidence for and against that claim.

    Rimsky-Korsakov and his wife had seven children.

    Having relatively large families may have been typical of people with his class background, though.

    Bach had twenty children. But then I think very few descendants down the line. Most of the greatest composers left few or no descendants. Mozart left no descendants (both of his children surviving to adulthood were childless). Beethoven had no children. Schubert, Bruckner, Brahms: no children. Haydn had just one child. (I don’t know if he has descendants today, but I think unlikely.) Mahler had one surviving daughter, who had maybe two children. Wagner had three children (which was probably not more than average at the time), and so still has a number of descendants.

    That’s not much, on average. Maybe it’s not a representative sample, though I’d wager it already contains the very best.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Ravel had no children. Debussy one daughter, who barely survived her a year.
    , @Dmitry
    From memory - I can think of example of "maladaptive" are Schumann and Scriabin, who both had notable mental disorders.

    Both Schumann and Scriabin have a lot of children (Scriabin with two wives, and Schumann with his brilliant wife who also inspired Brahms).

    I'm not sure having children is the correct criteria.

    Mental illness is probably the factor which can positively correlate with genius, to some extent - so genius is maladaptive to the extent of that positive correlation.

    Recall, Brahms has no children, but despite his alcoholism, he was much more well adapted to normal life than was e.g. Scriabin.

    We can also note that Scriabin was not exactly a "good father" - after his death his family has no money left (his genius son has drowned in the Dnieper shortly after).
    -

    Of course, all this is kind of a strange perspective, since normally any of us would think that men of genius like Brahms have a vastly more long-living legacy in their works than children are worth (children remember you for a few decades after your death, if you are lucky and they are loyal - while legacy Brahms will outlive us all, and even our great-grandchildren).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. ussr andy says:
    @Phille
    I am somewhat dismayed that you scooped my brilliant theory that visuo-spatial-mathematical IQ depends on brain size while handling of sequences does not, and that this explains asian underperformance, jewish brain size and the flynn effect, as well as some male-female differences.

    But I think I can add a few thoughts: The handling of sequences as the second factor of intelligence seems to depend on dendritic growth or the ability to create synapses quickly. The jewish genetic diseases indicate that boosting this ability is the main factor behind their high verbal IQ. I also assume that they repurposed part of the spatial processing cortex to handle more high level patterns. So they basically shuffled IQ points from visuo-spatial to mathematical IQ without increasing brain size.

    Now, the interesting thing about synapses is that there are lateral synapses, that according to some theories are necessary for sequence learning, and top-down synapses, which might be necessary for creating grand theories that unify many lower level facts. To me it is pretty clear that this is what Ashkenazim excel at. Coming up with just-so-stories. Sometimes correct, sometimes not, but often brilliant. It also seems to me that the European advantage over Asians might be along the same dimension. So verbal IQ might just correlate highly with GDP because it correlates with this ability of high-level conceptual thinking made possible by the ability to quickly create top-down synapses.

    This would be an alternative explanation to conformity, though the male-female gap doesn't drop out of it as naturally.

    To me it is pretty clear that this is what Ashkenazim excel at. Coming up with just-so-stories.

    here’s one, if I may: the male-female gap in innovation is because it’s all ultimately a mating display.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ali Choudhury
    I don't think Isaac Newton was particularly noted as a babe magnet. Those nterested in mating displays are more likely to try to become Big Men than advance the frontiers of knowledge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @reiner Tor
    Bach had twenty children. But then I think very few descendants down the line. Most of the greatest composers left few or no descendants. Mozart left no descendants (both of his children surviving to adulthood were childless). Beethoven had no children. Schubert, Bruckner, Brahms: no children. Haydn had just one child. (I don’t know if he has descendants today, but I think unlikely.) Mahler had one surviving daughter, who had maybe two children. Wagner had three children (which was probably not more than average at the time), and so still has a number of descendants.

    That’s not much, on average. Maybe it’s not a representative sample, though I’d wager it already contains the very best.

    Ravel had no children. Debussy one daughter, who barely survived her a year.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. Dmitry says:
    @reiner Tor
    Bach had twenty children. But then I think very few descendants down the line. Most of the greatest composers left few or no descendants. Mozart left no descendants (both of his children surviving to adulthood were childless). Beethoven had no children. Schubert, Bruckner, Brahms: no children. Haydn had just one child. (I don’t know if he has descendants today, but I think unlikely.) Mahler had one surviving daughter, who had maybe two children. Wagner had three children (which was probably not more than average at the time), and so still has a number of descendants.

    That’s not much, on average. Maybe it’s not a representative sample, though I’d wager it already contains the very best.

    From memory – I can think of example of “maladaptive” are Schumann and Scriabin, who both had notable mental disorders.

    Both Schumann and Scriabin have a lot of children (Scriabin with two wives, and Schumann with his brilliant wife who also inspired Brahms).

    I’m not sure having children is the correct criteria.

    Mental illness is probably the factor which can positively correlate with genius, to some extent – so genius is maladaptive to the extent of that positive correlation.

    Recall, Brahms has no children, but despite his alcoholism, he was much more well adapted to normal life than was e.g. Scriabin.

    We can also note that Scriabin was not exactly a “good father” – after his death his family has no money left (his genius son has drowned in the Dnieper shortly after).
    -

    Of course, all this is kind of a strange perspective, since normally any of us would think that men of genius like Brahms have a vastly more long-living legacy in their works than children are worth (children remember you for a few decades after your death, if you are lucky and they are loyal – while legacy Brahms will outlive us all, and even our great-grandchildren).

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    This is the biological perspective. My point was that it was not biologically adaptive. Did you not understand it?

    Also, what counts is number of descendants (long term), not number of children. You can have many children and yet no grandchildren. It happened a lot.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @Dmitry
    From memory - I can think of example of "maladaptive" are Schumann and Scriabin, who both had notable mental disorders.

    Both Schumann and Scriabin have a lot of children (Scriabin with two wives, and Schumann with his brilliant wife who also inspired Brahms).

    I'm not sure having children is the correct criteria.

    Mental illness is probably the factor which can positively correlate with genius, to some extent - so genius is maladaptive to the extent of that positive correlation.

    Recall, Brahms has no children, but despite his alcoholism, he was much more well adapted to normal life than was e.g. Scriabin.

    We can also note that Scriabin was not exactly a "good father" - after his death his family has no money left (his genius son has drowned in the Dnieper shortly after).
    -

    Of course, all this is kind of a strange perspective, since normally any of us would think that men of genius like Brahms have a vastly more long-living legacy in their works than children are worth (children remember you for a few decades after your death, if you are lucky and they are loyal - while legacy Brahms will outlive us all, and even our great-grandchildren).

    This is the biological perspective. My point was that it was not biologically adaptive. Did you not understand it?

    Also, what counts is number of descendants (long term), not number of children. You can have many children and yet no grandchildren. It happened a lot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    You want determine "biologically adaptiveness" (to environment) of having musical genius, by number of descendants of the great geniuses?

    You want to say that being musical genius is "maladaptive" because the geniuses have fewer kids or something like this?

    The musical genius of this person will usually be something adaptive to environment in the sense that it provides profession and income for that person. So by definition, is usually an adaptive trait for this person.

    The plausible explanation musical genius (which is in very extenuated form amongst the great names you discuss) might be maladaptive in population, is that any representative population of geniuses will perhaps have higher rates of mental illness than a control population (there is probably some correlation between genius and mental illness).

    In this case, it will be the particular mental illness which we would identity as maladaptive (and the musical genius is simply factor which may positively correlate with rates of mental illnesses).

    The correlation between musical genius and mental illness will be a very interesting and complicated topic, although trying to claim the musical intelligence is maladaptive factor - not very plausible.

    The thing is mental illnesses are maladaptive factors in most (societal) contexts, but not necessarily in the area of having children (what you are defining as "biological adaptedness") - otherwise we will see rates of mental illness falling in each generation, and the genetic preconditions of mental illness falling in the population, other things equal. (Although someone may respond that recessive genetic passing of genetic preconditions bypass this and allow it to remain in population).

    -

    I find your discussion is interesting though, to see you mentioning facts about the life of these great composers.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Verdi only had two children, both died in infancy. Then he married a soprano, who had had a number of children from a number of men (and she gave each of them to foster care or to the orphanage), but who had no children with Verdi.

    It’s interesting because Verdi was a very successful composer in the material sense of the world. He made a lot of money and was smart enough to invest it well (he bought land), so he reaped all the benefits of being a great composer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  113. Dmitry says:
    @reiner Tor
    This is the biological perspective. My point was that it was not biologically adaptive. Did you not understand it?

    Also, what counts is number of descendants (long term), not number of children. You can have many children and yet no grandchildren. It happened a lot.

    You want determine “biologically adaptiveness” (to environment) of having musical genius, by number of descendants of the great geniuses?

    You want to say that being musical genius is “maladaptive” because the geniuses have fewer kids or something like this?

    The musical genius of this person will usually be something adaptive to environment in the sense that it provides profession and income for that person. So by definition, is usually an adaptive trait for this person.

    The plausible explanation musical genius (which is in very extenuated form amongst the great names you discuss) might be maladaptive in population, is that any representative population of geniuses will perhaps have higher rates of mental illness than a control population (there is probably some correlation between genius and mental illness).

    In this case, it will be the particular mental illness which we would identity as maladaptive (and the musical genius is simply factor which may positively correlate with rates of mental illnesses).

    The correlation between musical genius and mental illness will be a very interesting and complicated topic, although trying to claim the musical intelligence is maladaptive factor – not very plausible.

    The thing is mental illnesses are maladaptive factors in most (societal) contexts, but not necessarily in the area of having children (what you are defining as “biological adaptedness”) – otherwise we will see rates of mental illness falling in each generation, and the genetic preconditions of mental illness falling in the population, other things equal. (Although someone may respond that recessive genetic passing of genetic preconditions bypass this and allow it to remain in population).

    -

    I find your discussion is interesting though, to see you mentioning facts about the life of these great composers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    I think of Bruckner in this discussion. Another musical genius, who never had any girlfriends.

    In this case, perhaps some factors could be related inseparably to his musical intelligence. His mental illness was being "obsessively pedantic" (it could be obsessive compulsive disorder).

    This could be seen as inseparable part of his musical genius, considering the obsessively intricate nature of his symphonies.

    It also exhibited in obsessiveness of his musical studies, in which he wanted a perfect knowledge of harmony theory before he started composing - so he only wrote his first symphony when he was almost middle-aged.

    But it could surely be more plausible, that the more decisive reason for a lack of romances (and therefore descendants), was a simply much more ordinary trait not necessarily linked to his musical talent - his introverted personality. So that after he only tried to get a wife, after he was a famous composer, and already an old man proposing to young women who had no interest in him.

    , @reiner Tor
    First of all, the majority of great composers were definitely not mentally ill. They were within the normal range, though often had difficult personalities, but I'd certainly not characterize a Beethoven or a Mozart as mentally ill. I don't even think Bruckner was mentally ill, though something was definitely off with the guy. Was Ravel mentally ill? Perhaps homosexual (though even that is lacking any proof), if you consider that an illness. (As it definitely is an illness from an evolutionary point of view.) I'm not sure about your examples Schumann and Scriabin. Whatever the reasons for Schumann's illness, he was still healthy at the time of his marriage and when his children were born. Am I wrong?

    Second, it's questionable that mental illness has genetic causes. Most likely, it doesn't. The most likely explanation for a majority of cases is some kind of infection, either viral or bacterial. As is the most likely explanation for a host of chronic diseases. Please read Plague Time: The New Germ Theory of Disease by Paul W. Ewald.

    Third, you still didn't address my point that having many children is not necessarily adaptive, unless you have grandchildren and great-grandchildren and so on. Especially in an era where mortality was very high.

    I find your discussion is interesting though
     
    You don't seem to read a lot of evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology. People like Steve Pinker will often drop things like that in their books.
    , @reiner Tor
    Do you listen to classical music? Can you recommend Russian composers?

    For example from Scriabin I only know Le Poème de l'extase, op. 54, which is good, but I don’t listen to it too much. I don’t know most Russian composers, except Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, Shostakovich and Prokofiev.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Dmitry says:
    @Dmitry
    You want determine "biologically adaptiveness" (to environment) of having musical genius, by number of descendants of the great geniuses?

    You want to say that being musical genius is "maladaptive" because the geniuses have fewer kids or something like this?

    The musical genius of this person will usually be something adaptive to environment in the sense that it provides profession and income for that person. So by definition, is usually an adaptive trait for this person.

    The plausible explanation musical genius (which is in very extenuated form amongst the great names you discuss) might be maladaptive in population, is that any representative population of geniuses will perhaps have higher rates of mental illness than a control population (there is probably some correlation between genius and mental illness).

    In this case, it will be the particular mental illness which we would identity as maladaptive (and the musical genius is simply factor which may positively correlate with rates of mental illnesses).

    The correlation between musical genius and mental illness will be a very interesting and complicated topic, although trying to claim the musical intelligence is maladaptive factor - not very plausible.

    The thing is mental illnesses are maladaptive factors in most (societal) contexts, but not necessarily in the area of having children (what you are defining as "biological adaptedness") - otherwise we will see rates of mental illness falling in each generation, and the genetic preconditions of mental illness falling in the population, other things equal. (Although someone may respond that recessive genetic passing of genetic preconditions bypass this and allow it to remain in population).

    -

    I find your discussion is interesting though, to see you mentioning facts about the life of these great composers.

    I think of Bruckner in this discussion. Another musical genius, who never had any girlfriends.

    In this case, perhaps some factors could be related inseparably to his musical intelligence. His mental illness was being “obsessively pedantic” (it could be obsessive compulsive disorder).

    This could be seen as inseparable part of his musical genius, considering the obsessively intricate nature of his symphonies.

    It also exhibited in obsessiveness of his musical studies, in which he wanted a perfect knowledge of harmony theory before he started composing – so he only wrote his first symphony when he was almost middle-aged.

    But it could surely be more plausible, that the more decisive reason for a lack of romances (and therefore descendants), was a simply much more ordinary trait not necessarily linked to his musical talent – his introverted personality. So that after he only tried to get a wife, after he was a famous composer, and already an old man proposing to young women who had no interest in him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @Daniel Chieh
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028393201000677

    Random, but possibly connected.


    The effect of testosterone (T) on sexual function in men is well established. However, less is known about its effects on cognitive function. The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between T levels and sex-typed cognitive abilities in both eugonadal and hypogonadal men...These results offer support to the notion that increased T has a differential effect on cognitive function, inhibiting spatial abilities while improving verbal fluency in eugonadal men.

     

    These results offer support to the notion that increased T has a differential effect on cognitive function, inhibiting spatial abilities while improving verbal fluency in eugonadal men.

    The “Chad” is canonically a horrible driver.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Bliss says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    So how come their higher visuospatial IQ does not make them better drivers?


     

    That's because its an incorrect heuristic.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration crash fatality rates for the African American populations are 12.31 deaths per 100,000 people and its pretty similar with other races(except for Native Americans, who have insanely high driving fatality rates). For Asians, the fatality rate was only 4 per 100k. That could be attributed to reduced alcoholism, however, in just crash numbers, Australia's University of Sydney found in 2010 that Asians are involved in only half as many automotive accidents, and a Canadian study replicated this in 2011.

    The reason why this heuristic exists, nonetheless, is because Asians(especially in Asia) do not seem to acknowledge traffic rules often enough, which can be incredibly annoying and makes driving in Asian countries extremely unpleasant. Niceties such as communicating with the other driver, or even signaling are often just not done; the fact that it doesn't result in more accidents actually means that such behavior will keep continuing. But all of the spatial awareness in the world won't help your fellow drivers if you don't think the rules apply to you, or more specifically, just don't care about them.

    At any rate, the WHO rundown of the most dangerous countries to be on the road has only one vaguely East Asian country, Thailand, and several African states.

    https://www.therichest.com/rich-list/poorest-list/10-countries-with-the-worst-drivers-in-the-world/

    the WHO rundown of the most dangerous countries to be on the road has only one vaguely East Asian country, Thailand, and several African states.

    90% of all fatalities on the road are in low to middle income countries. Chaotic conditions, bad roads, few lights and crosswalks, over crowded vehicles, lack of ambulances and hospitals, untrained drivers etc skew the numbers. Better to compare developed countries:

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/korea_irtad-2015-26-en#page4

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/australia_irtad-2015-7-en#page4

    In Australia deaths per billion km in 2000 was 9.1, in South Korea it was 49.5. South Korea must have taken some safety measures, for deaths in 2013 went down to 17.2, but that was still 3.4 times the deaths (5) in Australia that year.

    For the year 2013 here is how it looked for East Asian vs West European countries in deaths per billion km:

    S. Korea—>17.2
    Japan ——>6.9

    Germany->4.6
    Norway—->4.3
    UK————>3.5
    Sweden—-> 3.4

    South Korea has 5 times and Japan 2 times the death rate of UK and Sweden. Maybe there is some truth in the stereotype after all?

    Another comparison of driving IQ is to look at the very best drivers: the race car drivers. Formula One racing is the gold standard here. The field is dominated by Europeans but the very best driver is an Afro-Brit, Lewis Hamilton. No East Asians to be found at this level, even though F1 racing is popular in Japan, China and Singapore (they all host a Grand Prix).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    You did not even read your own links correctly.

    Road deaths by mileage is a pointless metric given differences in population density that is over twenty times higher in South Korea versus Australia. The metric primarily used in the report itself was death by population, which in 2013 is 10.1, and in 2015 is 9.3 per 100k population(WHO statistics). The US has 10.6 per 100k, France at 5.1 and Australia at 5.4.

    Furthermore, this is of mixed vehicle usage, and notable quantities of fatalities were of pedestrians and cyclists. These will naturally be lower in countries with less pedestrian and cycling traffic.

    , @Twinkie

    S. Korea—>17.2
    Japan ——>6.9
     
    This seems to indicate Flynn effect in driving ability. Or maybe it’s just increased familiarity. The history of automobile use is rather shallow in East Asia (and longer in Japan than in South Korea).

    We can figure this out better if we had access to similar data for American-born whites, blacks, East Asians, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Bbh says: • Website

    Is there any prospect of treating dementia soon to at least stop it from getting worse? A genius IQ is not going to save you if you are dying from dementia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Are you referring to age-related dementia? In that sense, it is part of the entire effort to address aging.

    To my knowledge, the most promising results have been from carnosine, which has had generally successful results in animal and cell studies, where they decreased brain age in rats and increased the life span on male fruitflies by 20%(female fruitflies benefit only if also treated with vitamin E, at 36%).

    There is some tangential support that it will also help with Alzheimer's including before/after brain scans, but I don't believe that a lot of human research has been done. There appears to only have been one specifically with humans in regards to dementia that measured behavioral/cognitive effects:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20224285


    In a double-blind placebo-controlled study addressing the therapeutic potential of carnosine in AD, it was assessed the efficacy of a combination of carnosine plus other antioxidants (formula F) in volunteers receiving donepezil (n = 26), in comparison to patients receiving donepezil plus placebo (n = 26) [90]. Using the Mini-Mental State Examination II (MMSE II) score, Cornelli [90] observed a significantly improvement of cognition in the group receiving donepezil plus formula F, as compared to those receiving donepezil plus placebo.
     
    I do believe with an aging population, this will be of ever increasing importance.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    Ultimately the challenge is that its hard to heal the brain when we really don't understand it, and it pays to be skeptical of any hard claims in neuroscience when things like this keep happening.

    Something like that happened with the idea that the brain lacked a lymphatic system, so sleep had a purpose to repair damage and remove waste products from the brain and allow capillaries to act as a substitute lymphatic system. It was all rather elegant and pretty as a theory, and taught in medical schools right up until 2017. And well, probably untrue at least in significant part.
    , @notanon
    some recent stuff on that

    1) may be connected to a virus - connection to immune system -> lack of vitamin D from sun light (a lot of elderly don't get enough sun)

    2) may be connected to brain no longer accepting glucose - connected to diabetes -> switch to low carb, high fat diet
    , @Daniel Chieh
    I would also like to specifically request if the commentator AP could reply to this with his thoughts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @Bliss

    the WHO rundown of the most dangerous countries to be on the road has only one vaguely East Asian country, Thailand, and several African states.
     
    90% of all fatalities on the road are in low to middle income countries. Chaotic conditions, bad roads, few lights and crosswalks, over crowded vehicles, lack of ambulances and hospitals, untrained drivers etc skew the numbers. Better to compare developed countries:

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/korea_irtad-2015-26-en#page4

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/australia_irtad-2015-7-en#page4

    In Australia deaths per billion km in 2000 was 9.1, in South Korea it was 49.5. South Korea must have taken some safety measures, for deaths in 2013 went down to 17.2, but that was still 3.4 times the deaths (5) in Australia that year.

    For the year 2013 here is how it looked for East Asian vs West European countries in deaths per billion km:

    S. Korea—>17.2
    Japan ——>6.9

    Germany->4.6
    Norway—->4.3
    UK————>3.5
    Sweden—-> 3.4

    South Korea has 5 times and Japan 2 times the death rate of UK and Sweden. Maybe there is some truth in the stereotype after all?

    Another comparison of driving IQ is to look at the very best drivers: the race car drivers. Formula One racing is the gold standard here. The field is dominated by Europeans but the very best driver is an Afro-Brit, Lewis Hamilton. No East Asians to be found at this level, even though F1 racing is popular in Japan, China and Singapore (they all host a Grand Prix).

    You did not even read your own links correctly.

    Road deaths by mileage is a pointless metric given differences in population density that is over twenty times higher in South Korea versus Australia. The metric primarily used in the report itself was death by population, which in 2013 is 10.1, and in 2015 is 9.3 per 100k population(WHO statistics). The US has 10.6 per 100k, France at 5.1 and Australia at 5.4.

    Furthermore, this is of mixed vehicle usage, and notable quantities of fatalities were of pedestrians and cyclists. These will naturally be lower in countries with less pedestrian and cycling traffic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Road deaths by mileage is a pointless metric given differences in population density that is over twenty times higher in South Korea versus Australia. The metric primarily used in the report itself was death by population
     
    When you are measuring driving ability the population metric is pointless. Accidents can only happen when someone is driving. So accidents by kilometers driven is the most apt metric for our purpose.

    As for population density Australia is 90% urban, compared to 83% for South Korea and 94% for Japan. Very few aussies live in the Outback. You are just looking for an excuse. Why else would you latch on to only Australia and ignore the data for UK, Germany, Sweden and Norway?

    Furthermore, this is of mixed vehicle usage, and notable quantities of fatalities were of pedestrians and cyclists. These will naturally be lower in countries with less pedestrian and cycling traffic.
     
    Your visuospatial driving skills include avoiding crashing into slow moving pedestrians and bicyclists.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @Bbh
    Is there any prospect of treating dementia soon to at least stop it from getting worse? A genius IQ is not going to save you if you are dying from dementia.

    Are you referring to age-related dementia? In that sense, it is part of the entire effort to address aging.

    To my knowledge, the most promising results have been from carnosine, which has had generally successful results in animal and cell studies, where they decreased brain age in rats and increased the life span on male fruitflies by 20%(female fruitflies benefit only if also treated with vitamin E, at 36%).

    There is some tangential support that it will also help with Alzheimer’s including before/after brain scans, but I don’t believe that a lot of human research has been done. There appears to only have been one specifically with humans in regards to dementia that measured behavioral/cognitive effects:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20224285

    In a double-blind placebo-controlled study addressing the therapeutic potential of carnosine in AD, it was assessed the efficacy of a combination of carnosine plus other antioxidants (formula F) in volunteers receiving donepezil (n = 26), in comparison to patients receiving donepezil plus placebo (n = 26) [90]. Using the Mini-Mental State Examination II (MMSE II) score, Cornelli [90] observed a significantly improvement of cognition in the group receiving donepezil plus formula F, as compared to those receiving donepezil plus placebo.

    I do believe with an aging population, this will be of ever increasing importance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bbh
    Well there is an experiment around LMTX that looks at getting rid of taught tangles that seems to have worked with a group of patients. Much of the research so far has been around beta amyloid which seems to be a wild goose chase
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @Anon

    I studied Mandarin and I have a basic proficiency. I do not confirm. Reading logographic Chinese is significantly easier than reading pinyin. (Pinyin Chinese is like a phonetic English except without spaces or punctuation; i.e., a nightmare.)
     
    You do realize Chinese students in China use pinyin to help them learn the characters, right? It's not a perfect complete system but it's easier to acquire, which is what Karlin said.

    You do realize Chinese students in China use pinyin to help them learn the characters, right?

    Of course I do. How do you think I learn the characters myself?

    It’s not a perfect complete system but it’s easier to acquire, which is what Karlin said.

    Read my post again and don’t be stupid this time around.

    Literacy (i.e., the ability to read and understand complex texts) is much harder in pinyin than in characters. Recognizing and sounding out words is maybe like 5% of being literate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    Recognizing and sounding out words is maybe like 5% of being literate.
     
    Well, thanks very much for this extremely accurate statistic, derived no doubt with arduous calculation.

    Pinyin is a significant aid to literacy, as are the existence of phonetic alphabets in general. That's what I said. That's what Karlin said. That's even what you said: How do you think I learn the characters myself?

    So with respect to don’t be stupid this time around, maybe try and take your own advice for a change?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @Bbh
    Is there any prospect of treating dementia soon to at least stop it from getting worse? A genius IQ is not going to save you if you are dying from dementia.

    Ultimately the challenge is that its hard to heal the brain when we really don’t understand it, and it pays to be skeptical of any hard claims in neuroscience when things like this keep happening.

    Something like that happened with the idea that the brain lacked a lymphatic system, so sleep had a purpose to repair damage and remove waste products from the brain and allow capillaries to act as a substitute lymphatic system. It was all rather elegant and pretty as a theory, and taught in medical schools right up until 2017. And well, probably untrue at least in significant part.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Bbh says: • Website
    @Daniel Chieh
    Are you referring to age-related dementia? In that sense, it is part of the entire effort to address aging.

    To my knowledge, the most promising results have been from carnosine, which has had generally successful results in animal and cell studies, where they decreased brain age in rats and increased the life span on male fruitflies by 20%(female fruitflies benefit only if also treated with vitamin E, at 36%).

    There is some tangential support that it will also help with Alzheimer's including before/after brain scans, but I don't believe that a lot of human research has been done. There appears to only have been one specifically with humans in regards to dementia that measured behavioral/cognitive effects:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20224285


    In a double-blind placebo-controlled study addressing the therapeutic potential of carnosine in AD, it was assessed the efficacy of a combination of carnosine plus other antioxidants (formula F) in volunteers receiving donepezil (n = 26), in comparison to patients receiving donepezil plus placebo (n = 26) [90]. Using the Mini-Mental State Examination II (MMSE II) score, Cornelli [90] observed a significantly improvement of cognition in the group receiving donepezil plus formula F, as compared to those receiving donepezil plus placebo.
     
    I do believe with an aging population, this will be of ever increasing importance.

    Well there is an experiment around LMTX that looks at getting rid of taught tangles that seems to have worked with a group of patients. Much of the research so far has been around beta amyloid which seems to be a wild goose chase

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Indeed, removing beta amyloids appears to worsen the condition.

    Are you referring to this?

    https://www.j-alz.com/content/second-phase-3-study-results-lmtx%C2%AE-published-journal-alzheimer%E2%80%99s-disease

    I might look into it further. I think ultimately we will be limited since even neurogenesis doesn't seem like it'll recover everything, just areas in the hippocampus and maybe a few other selected places. The other neurons will eventually die and nothing will replace it short of superexotic ideas like stem cells or something like that which is basically sci-fi.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. @Bbh
    Well there is an experiment around LMTX that looks at getting rid of taught tangles that seems to have worked with a group of patients. Much of the research so far has been around beta amyloid which seems to be a wild goose chase

    Indeed, removing beta amyloids appears to worsen the condition.

    Are you referring to this?

    https://www.j-alz.com/content/second-phase-3-study-results-lmtx%C2%AE-published-journal-alzheimer%E2%80%99s-disease

    I might look into it further. I think ultimately we will be limited since even neurogenesis doesn’t seem like it’ll recover everything, just areas in the hippocampus and maybe a few other selected places. The other neurons will eventually die and nothing will replace it short of superexotic ideas like stem cells or something like that which is basically sci-fi.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. notanon says:
    @Bbh
    Is there any prospect of treating dementia soon to at least stop it from getting worse? A genius IQ is not going to save you if you are dying from dementia.

    some recent stuff on that

    1) may be connected to a virus – connection to immune system -> lack of vitamin D from sun light (a lot of elderly don’t get enough sun)

    2) may be connected to brain no longer accepting glucose – connected to diabetes -> switch to low carb, high fat diet

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. notanon says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Someone unprepared to invest to promote mangoes is never going to find out. I will guess yes.
     
    Someone should do a study on chupatz. To have the audacity to get people - even highly experienced, credentialed, etc - to work for free for you for the opportunity to help you make money is a pretty classic example of that. Its interesting how it can often work, by framed in the right way, and by aiming at the right people.

    I suspect its one example of behavior that's probably individually beneficially, but societially negative especially as it becomes adaptive to have the skills needed to convince others to do so. At some point, it basically is a form of legal business in hoodwinking.

    To have the audacity to get people – even highly experienced, credentialed, etc – to work for free for you for the opportunity to help you make money is a pretty classic example of that. Its interesting how it can often work, by framed in the right way, and by aiming at the right people.

    the central banking mafia being the perfect example: “hey guys let’s you make us rich by letting us legally counterfeit your currency!”

    chutzpah is mostly just sociopathy – the big lie works cos

    1) sociopaths enjoy big lies – they get a kick out of fooling people, the bigger the better

    2) normal people are only comfortable telling small lies

    3) normal people assume everyone else thinks like them i.e. mostly honest people think others are mostly honest

    -> normal people find it hard to believe big lies are possible

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. notanon says:
    @BlackFlag
    Fair enough, I didn't think of that type of conformity.
    Innovation results from:
    1) Challenging taboo.
    2) Innovator disregarding disapproval from relatives and society by pursuing an impractical project.

    Still seems weak. Innovation normally occurs in line with a good career or a harmless pastime. Pretty sure Darwin was advancing his career by sailing on the Beagle. Did Zheng He have a naturalist? If so, what was he doing? If not, why didn't the Mandarins put one on his boat?

    There aren't that many of these great innovations that Murray lists. Someone with intellectual curiosity could go through them and see if non-conformity was a key requirement.

    2) Innovator disregarding disapproval from relatives and society by pursuing an impractical project.

    I think that’s a good (and common) hurdle in more clannish societies but more widely all innovation comes about as a conflict with the current way of doing things as “conservative” is the safe option: your ancestors survived by doing things this way so don’t change it.

    Still seems weak. Innovation normally occurs in line with a good career or a harmless pastime. Pretty sure Darwin was advancing his career by sailing on the Beagle.

    “normally” – in the West since the industrial revolution – sure but other times and places proto science was witchcraft.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. notanon says:

    the well-known quote

    Science advances one funeral at a time.

    speaks to how most people instinctively defend whatever the current “normal” is (for risk-minimizing evolutionary reasons).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  128. @Dmitry
    You want determine "biologically adaptiveness" (to environment) of having musical genius, by number of descendants of the great geniuses?

    You want to say that being musical genius is "maladaptive" because the geniuses have fewer kids or something like this?

    The musical genius of this person will usually be something adaptive to environment in the sense that it provides profession and income for that person. So by definition, is usually an adaptive trait for this person.

    The plausible explanation musical genius (which is in very extenuated form amongst the great names you discuss) might be maladaptive in population, is that any representative population of geniuses will perhaps have higher rates of mental illness than a control population (there is probably some correlation between genius and mental illness).

    In this case, it will be the particular mental illness which we would identity as maladaptive (and the musical genius is simply factor which may positively correlate with rates of mental illnesses).

    The correlation between musical genius and mental illness will be a very interesting and complicated topic, although trying to claim the musical intelligence is maladaptive factor - not very plausible.

    The thing is mental illnesses are maladaptive factors in most (societal) contexts, but not necessarily in the area of having children (what you are defining as "biological adaptedness") - otherwise we will see rates of mental illness falling in each generation, and the genetic preconditions of mental illness falling in the population, other things equal. (Although someone may respond that recessive genetic passing of genetic preconditions bypass this and allow it to remain in population).

    -

    I find your discussion is interesting though, to see you mentioning facts about the life of these great composers.

    First of all, the majority of great composers were definitely not mentally ill. They were within the normal range, though often had difficult personalities, but I’d certainly not characterize a Beethoven or a Mozart as mentally ill. I don’t even think Bruckner was mentally ill, though something was definitely off with the guy. Was Ravel mentally ill? Perhaps homosexual (though even that is lacking any proof), if you consider that an illness. (As it definitely is an illness from an evolutionary point of view.) I’m not sure about your examples Schumann and Scriabin. Whatever the reasons for Schumann’s illness, he was still healthy at the time of his marriage and when his children were born. Am I wrong?

    Second, it’s questionable that mental illness has genetic causes. Most likely, it doesn’t. The most likely explanation for a majority of cases is some kind of infection, either viral or bacterial. As is the most likely explanation for a host of chronic diseases. Please read Plague Time: The New Germ Theory of Disease by Paul W. Ewald.

    Third, you still didn’t address my point that having many children is not necessarily adaptive, unless you have grandchildren and great-grandchildren and so on. Especially in an era where mortality was very high.

    I find your discussion is interesting though

    You don’t seem to read a lot of evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology. People like Steve Pinker will often drop things like that in their books.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ali Choudhury
    Ewald's theory was interesting in that he believed homosexuality was propagated by a viral infection. I think Greg Cochran also agreed with that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Bliss says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    You did not even read your own links correctly.

    Road deaths by mileage is a pointless metric given differences in population density that is over twenty times higher in South Korea versus Australia. The metric primarily used in the report itself was death by population, which in 2013 is 10.1, and in 2015 is 9.3 per 100k population(WHO statistics). The US has 10.6 per 100k, France at 5.1 and Australia at 5.4.

    Furthermore, this is of mixed vehicle usage, and notable quantities of fatalities were of pedestrians and cyclists. These will naturally be lower in countries with less pedestrian and cycling traffic.

    Road deaths by mileage is a pointless metric given differences in population density that is over twenty times higher in South Korea versus Australia. The metric primarily used in the report itself was death by population

    When you are measuring driving ability the population metric is pointless. Accidents can only happen when someone is driving. So accidents by kilometers driven is the most apt metric for our purpose.

    As for population density Australia is 90% urban, compared to 83% for South Korea and 94% for Japan. Very few aussies live in the Outback. You are just looking for an excuse. Why else would you latch on to only Australia and ignore the data for UK, Germany, Sweden and Norway?

    Furthermore, this is of mixed vehicle usage, and notable quantities of fatalities were of pedestrians and cyclists. These will naturally be lower in countries with less pedestrian and cycling traffic.

    Your visuospatial driving skills include avoiding crashing into slow moving pedestrians and bicyclists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    As for population density Australia is 90% urban, compared to 83% for South Korea and 94% for Japan.
     
    You don’t seem to realize or seem to choose to ignore that “urban” areas can have enormously different population densities.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    If 500 deaths occurred between 500 car accidents with each, your metric will show twice as much safety versus 500 deaths involving a car and a pedestrian (or cycle) in spite of it actually being exactly the same.

    And even casual analysis would have shown that I was comparing the population density of Sydeny against Seoul(urban vs urban). You have neither understood the links you posted, nor my comments about vehicle mixture.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. m___ says:

    Almost everything can be explained by IQ, and differential rates in the appearance of intensive agriculture, urbanization, and literacy

    Cause consequence effects for realized intelligence? The need for collaboration and close exchanges, the probabilities for associations of better brains or their resulting output, resulting in being better when intensive agriculture is developed. Allowing for denser communities. Allowing for specialization. Allowing for ease and choice of collaboration.

    About the worry of non-linearity. Today, abstract thinking, resulting performance and product output should not need dense population concentrations, should not need distinction between different political entities, cultures, ethnicities theoretically. There could be a breaking point where the model of urban dominated ways of living would be averse, merely by derivative factors.

    Secondly, the untouched question, does a difference of say a billion people on the total of eight billion have a correlation in realized intelligence? Is there a breaking point here also, that shifts total human numbers from asset to liability.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  131. Bbh says: • Website

    How do you stop the well educated and higher IQ people from supporting SJW causes? Before anyone says STEM, what about the very high cases of austistic people who develop autogynephilia?

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon
    currently, successful careers depend on bowing to SJW hegemony

    so the solution is to change the cultural hegemony
    , @Daniel Chieh
    In this, I agree with AaronB that you have to provide an alternative worldview to work towards. A position of defense is unlikely to appeal to the high performing. Mr Karlin, I think, hints at this in fighting for a cause vs fighting for gimmedats.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. @Daniel Chieh
    German Shepherds are considered the most intelligent of dogs based on ability to learn commands. I wonder what is their cranial capacity versus other dogs? Are toy dogs mentally more impaired in some way?

    Dog owners agree that one of the smartest breeds is papillon, a toy breed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Interesting. I went through this:

    https://petrix.com/dogint/intelligence.html

    Most of the top 10 dogs are medium-large dogs - some of them, such as the Poodle, have mini variants but I doubt those were the ones ranked by the trainers(can't tell for certain). The Papillion is there, though, as an interesting outlier at 10 lbs and #7. It also has an interesting pedigree from spaniels, which are themselves in "excellent" intelligence before being bred into a toy form, but it outranks its predecessors.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. @Dmitry
    You want determine "biologically adaptiveness" (to environment) of having musical genius, by number of descendants of the great geniuses?

    You want to say that being musical genius is "maladaptive" because the geniuses have fewer kids or something like this?

    The musical genius of this person will usually be something adaptive to environment in the sense that it provides profession and income for that person. So by definition, is usually an adaptive trait for this person.

    The plausible explanation musical genius (which is in very extenuated form amongst the great names you discuss) might be maladaptive in population, is that any representative population of geniuses will perhaps have higher rates of mental illness than a control population (there is probably some correlation between genius and mental illness).

    In this case, it will be the particular mental illness which we would identity as maladaptive (and the musical genius is simply factor which may positively correlate with rates of mental illnesses).

    The correlation between musical genius and mental illness will be a very interesting and complicated topic, although trying to claim the musical intelligence is maladaptive factor - not very plausible.

    The thing is mental illnesses are maladaptive factors in most (societal) contexts, but not necessarily in the area of having children (what you are defining as "biological adaptedness") - otherwise we will see rates of mental illness falling in each generation, and the genetic preconditions of mental illness falling in the population, other things equal. (Although someone may respond that recessive genetic passing of genetic preconditions bypass this and allow it to remain in population).

    -

    I find your discussion is interesting though, to see you mentioning facts about the life of these great composers.

    Do you listen to classical music? Can you recommend Russian composers?

    For example from Scriabin I only know Le Poème de l’extase, op. 54, which is good, but I don’t listen to it too much. I don’t know most Russian composers, except Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, Shostakovich and Prokofiev.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Do you listen to classical music? Can you recommend Russian composers?

    For example from Scriabin I only know Le Poème de l’extase, op. 54, which is good, but I don’t listen to it too much. I don’t know most Russian composers, except Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, Shostakovich and Prokofiev.
     
    It's an area I'm sorry to be a geek - and I'm not sure Karlin wants us to convert his blog comments to a music forum, so I add this MORE tag and continue write underneath MORE and will copy and paste you some recommendations from a youtube playlist.

    I don't know if you listen to CDs, or if you download music files (the best place to get FLAC files is is on soulseek)?

    I grew up playing piano so listen more on piano compositions, which is where Scriabin and Rachmaninov were gods. (I don't know if you prefer opera or something) (Rachmaninov's writing for orchestra is much more disappointing)

    I copy-paste videos from my YouTube playlist -( and if you want CD recommendations, obviously the sound quality to hear the beauty of a piano is not possible on YouTube)

    Most famous etude of Scriabin(with its "stormclouds and rainbows")

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGEd5sDqEcs

    Another classic
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NToz59kpO0

    Another beautiful composition
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKxl3hTqOq0

    Rachmaninov

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13UlKWgwdZI

    Rachmaninov prelude "The Return" (later stated as the favourite of the composer's many preludes)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHGd624HzDc

    Tchaikovsky - I used to play this

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdwivpq16oQ

    Of a beautiful poem of Lermontov
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uY0fZuS4i94

    Rachmaninov - elegy
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg2euhUhT_U

    Rachmaninov's Vespers (these masterpieces, but best in small doses)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl61KCwFV9E

    There was the genius Hungarian pianist Zoltan Kocsis - recently died. He wrote famously a new, very ornate arrangement of the Rachmaninov's vocalize
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_OrA80NGBM
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. @ussr andy

    To me it is pretty clear that this is what Ashkenazim excel at. Coming up with just-so-stories.
     
    here's one, if I may: the male-female gap in innovation is because it's all ultimately a mating display.

    I don’t think Isaac Newton was particularly noted as a babe magnet. Those nterested in mating displays are more likely to try to become Big Men than advance the frontiers of knowledge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @reiner Tor
    First of all, the majority of great composers were definitely not mentally ill. They were within the normal range, though often had difficult personalities, but I'd certainly not characterize a Beethoven or a Mozart as mentally ill. I don't even think Bruckner was mentally ill, though something was definitely off with the guy. Was Ravel mentally ill? Perhaps homosexual (though even that is lacking any proof), if you consider that an illness. (As it definitely is an illness from an evolutionary point of view.) I'm not sure about your examples Schumann and Scriabin. Whatever the reasons for Schumann's illness, he was still healthy at the time of his marriage and when his children were born. Am I wrong?

    Second, it's questionable that mental illness has genetic causes. Most likely, it doesn't. The most likely explanation for a majority of cases is some kind of infection, either viral or bacterial. As is the most likely explanation for a host of chronic diseases. Please read Plague Time: The New Germ Theory of Disease by Paul W. Ewald.

    Third, you still didn't address my point that having many children is not necessarily adaptive, unless you have grandchildren and great-grandchildren and so on. Especially in an era where mortality was very high.

    I find your discussion is interesting though
     
    You don't seem to read a lot of evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology. People like Steve Pinker will often drop things like that in their books.

    Ewald’s theory was interesting in that he believed homosexuality was propagated by a viral infection. I think Greg Cochran also agreed with that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Twinkie says:
    @Bliss

    Road deaths by mileage is a pointless metric given differences in population density that is over twenty times higher in South Korea versus Australia. The metric primarily used in the report itself was death by population
     
    When you are measuring driving ability the population metric is pointless. Accidents can only happen when someone is driving. So accidents by kilometers driven is the most apt metric for our purpose.

    As for population density Australia is 90% urban, compared to 83% for South Korea and 94% for Japan. Very few aussies live in the Outback. You are just looking for an excuse. Why else would you latch on to only Australia and ignore the data for UK, Germany, Sweden and Norway?

    Furthermore, this is of mixed vehicle usage, and notable quantities of fatalities were of pedestrians and cyclists. These will naturally be lower in countries with less pedestrian and cycling traffic.
     
    Your visuospatial driving skills include avoiding crashing into slow moving pedestrians and bicyclists.

    As for population density Australia is 90% urban, compared to 83% for South Korea and 94% for Japan.

    You don’t seem to realize or seem to choose to ignore that “urban” areas can have enormously different population densities.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Twinkie says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Is there a credible estimate of Indian IQ? I am not convinced by Lynn & Vanhanen’s low-80s estimate.
     
    We are still waiting for Jason Malloy to chime in with his promised study. But I think that low 80s are plausible, with potential to go up to low-to-mid 90s.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-puzzle-of-indian-iq-a-country-of-gypsies-and-jews/

    Speaking of Jason Richwine, Steve Sailer on his twitter mentioned a few days ago, in response to a direct question on this very topic from an Indian, that the mean IQ of 2nd-gen Indian-Americans is something around 112 IQ, so quite close to mean Ashkenazi IQ.
     
    Something like 50% of Indian-Americans are Brahmins IIRC, and Americans did very thorough cognitive filtering on which Indians got in.

    I know that Jason Malloy once commented that Brahmins in India DON'T have superior IQs, but since it's just one short comment and goes against a lot of other evidence (e.g. almost all of the people who developed Indian nukes were South Indian Brahmins), plus the heterogeneity of the Brahmin caste itself, I don't take this seriously.

    That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins.
     
    British Indians do much worse than Indian-Americans, they are at best only equal to British Whites on academic tests. Ergo for IQ tests.

    Isn’t this an old stereotype(or even a slur) repackaged in a new exterior? I’ve gone back and read some articles from ~2005 recently and it is astonishing how dismissive many Western media outlets were of the Chinese.
     
    Well I never did that from the very start so I think I have some credibility on the matter.

    This is from 2008, less than a year after I began blogging!: http://akarlin.com/2008/08/a-long-wait-at-the-gate-of-delusions/

    Also http://akarlin.com/2011/07/top-10-sinophobe-myths/

    Yet as you yourself have pointed out, the Chinese have risen very fast at cutting-edge research in the academies. Their AI efforts are already world-class.
     
    Correct.

    However, as I have also long pointed out, Japan has less elite scientific level output than the UK or Germany: http://www.unz.com/freed/affirmative-action-and-the-american-mind-if-any/#comment-2349841

    South Korea is equal to Spain (!) and Switzerland (!!!).

    Assuming China converges to somewhere between Korea's and Japan's level, its elite scientific output will max out at 100%-150% of the US level. Which will make it the world's premier scientific power, but not an overwhelmingly dominant one, which is what you would expect from its demographics + average IQ.

    This ofc assumes that the US will not keep on declining due to internal demographic changes and SJWization.

    Incidentally, in the deeper past, I actually long resisted the claim that East Asians are somehow less curious and so forth. However, things like the Nature Science Index, Kura's arguments, the data on East Asian participation in "out of left field" communities, etc. have gradually convinced me that there is something to those stereotypes.

    Though their extreme versions (e.g. Wingrove's Chung Kuo series) remain ridiculous exaggerations.

    Also, there was plenty of Chinese innovation pre-1500 AD and one could argue that if you focus from 0 AD to 1500 AD, it is not clear that Europeans did better. We innovated in a shorter burst and as technological output accelerated, it was more tightly packed in a shorter timespan, though I will concede that the last 500 years were vastly more important than anything than came before it put together.
     
    Lead was very much restricted, from around 300 AD when Rome began to fall into obscurantism, to 1100 AD, which correlated to the rise of medieval scholasticism (not even the Renaissance!): https://www.unz.com/akarlin/graphing-the-dark-ages/

    https://www.unzcloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/kirkegaard-human-accomplishment-2.png

    Also, China's peak during that period was very modest relative to the earlier Greek peak, to say nothing of course of post-1100 developments in Europe.

    There is also the structure of Chinese developments: Much more practical, heavily loaded towards tech (compass, paper, gunpowder, printing press), including even the basic research (didn't bother with proofs until arrival of modern Western mathematics; but 18th century Japan independently developed advanced numerical techniques). In contrast, India (Kerala)... developed the zero.

    Perhaps we were simply doing better at this particular juncture, which is why it was us, but had it begun in 1300 AD, maybe I would have written this in Mandarin.
     
    I believe core Europe was already more advanced in important respects than China by 1300. By then, IIRC, they were even producing more manuscripts, despite China having the printing press.

    However, if Europe was to vanish off the face of the Earth c. 1300, I do think China would have been by far the next best candidate to reach the Industrial Revolution soonest. Maybe around 2200-2300.

    Incidentally, in the deeper past, I actually long resisted the claim that East Asians are somehow less curious and so forth. However, things like the Nature Science Index, Kura’s arguments, the data on East Asian participation in “out of left field” communities, etc. have gradually convinced me that there is something to those stereotypes.

    I don’t think it’s lower “curiosity.” East Asians are actually quite curious about, for example, new gadgets.

    My own observation is that East Asians tend to be highly risk-averse, thus driving them toward more the practical than the abstract (hence the massive government funding toward basic research in the West vs. corporation-driven applied science/technological research in Japan and South Korea).

    I even see this comparative tendency even in – of all things – Judo. My decades of coaching youth Judo in the U.S. has confirmed for me that East Asian youngsters are, on average, much more risk-averse than white youngsters. Stereotypically, East Asian kids won’t use a newly learned technique right away in randori and shiai. They’ll drill it for a very long time and only use it once they feel comfortable and confident of a high rate of success. White kids on average tend to jump into using newly learned techniques “live” much sooner… even when they are pretty bad at executing them and invariably get smashed/countered backwards.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Twinkie says:
    @Bliss

    the WHO rundown of the most dangerous countries to be on the road has only one vaguely East Asian country, Thailand, and several African states.
     
    90% of all fatalities on the road are in low to middle income countries. Chaotic conditions, bad roads, few lights and crosswalks, over crowded vehicles, lack of ambulances and hospitals, untrained drivers etc skew the numbers. Better to compare developed countries:

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/korea_irtad-2015-26-en#page4

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/australia_irtad-2015-7-en#page4

    In Australia deaths per billion km in 2000 was 9.1, in South Korea it was 49.5. South Korea must have taken some safety measures, for deaths in 2013 went down to 17.2, but that was still 3.4 times the deaths (5) in Australia that year.

    For the year 2013 here is how it looked for East Asian vs West European countries in deaths per billion km:

    S. Korea—>17.2
    Japan ——>6.9

    Germany->4.6
    Norway—->4.3
    UK————>3.5
    Sweden—-> 3.4

    South Korea has 5 times and Japan 2 times the death rate of UK and Sweden. Maybe there is some truth in the stereotype after all?

    Another comparison of driving IQ is to look at the very best drivers: the race car drivers. Formula One racing is the gold standard here. The field is dominated by Europeans but the very best driver is an Afro-Brit, Lewis Hamilton. No East Asians to be found at this level, even though F1 racing is popular in Japan, China and Singapore (they all host a Grand Prix).

    S. Korea—>17.2
    Japan ——>6.9

    This seems to indicate Flynn effect in driving ability. Or maybe it’s just increased familiarity. The history of automobile use is rather shallow in East Asia (and longer in Japan than in South Korea).

    We can figure this out better if we had access to similar data for American-born whites, blacks, East Asians, etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I addressed that in post 75, basically, though it also includes immigrants.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Anon[298] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous coward

    You do realize Chinese students in China use pinyin to help them learn the characters, right?
     
    Of course I do. How do you think I learn the characters myself?

    It’s not a perfect complete system but it’s easier to acquire, which is what Karlin said.
     
    Read my post again and don't be stupid this time around.

    Literacy (i.e., the ability to read and understand complex texts) is much harder in pinyin than in characters. Recognizing and sounding out words is maybe like 5% of being literate.

    Recognizing and sounding out words is maybe like 5% of being literate.

    Well, thanks very much for this extremely accurate statistic, derived no doubt with arduous calculation.

    Pinyin is a significant aid to literacy, as are the existence of phonetic alphabets in general. That’s what I said. That’s what Karlin said. That’s even what you said: How do you think I learn the characters myself?

    So with respect to don’t be stupid this time around, maybe try and take your own advice for a change?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    Pinyin is a significant aid to literacy
     
    It's an aid to memorizing characters. It is not an aid in achieving Chinese literacy. (Quite the opposite, in fact. It'd be much easier if the characters had saner and more memorable phonetic labels.)

    Do you understand the difference between 'knowing characters' and 'being literate'?

    That’s what I said. That’s what Karlin said.
     
    I don't know who you are, but Karlin has no clue about the Chinese language. No offense, but I really don't care about his opinion on this topic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @Bliss

    Road deaths by mileage is a pointless metric given differences in population density that is over twenty times higher in South Korea versus Australia. The metric primarily used in the report itself was death by population
     
    When you are measuring driving ability the population metric is pointless. Accidents can only happen when someone is driving. So accidents by kilometers driven is the most apt metric for our purpose.

    As for population density Australia is 90% urban, compared to 83% for South Korea and 94% for Japan. Very few aussies live in the Outback. You are just looking for an excuse. Why else would you latch on to only Australia and ignore the data for UK, Germany, Sweden and Norway?

    Furthermore, this is of mixed vehicle usage, and notable quantities of fatalities were of pedestrians and cyclists. These will naturally be lower in countries with less pedestrian and cycling traffic.
     
    Your visuospatial driving skills include avoiding crashing into slow moving pedestrians and bicyclists.

    If 500 deaths occurred between 500 car accidents with each, your metric will show twice as much safety versus 500 deaths involving a car and a pedestrian (or cycle) in spite of it actually being exactly the same.

    And even casual analysis would have shown that I was comparing the population density of Sydeny against Seoul(urban vs urban). You have neither understood the links you posted, nor my comments about vehicle mixture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    If 500 deaths occurred between 500 car accidents with each, your metric will show twice as much safety
     
    How does that make the mileage metric pointless as you claimed ? How is the population metric (which includes non-drivers), the correct metric to measure driving ability? Try and think rationally.

    And why the hell should the crashes with pedestrians and cyclists be ignored? Do they not also measure visuospatial IQ?

    And btw, even if you disregard the deaths involving pedestrians and cyclists the rate is still many times higher in South Korea (6.84) than in the UK (2.26)

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/united-kingdom_irtad-2015-42-en#page5

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/korea_irtad-2015-26-en#page4

    And even casual analysis would have shown that I was comparing the population density of Sydeny against Seoul(urban vs urban).
     
    No you were not. You were comparing Australia to South Korea. Anyone can check and confirm.

    In any case your point that higher population density results in higher deadly car accident rates is contradicted by the data. For example:

    https://stats-japan.com/t/kiji/11911

    Kagawa Prefecture (1355/sq mi density) has almost 5 times the accident fatality rate as Tokyo (16,121/sq mi density).


    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/eb63/be3106ea8fa91f1ad1b39b90bd852ce8f0f1.pdf

    Population density was also associated with fewer crashes. Each additional person per net residential acre decreased accident incidence by 0.05%.

    A study by Reid Ewing of the University of Maryland 2009[3] also concluded that dense urban areas appear to be safer than the lower volume environments of the suburbs.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. notanon says:
    @Bbh
    How do you stop the well educated and higher IQ people from supporting SJW causes? Before anyone says STEM, what about the very high cases of austistic people who develop autogynephilia?

    currently, successful careers depend on bowing to SJW hegemony

    so the solution is to change the cultural hegemony

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. notanon says:

    east Asian drivers

    could a population with particularly high visuo-spatial ability get away with “bad” driving (aka correctly judged near misses) if and only if every driver is east Asian but not otherwise?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  143. @Anon

    Recognizing and sounding out words is maybe like 5% of being literate.
     
    Well, thanks very much for this extremely accurate statistic, derived no doubt with arduous calculation.

    Pinyin is a significant aid to literacy, as are the existence of phonetic alphabets in general. That's what I said. That's what Karlin said. That's even what you said: How do you think I learn the characters myself?

    So with respect to don’t be stupid this time around, maybe try and take your own advice for a change?

    Pinyin is a significant aid to literacy

    It’s an aid to memorizing characters. It is not an aid in achieving Chinese literacy. (Quite the opposite, in fact. It’d be much easier if the characters had saner and more memorable phonetic labels.)

    Do you understand the difference between ‘knowing characters’ and ‘being literate’?

    That’s what I said. That’s what Karlin said.

    I don’t know who you are, but Karlin has no clue about the Chinese language. No offense, but I really don’t care about his opinion on this topic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    It is not an aid in achieving Chinese literacy.
     
    Right, that's why it's taught in Chinese schools. Makes sense.

    I really don’t care about his opinion on this topic.
     
    Then why spend so much time in useless acrimony? If you want to make the point that China shouldn't drop characters and go pinyin-only, that's a very good point, but why pretend you're engaging in some sort of disagreement with our host Sr. Karlin about it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. @Bbh
    How do you stop the well educated and higher IQ people from supporting SJW causes? Before anyone says STEM, what about the very high cases of austistic people who develop autogynephilia?

    In this, I agree with AaronB that you have to provide an alternative worldview to work towards. A position of defense is unlikely to appeal to the high performing. Mr Karlin, I think, hints at this in fighting for a cause vs fighting for gimmedats.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    I agree with AaronB
     
    I don't know if it's his idea, it came up multiple times before. A defensive ideology doesn't attract people. For example when talking about National Socialism, it came up many times that they offered something higher to people: a sense of belonging to a community, a desire to sacrifice (even oneself) for idealistic reasons (the vision of the Thousand Year Reich), something transcendental. Hitler had a genius for theater (he probably got a lot of ideas from Wagner), and he also had a good aesthetic sense. Even Himmler's stupid mysticism helped a lot. The SS had a huge appeal, and in part it must've been due to his mysticism, for example the Wewelsburg complex.

    I'm sure that Richard Spencer's frequent Nietzsche quotes or the tendency to quote Evola and the likes is also a kind of attempt at creating something less materialistic. It's obvious that you cannot start a movement by HBD above. I don't think many of us were under such an illusion.

    That said, the people supporting SJW causes are either self-interested (especially those being members of grievance groups) or they don't understand its long term results (e.g. unaware of HBD, unaware of the pace of demographic transformation, etc.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. @Twinkie

    S. Korea—>17.2
    Japan ——>6.9
     
    This seems to indicate Flynn effect in driving ability. Or maybe it’s just increased familiarity. The history of automobile use is rather shallow in East Asia (and longer in Japan than in South Korea).

    We can figure this out better if we had access to similar data for American-born whites, blacks, East Asians, etc.

    I addressed that in post 75, basically, though it also includes immigrants.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. @Daniel Chieh
    In this, I agree with AaronB that you have to provide an alternative worldview to work towards. A position of defense is unlikely to appeal to the high performing. Mr Karlin, I think, hints at this in fighting for a cause vs fighting for gimmedats.

    I agree with AaronB

    I don’t know if it’s his idea, it came up multiple times before. A defensive ideology doesn’t attract people. For example when talking about National Socialism, it came up many times that they offered something higher to people: a sense of belonging to a community, a desire to sacrifice (even oneself) for idealistic reasons (the vision of the Thousand Year Reich), something transcendental. Hitler had a genius for theater (he probably got a lot of ideas from Wagner), and he also had a good aesthetic sense. Even Himmler’s stupid mysticism helped a lot. The SS had a huge appeal, and in part it must’ve been due to his mysticism, for example the Wewelsburg complex.

    I’m sure that Richard Spencer’s frequent Nietzsche quotes or the tendency to quote Evola and the likes is also a kind of attempt at creating something less materialistic. It’s obvious that you cannot start a movement by HBD above. I don’t think many of us were under such an illusion.

    That said, the people supporting SJW causes are either self-interested (especially those being members of grievance groups) or they don’t understand its long term results (e.g. unaware of HBD, unaware of the pace of demographic transformation, etc.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @DFH


    I’m sure that Richard Spencer’s frequent Nietzsche quotes or the tendency to quote Evola and the likes is also a kind of attempt at creating something less materialistic.
     
    You give him too much credit. He just says stuff that sounds cool to his juvenile mind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. Anon[298] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous coward

    Pinyin is a significant aid to literacy
     
    It's an aid to memorizing characters. It is not an aid in achieving Chinese literacy. (Quite the opposite, in fact. It'd be much easier if the characters had saner and more memorable phonetic labels.)

    Do you understand the difference between 'knowing characters' and 'being literate'?

    That’s what I said. That’s what Karlin said.
     
    I don't know who you are, but Karlin has no clue about the Chinese language. No offense, but I really don't care about his opinion on this topic.

    It is not an aid in achieving Chinese literacy.

    Right, that’s why it’s taught in Chinese schools. Makes sense.

    I really don’t care about his opinion on this topic.

    Then why spend so much time in useless acrimony? If you want to make the point that China shouldn’t drop characters and go pinyin-only, that’s a very good point, but why pretend you’re engaging in some sort of disagreement with our host Sr. Karlin about it?

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @anonymous coward
    I'll repeat again, for the third time: literacy is not recognizing the characters. The thai language has a simple alphabet, you could learn it in a week. Good luck becoming literate in thai, though.

    Chinese characters are hard to learn but they greatly simplify Chinese literacy. They have a practical use. Don't comment on the issue unless you know something about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. utu says:
    @songbird

    Does “I can easily believe” mean you are credulous? Or you are not really thoughtful when expressing yourself?
     
    Now, now... “I can easily believe” is an expression, just as is "I find it hard to believe." Maybe, it is as others have inferred and you aren't a native English speaker?

    Let me put it this way, so it is more understandable for you: I did not live in a Jewish neighborhood (though probably a more Jewish part of the country). The nearest synagogue I knew of was two towns over, but many of my smarter than average classmates were Jews, based on what classes they were in: honors and advanced placement, based on their SAT scores, and what colleges they went to: Harvard, John-Hopkins, etc. Who their fathers were: doctors, a concert player, etc.

    The smartest guy I ever knew was probably Chinese. He drew a complicated phase diagram from memory. I once heard his intelligence remarked on, by someone I had no reason to suspect even knew him - I recognized who he was talking about immediately, even though I did not myself know him very well either.

    The only out and out dumb East Asian I ever knew had Down Syndrome. In contrast, one of the few Indians I knew as a boy was a complete dumb-ass. I knew another one who was about average, but a pothead. I did not know any obviously smart ones in college. I am sure there were some, but I did not know them.

    Meanwhile, I have repeatedly been struck by how stupid many of the blacks I've known seem to be. Now, none of this is scientific or statistical, but Asians and Ashenazis seem to punch above their weight, while the American dot-Indians I've known seem at best to have the intelligence of whites. Maybe, they don't. Maybe, it is statistically higher, and/or maybe the mean has risen, as new ones have come ashore.

    Could the official Ashkenazi IQ estimate be off? Higher than it actually is? Quite possibly. The true average seems higher than the white average though. Maybe, there are even subgroups of whites that are the same, but whites aren't as tribalistic, so it is harder to know when someone is an Episcopalian than a Jew.

    BTW, contra Ron Unz and I believe also you, two of the stupidest people I ever knew were Hispanic. They had AIDS that they had gotten from sharing needles, and decided to have a baby, I was literally gawking at how stupid they were, and the dysgenics of it all, so that my teacher noticed, probably misinterpreted it, and smiled at me, probably thinking I was impressed with the technology that gave the baby a good chance of being born HIV-free. Now, of course that is incident, but I never knew a smart Hispanic.

    You said ” I can easily believe 112 for Jews, 105-106 for NE Asians.” And you know that 112 is larger than 106, right? And your experience of Asians and Jews does not lend support to your “easy belief” that Jews are smarter than Asians. Nonetheless, you exactly stated that “based on acquaintances, I can easily believe [Jews are smarter than Asians].”

    And yes, English is not my native language but I do not think it is the issue of my understanding English but it is about you being careless/sloppy in expressing some kind of thought. Actually what was your thought?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Anon[250] • Disclaimer says:
    @Guillaume Tell

    that you can be objective when judging whether somebody is smarter than you or not.
     
    I think that is the crux of the problem! In my case for example, n is always equal to 0 :)

    Oh dear! That is indeed a very manly thing to say! But not because of IQ at all, it is rather an impulse, a striving to construct, to achieve, to conquer and hold. A properly formed conscience is indispensable for the ‘constructive’ part. Otherwise the IQ losses much of its charm, imo.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. @Anon

    It is not an aid in achieving Chinese literacy.
     
    Right, that's why it's taught in Chinese schools. Makes sense.

    I really don’t care about his opinion on this topic.
     
    Then why spend so much time in useless acrimony? If you want to make the point that China shouldn't drop characters and go pinyin-only, that's a very good point, but why pretend you're engaging in some sort of disagreement with our host Sr. Karlin about it?

    I’ll repeat again, for the third time: literacy is not recognizing the characters. The thai language has a simple alphabet, you could learn it in a week. Good luck becoming literate in thai, though.

    Chinese characters are hard to learn but they greatly simplify Chinese literacy. They have a practical use. Don’t comment on the issue unless you know something about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    I repeat:

    why pretend you're engaging in some sort of disagreement with our host Sr. Karlin about it?
     
    Yes, when you have learned pinyin, you have not learned Chinese, any more than my using the Latin alphabet proves I read Spanish (I do, but that's beside the point). This is a valid point, but one wonders in what way you imagine you are disagreeing with any point anyone else has made? Is there something else you are trying to say?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. @Bbh
    Is there any prospect of treating dementia soon to at least stop it from getting worse? A genius IQ is not going to save you if you are dying from dementia.

    I would also like to specifically request if the commentator AP could reply to this with his thoughts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. A (wild) idea.
    Following Mr.Karlins theory, might it not have been better for Europe to have been conquered by Islam in the 8th-9th centuries? Here I mostly refer to the sieges of Constantinople, rather than to the battle of Tours (losing which would not have brought down the Frankish kingdom).
    According to even someone like Toby Huff (who is known to be among the most “eurocentric” contemporary historians of medieval science), the world of Islam was ahead of the West in science (Natural-Philosophy) till the late 14th century……which would mean that Islam was ahead for about 700 years, not a small period of time by any measure. This is despite that fact that the Muslim world had a smaller population then Western Europe at least from the 12th century on that it mostly consisted of a thinly populated vast landmass, while the wests population was far more concentrated, with most of the west being accessible via water transport making communications much easier. The core of the Muslim world was also ravaged by very violent nomad invasions on a semi-regular basis and had a far lower IQ. Despite all of this it managed to stay ahead for 700 years.
    The west had a far worst access to ancient writing and was hampered by the anti-rationalist mindset of the church. This changed only slowly and one of the main catalysts for this was the loot of a vast massive of writing after the fall of Toledo 1085, this new knowledge did a lot to kick start scholastics and rationalism but despite this, it still took the west another 300 years to catch up and overtake the “arab masters”.

    Now had Islam taken over the West by 800 (not necessarily trough conquest, voulonteer conversions of western Kings would also have been a possibility, especially after the fall of Byzantium and the Khazar Khaganate, would have made the eastern Slavs convert and become a battering ram for Islam in Europe) the west would have still retained its genetic and geographical advantages, but also would have had immediate access to ancient writings and to eastern inventions like the Indian numerals or Chinese paper, it would also have converted to Islam at a time when rationalism was flowering in the muslim world, removing the mystical obscurantism of the church as a factor. The (superior) Northwest Europeans would then easily have taken over leadership of the muslim world from the (inferior) Arabs. al-ghazali would not have been a factor, because the intellectual dominance in the world of Islam would have been western anyway (not to mention that according to many scholars, his influence on the development of science is vastly exaggerated in the west). The scientific revolution might have occurred 500 years earlier then it did (probably towards the end of the “medieval warm period”).

    Now there are some objections to this “thesis” that I would like to address:

    1.Racial mixture with Arabs, Berbers and African slaves would have led to a degeneration of the Nordic race: First few Arabs, let alone Africans would settle in northern Europe, in our own history, even the Turks beardly settled in the Balkans and African slaves would not have survived in most of Europe anyway. Arabs and Berbers were few in number, they beardly colonized Spain or Sicily, they would have at best spread as a purely administrative elite north of the pyrenes/Alps and would have been replaced by (superior) natives after a few centuries.

    2. Inbreeding would have led to a degeneration of the Nordic race: Firstly, Muslims in Europe didn’t practice much of the cousin marriage, typical for the middle east (and had far lower rates of polygamy as well). Albanians, Bosnjaks or Wolga Tatars don’t practice it, so it seems that this custom usually remains in Asia or Africa and does not spread into Europe. But the Europeans of 800 were still used to clannishness….could they have maintained it under Islam? If this is so one has to ask how harmful inbreeding actually is. Does it lower IQ? The Japanese are far more inbred then other (civilized) East Asians, but while having more genetic diseases and a smaller stature, they still retain the IQ typical for (civilized) East Asians. Ashkenazi Jews are also strongly inbred as well. Inbreeding might indeed lead to clannishness, but as Mr.Karlin stated above, clannishness does have no effect on either science or economic wealth. While clannishness in the Muslim world can often be violent and dysfunctional, the clannishness of East Asians or Ashkenazi Jews is neither. Why would the higher IQ Europeans follow the pattern of low IQ middle easterners?

    3. Islamic financial laws would have hindered economic growth: See Mr.Karlin, institutions have no impact on wealth (unless its communism).

    So what do you people think about this idea? Were Hitler and Nietzsche right for having desired an Islamic takeover of Europe (although for rather different reasons)? Would the Wests embrace of Islam led to far earlier progress and put the natural Nordic master-race on top of a vast Muslim world-system over half a millennium before it actually took it over (for a short period of time)?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh

    The (superior) Northwest Europeans would then easily have taken over leadership of the muslim world from the (inferior) Arabs
     
    From what I could tell, the Persians were culturally and intellectually quite superior to the Arabic portions of Islam(and significant contributor of the Islamic Golden Age), but they didn't manage to takeover leadership of the Muslim world, did they?
    , @Hyperborean

    So what do you people think about this idea? Were Hitler and Nietzsche right for having desired an Islamic takeover of Europe (although for rather different reasons)? Would the Wests embrace of Islam led to far earlier progress and put the natural Nordic master-race on top of a vast Muslim world-system over half a millennium before it actually took it over (for a short period of time)?
     
    Not worth slouching towards Mecca for.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. Such a well thought out (and sourced) theory…..marked as spam. Im disappointed. And this despite the fact that so many far-right authorities have already contemplated the very same question.

    AK: Oops. Maybe better wait a few minutes before throwing around censorship accusations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    When you become mecha-AK, allocate some process memory for moderating comments. But more for remembering grudges.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. DFH says:
    @reiner Tor

    I agree with AaronB
     
    I don't know if it's his idea, it came up multiple times before. A defensive ideology doesn't attract people. For example when talking about National Socialism, it came up many times that they offered something higher to people: a sense of belonging to a community, a desire to sacrifice (even oneself) for idealistic reasons (the vision of the Thousand Year Reich), something transcendental. Hitler had a genius for theater (he probably got a lot of ideas from Wagner), and he also had a good aesthetic sense. Even Himmler's stupid mysticism helped a lot. The SS had a huge appeal, and in part it must've been due to his mysticism, for example the Wewelsburg complex.

    I'm sure that Richard Spencer's frequent Nietzsche quotes or the tendency to quote Evola and the likes is also a kind of attempt at creating something less materialistic. It's obvious that you cannot start a movement by HBD above. I don't think many of us were under such an illusion.

    That said, the people supporting SJW causes are either self-interested (especially those being members of grievance groups) or they don't understand its long term results (e.g. unaware of HBD, unaware of the pace of demographic transformation, etc.)

    I’m sure that Richard Spencer’s frequent Nietzsche quotes or the tendency to quote Evola and the likes is also a kind of attempt at creating something less materialistic.

    You give him too much credit. He just says stuff that sounds cool to his juvenile mind.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    He just says stuff that sounds cool to his juvenile mind.
     
    Non-materialistic (or non-materialistic sounding) things usually sound cool to most minds. Would Star Wars be as popular (or as good) with all the cool technical stuff (including the spaceships and the light sabers) if it didn't have the cool mystical sounding religion of "Force" (and its magic) as well? I don't think so either.

    I don't know if Spencer understands this consciously, but he surely does understand it at some level. Unfortunately religion cannot discriminate based on any "protected" category like race (except Judaism can discriminate based on descent, or women could be discriminated against in Judaism or Islam, etc.), so you cannot use the religious loophole to create a parallel society.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. phil says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Certainly a major factor, but assuming equal IQs, an female S.D. of 13.5 vs. 15 for men (James Thompson usually uses 14), and a discovery threshold of 145, women would still account for almost a quarter of eminent figures; at a discovery threshold of 160, they would still account for ~12% of eminent figures. Whereas the actual number is just 2%. So other factors must clearly play a role.

    My pet theory is that even though female capacity to contribute to innovation has been getting progressively better throughout history - absolute conditions may be even better than for men, these days - the threshold discovery rate has also been steadily going up. The two factors have canceled each other out, resulting in zero net progress in the percentage of female eminent figures. They might even fall this century, since female access is now maxed out, whereas the problems that need to be solved will continue getting harder.

    Apart from IQ considerations, women are less interested, on average, in abstract speculation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @notanon
    risk aversion
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. @DFH


    I’m sure that Richard Spencer’s frequent Nietzsche quotes or the tendency to quote Evola and the likes is also a kind of attempt at creating something less materialistic.
     
    You give him too much credit. He just says stuff that sounds cool to his juvenile mind.

    He just says stuff that sounds cool to his juvenile mind.

    Non-materialistic (or non-materialistic sounding) things usually sound cool to most minds. Would Star Wars be as popular (or as good) with all the cool technical stuff (including the spaceships and the light sabers) if it didn’t have the cool mystical sounding religion of “Force” (and its magic) as well? I don’t think so either.

    I don’t know if Spencer understands this consciously, but he surely does understand it at some level. Unfortunately religion cannot discriminate based on any “protected” category like race (except Judaism can discriminate based on descent, or women could be discriminated against in Judaism or Islam, etc.), so you cannot use the religious loophole to create a parallel society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. @Polish Perspective

    There isn’t near as much to explain about the Middle East and India. They are simply less intelligent – significantly so – than the Europeans or East Asians.
     
    Is there a credible estimate of Indian IQ? I am not convinced by Lynn & Vanhanen's low-80s estimate. You have mentioned high parasitic load and malnourishment as potential factors holding the subcontinent in general back. Malnourishment in India is higher than even the average Sub-Saharan African country.

    You go on to state that you view the g-loaded PISA tests to be better guides, but India notoriously underperformed the (only) time they participated, probably for the same reason(s). Speaking of Jason Richwine, Steve Sailer on his twitter mentioned a few days ago, in response to a direct question on this very topic from an Indian, that the mean IQ of 2nd-gen Indian-Americans is something around 112 IQ, so quite close to mean Ashkenazi IQ. This would imply that 'regression to the mean' is quite high, and as such would throw cold water on the idea that the average Indian IQ is low on a genetic basis.

    Of course, as most people know, India has many subpopulations and many castes have extremely high endogamy, which makes determining Indian IQ so difficult, especially as most immigrants to the US are high caste(implied as Brahmin). That said, from what I understand, the same can not be said of Indians in the UK and they tend to do quite well there, despite far fewer Brahmins. Then again, some Indians on /pol/ have thrown cold water on this Brahmin = high caste theory.

    https://i.imgur.com/a2Uv6yM.png

    https://i.imgur.com/ViCWhFT.png

    I say this in the context of recman1's comments on UK Indians, and his focus on Brahmin's as high caste, which, if the-above comments is anything to go by, is misleading since 'high caste' is not synonymous with Brahmin in a strict socio-economic sense (but more so in a cultural sense).

    Verbal skills are much more important for economic productivity than recognizing patterns in weird shapes, ergo GDP per capita and development levels showing the highest levels of correlation precisely with verbal IQ.
     

    This is interesting, and I've heard this before. Additionally, I do not remember which author - perhaps it was Murray - who once wrote that mathematical IQ is actually better correlated with verbal IQ than the other way around. In other words, someone with a verbal IQ of 130 will have a higher mathematical IQ on average than someone with a mathematical IQ of 130 will have a verbal IQ. I do not know if this is true, do you know something about this? It goes against the stereotype of "clever humanist but worthless on math", which is why I was skeptical when I read it. It'd be interesting if true.

    My guess is that this underperformance can be ascribed to greater East Asian conformism, relative to the other major races of man (Kura et al., 2015).
     
    Isn't this an old stereotype(or even a slur) repackaged in a new exterior? I've gone back and read some articles from ~2005 recently and it is astonishing how dismissive many Western media outlets were of the Chinese. Sure, they write, the Chinese are growing fast but [insert litany of thinly-veiled dismissive insults about 'robotic' Asians who lack innovation]. Yet as you yourself have pointed out, the Chinese have risen very fast at cutting-edge research in the academies. Their AI efforts are already world-class. This does not disprove their historical lag, but it should perhaps caution us on taking an essentialist perspective by tagging them as perpetually 'incurious'. If that was the case, you'd expect it to remain a constant constraint and that doesn't appear to be true, or at least far less than many thought 10-15 years ago. Thoughts?

    Also, there was plenty of Chinese innovation pre-1500 AD and one could argue that if you focus from 0 AD to 1500 AD, it is not clear that Europeans did better. We innovated in a shorter burst and as technological output accelerated, it was more tightly packed in a shorter timespan, though I will concede that the last 500 years were vastly more important than anything than came before it put together.

    However, as Kurzweil has noted, human innovation has sped up consistently over the last 10 000 years. The introduction of each technology has been shorter and shorter, which perhaps shows to a generalised pattern that makes the industrial revolution less of a unique European phenomena in the sense that "without us, it would never have happened" and more a logical end-conclusion of ever-faster innovation over the course of human history. Perhaps we were simply doing better at this particular juncture, which is why it was us, but had it begun in 1300 AD, maybe I would have written this in Mandarin.


    P.S. For what it's worth, there are questions over whether we measure productivity adequately today. Some, like prof Diane Coyle, argue that we are underestimating it and research institutions like the Conference Board has taken in her research and the result of those models is that East Asian GDPpc is higher than it is today due to higher productivity.

    It is particularly technological productivity that is undermeasured, and that would remove a lot of this 'underperformance'. SK has lower productivity than Spain according to the OECD, which is somewhat implausible.

    …greater East Asian conformism
    …Isn’t this an old stereotype(or even a slur)
    …Their AI efforts are already world-class.

    .
    China’s Social Credit System: AI-driven panopticon

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Eh, I wouldn't read too much into the social credit system. As the article itself notes, there are "credit" systems worldwide already and this doesn't actually look like its centralized.

    This shouldn’t surprise us. Society in the West has already accepted a fairly extensive social credit system for many decades, including private credit ratings, employee assessments which can be shared, customer cards and reward credit cards, Professor of Law and International Affairs at Penn State Law Larry Cata Backer told TechNode.
     
    Which incidentally, I was reminded of today when my social media under my real name just got randomly checked by a some company recruiter, I presume, someone who was scouting me from LinkedIn. Good thing that I removed any of my actual opinions there. Glory to social justice, blahblah.

    Anyway, from the most optimistic perspective, I can hope that it'll help engineer a higher trust culture. in China.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. @Hippopotamusdrome


    ...greater East Asian conformism
    ...Isn’t this an old stereotype(or even a slur)
    ...Their AI efforts are already world-class.

     

    .
    China's Social Credit System: AI-driven panopticon

    Eh, I wouldn’t read too much into the social credit system. As the article itself notes, there are “credit” systems worldwide already and this doesn’t actually look like its centralized.

    This shouldn’t surprise us. Society in the West has already accepted a fairly extensive social credit system for many decades, including private credit ratings, employee assessments which can be shared, customer cards and reward credit cards, Professor of Law and International Affairs at Penn State Law Larry Cata Backer told TechNode.

    Which incidentally, I was reminded of today when my social media under my real name just got randomly checked by a some company recruiter, I presume, someone who was scouting me from LinkedIn. Good thing that I removed any of my actual opinions there. Glory to social justice, blahblah.

    Anyway, from the most optimistic perspective, I can hope that it’ll help engineer a higher trust culture. in China.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. Anon[298] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous coward
    I'll repeat again, for the third time: literacy is not recognizing the characters. The thai language has a simple alphabet, you could learn it in a week. Good luck becoming literate in thai, though.

    Chinese characters are hard to learn but they greatly simplify Chinese literacy. They have a practical use. Don't comment on the issue unless you know something about it.

    I repeat:

    why pretend you’re engaging in some sort of disagreement with our host Sr. Karlin about it?

    Yes, when you have learned pinyin, you have not learned Chinese, any more than my using the Latin alphabet proves I read Spanish (I do, but that’s beside the point). This is a valid point, but one wonders in what way you imagine you are disagreeing with any point anyone else has made? Is there something else you are trying to say?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    This is a valid point, but one wonders in what way you imagine you are disagreeing with any point anyone else has made? Is there something else you are trying to say?
     
    Yes. Read my post again: literate 'Chinese' is a huge amalgamation of several languages, including several dead ones. Characters are built around this idea, and facilitate understanding. Pinyin makes understanding harder.

    Conceivably, if the Chinese were forced by some dictator to use only pinyin then they'd have to invent some other (simpler) written language, and after a few generations things would stabilize. But by then they'd have lost all their literate tradition and gained a massive generation gap, and choice of writing system would be the least of their problems.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. @Unknown128
    Such a well thought out (and sourced) theory.....marked as spam. Im disappointed. And this despite the fact that so many far-right authorities have already contemplated the very same question.

    AK: Oops. Maybe better wait a few minutes before throwing around censorship accusations.

    When you become mecha-AK, allocate some process memory for moderating comments. But more for remembering grudges.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. @Unknown128
    A (wild) idea.
    Following Mr.Karlins theory, might it not have been better for Europe to have been conquered by Islam in the 8th-9th centuries? Here I mostly refer to the sieges of Constantinople, rather than to the battle of Tours (losing which would not have brought down the Frankish kingdom).
    According to even someone like Toby Huff (who is known to be among the most “eurocentric” contemporary historians of medieval science), the world of Islam was ahead of the West in science (Natural-Philosophy) till the late 14th century……which would mean that Islam was ahead for about 700 years, not a small period of time by any measure. This is despite that fact that the Muslim world had a smaller population then Western Europe at least from the 12th century on that it mostly consisted of a thinly populated vast landmass, while the wests population was far more concentrated, with most of the west being accessible via water transport making communications much easier. The core of the Muslim world was also ravaged by very violent nomad invasions on a semi-regular basis and had a far lower IQ. Despite all of this it managed to stay ahead for 700 years.
    The west had a far worst access to ancient writing and was hampered by the anti-rationalist mindset of the church. This changed only slowly and one of the main catalysts for this was the loot of a vast massive of writing after the fall of Toledo 1085, this new knowledge did a lot to kick start scholastics and rationalism but despite this, it still took the west another 300 years to catch up and overtake the “arab masters”.

    Now had Islam taken over the West by 800 (not necessarily trough conquest, voulonteer conversions of western Kings would also have been a possibility, especially after the fall of Byzantium and the Khazar Khaganate, would have made the eastern Slavs convert and become a battering ram for Islam in Europe) the west would have still retained its genetic and geographical advantages, but also would have had immediate access to ancient writings and to eastern inventions like the Indian numerals or Chinese paper, it would also have converted to Islam at a time when rationalism was flowering in the muslim world, removing the mystical obscurantism of the church as a factor. The (superior) Northwest Europeans would then easily have taken over leadership of the muslim world from the (inferior) Arabs. al-ghazali would not have been a factor, because the intellectual dominance in the world of Islam would have been western anyway (not to mention that according to many scholars, his influence on the development of science is vastly exaggerated in the west). The scientific revolution might have occurred 500 years earlier then it did (probably towards the end of the “medieval warm period”).

    Now there are some objections to this “thesis” that I would like to address:

    1.Racial mixture with Arabs, Berbers and African slaves would have led to a degeneration of the Nordic race: First few Arabs, let alone Africans would settle in northern Europe, in our own history, even the Turks beardly settled in the Balkans and African slaves would not have survived in most of Europe anyway. Arabs and Berbers were few in number, they beardly colonized Spain or Sicily, they would have at best spread as a purely administrative elite north of the pyrenes/Alps and would have been replaced by (superior) natives after a few centuries.

    2. Inbreeding would have led to a degeneration of the Nordic race: Firstly, Muslims in Europe didn’t practice much of the cousin marriage, typical for the middle east (and had far lower rates of polygamy as well). Albanians, Bosnjaks or Wolga Tatars don’t practice it, so it seems that this custom usually remains in Asia or Africa and does not spread into Europe. But the Europeans of 800 were still used to clannishness….could they have maintained it under Islam? If this is so one has to ask how harmful inbreeding actually is. Does it lower IQ? The Japanese are far more inbred then other (civilized) East Asians, but while having more genetic diseases and a smaller stature, they still retain the IQ typical for (civilized) East Asians. Ashkenazi Jews are also strongly inbred as well. Inbreeding might indeed lead to clannishness, but as Mr.Karlin stated above, clannishness does have no effect on either science or economic wealth. While clannishness in the Muslim world can often be violent and dysfunctional, the clannishness of East Asians or Ashkenazi Jews is neither. Why would the higher IQ Europeans follow the pattern of low IQ middle easterners?

    3. Islamic financial laws would have hindered economic growth: See Mr.Karlin, institutions have no impact on wealth (unless its communism).

    So what do you people think about this idea? Were Hitler and Nietzsche right for having desired an Islamic takeover of Europe (although for rather different reasons)? Would the Wests embrace of Islam led to far earlier progress and put the natural Nordic master-race on top of a vast Muslim world-system over half a millennium before it actually took it over (for a short period of time)?

    The (superior) Northwest Europeans would then easily have taken over leadership of the muslim world from the (inferior) Arabs

    From what I could tell, the Persians were culturally and intellectually quite superior to the Arabic portions of Islam(and significant contributor of the Islamic Golden Age), but they didn’t manage to takeover leadership of the Muslim world, did they?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Unknown128
    Persians don't exactly have higher IQs then most other middle easterners. They just were more civilized culturally. Also they happened to be in the way of Turkic tribes....I think that between 1000 and 1900 there were like 15 Turkic and Mongol dynasties ruling Persia, some of which had colorful names like "Black rams"....Meanwhile Northern Europe was geographically much safer and whatever Islam would have been practiced there would have been a specifically European one (considering that European Muslims would have outnumbered Middle easterners by at least 1200).
    , @Talha
    Actually they did on the intellectual and spiritual levels for sure. As far as politics; the Abbasids were often half or more ethnic Persian. And that’s not taking into account two other major factors; 1) all conquering tribal people were civilized through Persian cultural influences in that area and 2) part way through the Abbasid reign, the unity of Islam shattered and they were simply titular heads over fairly powerful and independent Persian-Turko rulers like Khwarezm and Ghznavids.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. @Unknown128
    A (wild) idea.
    Following Mr.Karlins theory, might it not have been better for Europe to have been conquered by Islam in the 8th-9th centuries? Here I mostly refer to the sieges of Constantinople, rather than to the battle of Tours (losing which would not have brought down the Frankish kingdom).
    According to even someone like Toby Huff (who is known to be among the most “eurocentric” contemporary historians of medieval science), the world of Islam was ahead of the West in science (Natural-Philosophy) till the late 14th century……which would mean that Islam was ahead for about 700 years, not a small period of time by any measure. This is despite that fact that the Muslim world had a smaller population then Western Europe at least from the 12th century on that it mostly consisted of a thinly populated vast landmass, while the wests population was far more concentrated, with most of the west being accessible via water transport making communications much easier. The core of the Muslim world was also ravaged by very violent nomad invasions on a semi-regular basis and had a far lower IQ. Despite all of this it managed to stay ahead for 700 years.
    The west had a far worst access to ancient writing and was hampered by the anti-rationalist mindset of the church. This changed only slowly and one of the main catalysts for this was the loot of a vast massive of writing after the fall of Toledo 1085, this new knowledge did a lot to kick start scholastics and rationalism but despite this, it still took the west another 300 years to catch up and overtake the “arab masters”.

    Now had Islam taken over the West by 800 (not necessarily trough conquest, voulonteer conversions of western Kings would also have been a possibility, especially after the fall of Byzantium and the Khazar Khaganate, would have made the eastern Slavs convert and become a battering ram for Islam in Europe) the west would have still retained its genetic and geographical advantages, but also would have had immediate access to ancient writings and to eastern inventions like the Indian numerals or Chinese paper, it would also have converted to Islam at a time when rationalism was flowering in the muslim world, removing the mystical obscurantism of the church as a factor. The (superior) Northwest Europeans would then easily have taken over leadership of the muslim world from the (inferior) Arabs. al-ghazali would not have been a factor, because the intellectual dominance in the world of Islam would have been western anyway (not to mention that according to many scholars, his influence on the development of science is vastly exaggerated in the west). The scientific revolution might have occurred 500 years earlier then it did (probably towards the end of the “medieval warm period”).

    Now there are some objections to this “thesis” that I would like to address:

    1.Racial mixture with Arabs, Berbers and African slaves would have led to a degeneration of the Nordic race: First few Arabs, let alone Africans would settle in northern Europe, in our own history, even the Turks beardly settled in the Balkans and African slaves would not have survived in most of Europe anyway. Arabs and Berbers were few in number, they beardly colonized Spain or Sicily, they would have at best spread as a purely administrative elite north of the pyrenes/Alps and would have been replaced by (superior) natives after a few centuries.

    2. Inbreeding would have led to a degeneration of the Nordic race: Firstly, Muslims in Europe didn’t practice much of the cousin marriage, typical for the middle east (and had far lower rates of polygamy as well). Albanians, Bosnjaks or Wolga Tatars don’t practice it, so it seems that this custom usually remains in Asia or Africa and does not spread into Europe. But the Europeans of 800 were still used to clannishness….could they have maintained it under Islam? If this is so one has to ask how harmful inbreeding actually is. Does it lower IQ? The Japanese are far more inbred then other (civilized) East Asians, but while having more genetic diseases and a smaller stature, they still retain the IQ typical for (civilized) East Asians. Ashkenazi Jews are also strongly inbred as well. Inbreeding might indeed lead to clannishness, but as Mr.Karlin stated above, clannishness does have no effect on either science or economic wealth. While clannishness in the Muslim world can often be violent and dysfunctional, the clannishness of East Asians or Ashkenazi Jews is neither. Why would the higher IQ Europeans follow the pattern of low IQ middle easterners?

    3. Islamic financial laws would have hindered economic growth: See Mr.Karlin, institutions have no impact on wealth (unless its communism).

    So what do you people think about this idea? Were Hitler and Nietzsche right for having desired an Islamic takeover of Europe (although for rather different reasons)? Would the Wests embrace of Islam led to far earlier progress and put the natural Nordic master-race on top of a vast Muslim world-system over half a millennium before it actually took it over (for a short period of time)?

    So what do you people think about this idea? Were Hitler and Nietzsche right for having desired an Islamic takeover of Europe (although for rather different reasons)? Would the Wests embrace of Islam led to far earlier progress and put the natural Nordic master-race on top of a vast Muslim world-system over half a millennium before it actually took it over (for a short period of time)?

    Not worth slouching towards Mecca for.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. @Toronto Russian
    Dog owners agree that one of the smartest breeds is papillon, a toy breed.
    https://youtu.be/uY4-J-5C-3E

    Interesting. I went through this:

    https://petrix.com/dogint/intelligence.html

    Most of the top 10 dogs are medium-large dogs – some of them, such as the Poodle, have mini variants but I doubt those were the ones ranked by the trainers(can’t tell for certain). The Papillion is there, though, as an interesting outlier at 10 lbs and #7. It also has an interesting pedigree from spaniels, which are themselves in “excellent” intelligence before being bred into a toy form, but it outranks its predecessors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    My parents have a mini-poodle and a Yorkie. The mini-poodle is MUCH smarter.
    , @utu
    The Dog Who Knows 1,000 Words

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6479QAJuz8
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. @Daniel Chieh
    I'm very familiar with the Society of Mind which originates with Dr. Marvin Minsky(and its opposite, Sir Roger Penrose's quantum brain) . Its interesting. I think its probably not totally accurate since there is a "semantic default network" observed in the brain, so its not merely a series of isolated subsystems. Its probably still relatively accurate, but I think to some extent, we assume a more mechanistic view of the mind than is warranted. Biological systems don't isolate as much as our mechanical systems do, so the effects of, for example, hormones and neurotransmitters can wander and cause emergent effects. Even the blood-brain barrier is quite permeable and there is a lot of evidence of the influence of the enteric nervous system which is external to the skull.

    You can trigger religious feelings with DMT without the need for internal voices, and this feels much more consistent with what we know of how the brain works, for example with the striatum having a strong association with positivity(so called "reward center") but with the actual interpretation of the "good feelings" being filtered through the brain. Dr. Heath's experiments had one woman experience her "reward" stimulation as seduced; another one of his patients simply experienced it as happiness, and so on. Such religious experiences would be varied: euphoria, seeing beings, and so on. To exactly indicate voices which are then fading away now seems dubious, a kind of precision in evolution without exact mechanism of selection. When in doubt, I favor the more parsimonious explanation especially since DMT is created endogenously by the body.

    DMT eh? I’ll have to give it a try sometime.

    Read More
    • LOL: Daniel Chieh
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @Daniel Chieh
    Interesting. I went through this:

    https://petrix.com/dogint/intelligence.html

    Most of the top 10 dogs are medium-large dogs - some of them, such as the Poodle, have mini variants but I doubt those were the ones ranked by the trainers(can't tell for certain). The Papillion is there, though, as an interesting outlier at 10 lbs and #7. It also has an interesting pedigree from spaniels, which are themselves in "excellent" intelligence before being bred into a toy form, but it outranks its predecessors.

    My parents have a mini-poodle and a Yorkie. The mini-poodle is MUCH smarter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    One of my fantasies is to introduce human astrocytes to wolves and then allow the natural process of rewilding to take place. BAP-senpai would approve, don't you think?

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26639-the-smart-mouse-with-the-half-human-brain/

    I also played Green in Magic the Gathering.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. @Anatoly Karlin
    My parents have a mini-poodle and a Yorkie. The mini-poodle is MUCH smarter.

    One of my fantasies is to introduce human astrocytes to wolves and then allow the natural process of rewilding to take place. BAP-senpai would approve, don’t you think?

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26639-the-smart-mouse-with-the-half-human-brain/

    I also played Green in Magic the Gathering.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. @Daniel Chieh

    The (superior) Northwest Europeans would then easily have taken over leadership of the muslim world from the (inferior) Arabs
     
    From what I could tell, the Persians were culturally and intellectually quite superior to the Arabic portions of Islam(and significant contributor of the Islamic Golden Age), but they didn't manage to takeover leadership of the Muslim world, did they?

    Persians don’t exactly have higher IQs then most other middle easterners. They just were more civilized culturally. Also they happened to be in the way of Turkic tribes….I think that between 1000 and 1900 there were like 15 Turkic and Mongol dynasties ruling Persia, some of which had colorful names like “Black rams”….Meanwhile Northern Europe was geographically much safer and whatever Islam would have been practiced there would have been a specifically European one (considering that European Muslims would have outnumbered Middle easterners by at least 1200).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. Talha says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    The (superior) Northwest Europeans would then easily have taken over leadership of the muslim world from the (inferior) Arabs
     
    From what I could tell, the Persians were culturally and intellectually quite superior to the Arabic portions of Islam(and significant contributor of the Islamic Golden Age), but they didn't manage to takeover leadership of the Muslim world, did they?

    Actually they did on the intellectual and spiritual levels for sure. As far as politics; the Abbasids were often half or more ethnic Persian. And that’s not taking into account two other major factors; 1) all conquering tribal people were civilized through Persian cultural influences in that area and 2) part way through the Abbasid reign, the unity of Islam shattered and they were simply titular heads over fairly powerful and independent Persian-Turko rulers like Khwarezm and Ghznavids.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    If you want to keep top spot, it is not enough to be intellectual and civilized. You need fighting ability and Persia simply did not have enough to hold its own against people like the Arabs or various Turks. They had to settle for civilizing and absorbing them - a lot of parallels actually with the various Germanic tribes and their takeover of Rome.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. utu says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    Interesting. I went through this:

    https://petrix.com/dogint/intelligence.html

    Most of the top 10 dogs are medium-large dogs - some of them, such as the Poodle, have mini variants but I doubt those were the ones ranked by the trainers(can't tell for certain). The Papillion is there, though, as an interesting outlier at 10 lbs and #7. It also has an interesting pedigree from spaniels, which are themselves in "excellent" intelligence before being bred into a toy form, but it outranks its predecessors.

    The Dog Who Knows 1,000 Words

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Talha says:
    @Talha
    Actually they did on the intellectual and spiritual levels for sure. As far as politics; the Abbasids were often half or more ethnic Persian. And that’s not taking into account two other major factors; 1) all conquering tribal people were civilized through Persian cultural influences in that area and 2) part way through the Abbasid reign, the unity of Islam shattered and they were simply titular heads over fairly powerful and independent Persian-Turko rulers like Khwarezm and Ghznavids.

    Peace.

    If you want to keep top spot, it is not enough to be intellectual and civilized. You need fighting ability and Persia simply did not have enough to hold its own against people like the Arabs or various Turks. They had to settle for civilizing and absorbing them – a lot of parallels actually with the various Germanic tribes and their takeover of Rome.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. utu says:
    @RaceRealist88
    "Almost everything can be explained by IQ"

    If you craft just-so stories sure "Almost everything can be explained by IQ", but if no novel predictions are made than who cares that "Almost everything can be explained by IQ", since no novel predictions are made to possibly falsify the "IQ hypothesis"?

    Just-so stories of evolution are unfalsifiable. This is the ultimate strength of the theory of evolution. Even Karl Popper had doubts whether the theory of evolution was a theory at all beyond being a tautology that must be true ex definitione and thus can’t be falsified. But the theory of evolution can be falsified but not on the level of the just-so stories that are being commonly told. The stories are destined to be true. That’s why that they so much fun telling them because making utterance that are always true is very empowering. The truth is the ultimate rhetorical device.

    The IQism however is entirely different matter. Its popularity and success hinges on sneaky reifications that blind people to notice serious epistemological issues.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Dmitry says:
    @reiner Tor
    Do you listen to classical music? Can you recommend Russian composers?

    For example from Scriabin I only know Le Poème de l'extase, op. 54, which is good, but I don’t listen to it too much. I don’t know most Russian composers, except Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, Shostakovich and Prokofiev.

    Do you listen to classical music? Can you recommend Russian composers?

    For example from Scriabin I only know Le Poème de l’extase, op. 54, which is good, but I don’t listen to it too much. I don’t know most Russian composers, except Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, Shostakovich and Prokofiev.

    It’s an area I’m sorry to be a geek – and I’m not sure Karlin wants us to convert his blog comments to a music forum, so I add this MORE tag and continue write underneath MORE and will copy and paste you some recommendations from a youtube playlist.

    [MORE]

    I don’t know if you listen to CDs, or if you download music files (the best place to get FLAC files is is on soulseek)?

    I grew up playing piano so listen more on piano compositions, which is where Scriabin and Rachmaninov were gods. (I don’t know if you prefer opera or something) (Rachmaninov’s writing for orchestra is much more disappointing)

    I copy-paste videos from my YouTube playlist -( and if you want CD recommendations, obviously the sound quality to hear the beauty of a piano is not possible on YouTube)

    Most famous etude of Scriabin(with its “stormclouds and rainbows”)

    Another classic

    Another beautiful composition

    Rachmaninov

    Rachmaninov prelude “The Return” (later stated as the favourite of the composer’s many preludes)

    Tchaikovsky – I used to play this

    Of a beautiful poem of Lermontov

    Rachmaninov – elegy

    Rachmaninov’s Vespers (these masterpieces, but best in small doses)

    There was the genius Hungarian pianist Zoltan Kocsis – recently died. He wrote famously a new, very ornate arrangement of the Rachmaninov’s vocalize

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. Bliss says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    If 500 deaths occurred between 500 car accidents with each, your metric will show twice as much safety versus 500 deaths involving a car and a pedestrian (or cycle) in spite of it actually being exactly the same.

    And even casual analysis would have shown that I was comparing the population density of Sydeny against Seoul(urban vs urban). You have neither understood the links you posted, nor my comments about vehicle mixture.

    If 500 deaths occurred between 500 car accidents with each, your metric will show twice as much safety

    How does that make the mileage metric pointless as you claimed ? How is the population metric (which includes non-drivers), the correct metric to measure driving ability? Try and think rationally.

    And why the hell should the crashes with pedestrians and cyclists be ignored? Do they not also measure visuospatial IQ?

    And btw, even if you disregard the deaths involving pedestrians and cyclists the rate is still many times higher in South Korea (6.84) than in the UK (2.26)

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/united-kingdom_irtad-2015-42-en#page5

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/korea_irtad-2015-26-en#page4

    And even casual analysis would have shown that I was comparing the population density of Sydeny against Seoul(urban vs urban).

    No you were not. You were comparing Australia to South Korea. Anyone can check and confirm.

    In any case your point that higher population density results in higher deadly car accident rates is contradicted by the data. For example:

    https://stats-japan.com/t/kiji/11911

    Kagawa Prefecture (1355/sq mi density) has almost 5 times the accident fatality rate as Tokyo (16,121/sq mi density).

    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/eb63/be3106ea8fa91f1ad1b39b90bd852ce8f0f1.pdf

    Population density was also associated with fewer crashes. Each additional person per net residential acre decreased accident incidence by 0.05%.

    A study by Reid Ewing of the University of Maryland 2009[3] also concluded that dense urban areas appear to be safer than the lower volume environments of the suburbs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Mixed traffic will badly distort the fatality/mileage metric but not the fatality/population metric, which I just explained and which you failed to understand. And as far as the effort to cherry pick in an increasingly futile effort to make your point(suburbs with less road development are going to have more accidents, what a surprise), I think this picture alone is enough to explain how density neatly increases accidents:

    https://cdn.citylab.com/media/img/citylab/2015/10/RTS3HL3/940.jpg

    Again, traffic mix alters things. In Tokyo, where commuting by foot via public transportation exceeds all other forms of transportation, you will have...fewer road deaths.

    Such an amazing thought.

    Really, the most useful comparison in this that minimizes other variables is National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which compares ethnicity directly against each other, with at least the same mix of vehicles, in the same driving conditions, in the same country.

    https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/810995

    https://i.imgur.com/FUsPI0Q.png

    Which is, in fact, a nontrivial difference in fatality rate.

    Have fun being wrong as you continue to cherry pick for your ego.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @Bliss

    If 500 deaths occurred between 500 car accidents with each, your metric will show twice as much safety
     
    How does that make the mileage metric pointless as you claimed ? How is the population metric (which includes non-drivers), the correct metric to measure driving ability? Try and think rationally.

    And why the hell should the crashes with pedestrians and cyclists be ignored? Do they not also measure visuospatial IQ?

    And btw, even if you disregard the deaths involving pedestrians and cyclists the rate is still many times higher in South Korea (6.84) than in the UK (2.26)

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/united-kingdom_irtad-2015-42-en#page5

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/korea_irtad-2015-26-en#page4

    And even casual analysis would have shown that I was comparing the population density of Sydeny against Seoul(urban vs urban).
     
    No you were not. You were comparing Australia to South Korea. Anyone can check and confirm.

    In any case your point that higher population density results in higher deadly car accident rates is contradicted by the data. For example:

    https://stats-japan.com/t/kiji/11911

    Kagawa Prefecture (1355/sq mi density) has almost 5 times the accident fatality rate as Tokyo (16,121/sq mi density).


    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/eb63/be3106ea8fa91f1ad1b39b90bd852ce8f0f1.pdf

    Population density was also associated with fewer crashes. Each additional person per net residential acre decreased accident incidence by 0.05%.

    A study by Reid Ewing of the University of Maryland 2009[3] also concluded that dense urban areas appear to be safer than the lower volume environments of the suburbs.

    Mixed traffic will badly distort the fatality/mileage metric but not the fatality/population metric, which I just explained and which you failed to understand. And as far as the effort to cherry pick in an increasingly futile effort to make your point(suburbs with less road development are going to have more accidents, what a surprise), I think this picture alone is enough to explain how density neatly increases accidents:

    Again, traffic mix alters things. In Tokyo, where commuting by foot via public transportation exceeds all other forms of transportation, you will have…fewer road deaths.

    Such an amazing thought.

    Really, the most useful comparison in this that minimizes other variables is National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which compares ethnicity directly against each other, with at least the same mix of vehicles, in the same driving conditions, in the same country.

    https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/810995

    Which is, in fact, a nontrivial difference in fatality rate.

    Have fun being wrong as you continue to cherry pick for your ego.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    In fact, the NHTSA stats themselves demonstrate an excellent example of how vehicle mix impacts fatality statistics, making this a teachable moment. On page 3, it mentions that whites make up an enormous number of motorcycle fatalities.


    Over the last several years motorcyclist fatalities have increased significantly. In 2006, 4,837 motorcyclists were killed in motor vehicle traffic crashes. As shown in Table 2, Whites accounted for 68 percent of motorcyclist fatalities as compared to Hispanics and African-Americans, who accounted for 7 percent and 8 percent, respectively.
     
    Does this mean that whites are much worse drivers than Hispanics or African-Americans, or at least specifically, much worse motorcyclists? No. Whites are simply much more likely to be motorcycle users:

    https://brandongaille.com/32-compelling-motorcycle-demographics/

    the primary customer is a Caucasian/White male above the age of 35, it is important for the industry to create an interest in their product.
     
    By simply having a more motorcycles in the hands of whites versus car usage, this increases the number of accidents on motorcycles, and increases the number of fatalities experienced due to dangers of motorcycles accidents. This does not indicate, for example, that whites are bad drivers or even bad drivers specifically on motorcycles.
    , @Bliss

    Mixed traffic will badly distort the fatality/mileage metric but not the fatality/population metric
     
    You keep repeating this BS as if you are making sense. The fatality/population metric does not measure driving ability because it includes non-drivers (who may be the majority in densely populated cities). It is distorted from the get go. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

    Whether you drive 100 fast miles on the freeway, 10 medium paced miles in the suburbs or 1 slow mile in the city, you are still driving. It still requires visuospatial skill. You can nitpick the fatality/mileage metric all you want, but it is still the best metric available.

    Running over pedestrians and cyclists while driving at slow speeds in the city is very bad driving. Capische?

    I think this picture alone is enough to explain how density neatly increases accidents:
     
    Laughable stupidity. As if this picture trumps the data I provided. It is truly foolish to think such traffic congestions lead to accidents that result in death or injury.

    As for the NHTSA chart it should be obvious to you that it can’t be a true reflection of asian driving ability. Why don’t you apply your nitpicking skills to figure out what’s wrong with that chart?
    , @Twinkie
    By the way, another thing to note is that driving fatalities are correlated well to drunk-driving. Though Asians don’t drunk-drive much in the US, the practice is much more culturally acceptable in Japan and South Korea, with predictable results.
    , @myself
    Isn't that a picture of a traffic jam in China, the one that stretched over 200 miles?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. @Daniel Chieh
    Mixed traffic will badly distort the fatality/mileage metric but not the fatality/population metric, which I just explained and which you failed to understand. And as far as the effort to cherry pick in an increasingly futile effort to make your point(suburbs with less road development are going to have more accidents, what a surprise), I think this picture alone is enough to explain how density neatly increases accidents:

    https://cdn.citylab.com/media/img/citylab/2015/10/RTS3HL3/940.jpg

    Again, traffic mix alters things. In Tokyo, where commuting by foot via public transportation exceeds all other forms of transportation, you will have...fewer road deaths.

    Such an amazing thought.

    Really, the most useful comparison in this that minimizes other variables is National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which compares ethnicity directly against each other, with at least the same mix of vehicles, in the same driving conditions, in the same country.

    https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/810995

    https://i.imgur.com/FUsPI0Q.png

    Which is, in fact, a nontrivial difference in fatality rate.

    Have fun being wrong as you continue to cherry pick for your ego.

    In fact, the NHTSA stats themselves demonstrate an excellent example of how vehicle mix impacts fatality statistics, making this a teachable moment. On page 3, it mentions that whites make up an enormous number of motorcycle fatalities.

    Over the last several years motorcyclist fatalities have increased significantly. In 2006, 4,837 motorcyclists were killed in motor vehicle traffic crashes. As shown in Table 2, Whites accounted for 68 percent of motorcyclist fatalities as compared to Hispanics and African-Americans, who accounted for 7 percent and 8 percent, respectively.

    Does this mean that whites are much worse drivers than Hispanics or African-Americans, or at least specifically, much worse motorcyclists? No. Whites are simply much more likely to be motorcycle users:

    https://brandongaille.com/32-compelling-motorcycle-demographics/

    the primary customer is a Caucasian/White male above the age of 35, it is important for the industry to create an interest in their product.

    By simply having a more motorcycles in the hands of whites versus car usage, this increases the number of accidents on motorcycles, and increases the number of fatalities experienced due to dangers of motorcycles accidents. This does not indicate, for example, that whites are bad drivers or even bad drivers specifically on motorcycles.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. Bliss says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    Mixed traffic will badly distort the fatality/mileage metric but not the fatality/population metric, which I just explained and which you failed to understand. And as far as the effort to cherry pick in an increasingly futile effort to make your point(suburbs with less road development are going to have more accidents, what a surprise), I think this picture alone is enough to explain how density neatly increases accidents:

    https://cdn.citylab.com/media/img/citylab/2015/10/RTS3HL3/940.jpg

    Again, traffic mix alters things. In Tokyo, where commuting by foot via public transportation exceeds all other forms of transportation, you will have...fewer road deaths.

    Such an amazing thought.

    Really, the most useful comparison in this that minimizes other variables is National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which compares ethnicity directly against each other, with at least the same mix of vehicles, in the same driving conditions, in the same country.

    https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/810995

    https://i.imgur.com/FUsPI0Q.png

    Which is, in fact, a nontrivial difference in fatality rate.

    Have fun being wrong as you continue to cherry pick for your ego.

    Mixed traffic will badly distort the fatality/mileage metric but not the fatality/population metric

    You keep repeating this BS as if you are making sense. The fatality/population metric does not measure driving ability because it includes non-drivers (who may be the majority in densely populated cities). It is distorted from the get go. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

    Whether you drive 100 fast miles on the freeway, 10 medium paced miles in the suburbs or 1 slow mile in the city, you are still driving. It still requires visuospatial skill. You can nitpick the fatality/mileage metric all you want, but it is still the best metric available.

    Running over pedestrians and cyclists while driving at slow speeds in the city is very bad driving. Capische?

    I think this picture alone is enough to explain how density neatly increases accidents:

    Laughable stupidity. As if this picture trumps the data I provided. It is truly foolish to think such traffic congestions lead to accidents that result in death or injury.

    As for the NHTSA chart it should be obvious to you that it can’t be a true reflection of asian driving ability. Why don’t you apply your nitpicking skills to figure out what’s wrong with that chart?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh

    Whether you drive 100 fast miles on the freeway, 10 medium paced miles in the suburbs or 1 slow mile in the city, you are still driving. It still requires visuospatial skill. You can nitpick the fatality/mileage metric all you want, but it is still the best metric available
     
    Whether you ride 100, 10 or just 1 mile on a bike, you will not be recorded. It's such a great metric that the WHO does not even record it.

    Like I said, enjoy being wrong.
    , @reiner Tor

    Running over pedestrians and cyclists while driving at slow speeds in the city is very bad driving.
     
    I'd say driving at high speeds on a highway is easier than driving in a densely populated city full of cyclists and pedestrians, though. Especially on a mileage basis - you can drive 20 miles in 20 minutes at the highway while taking over, say, 20 cars, whereas in a city it takes several hours and encountering thousands of other vehicles.

    Actually, I mostly drive in a city, but something like a fifth of my mileage comes from longer trips on the highway. In huge countries with low population densities this could be more. For example in Australia there must be a number of Sydney or Melbourne residents regularly (like every other month) driving between these two cities, while in South Korea the percentage of Gangnam residents driving to Busan must be lower (because Busan is much smaller relative to Seoul than Melbourne is relative to Sydney), and, to top it off, the Seoul-Busan distance is also much smaller. Therefore, the number of miles driven under not very dangerous circumstances (on a highway) must be inflated in Australia relative to South Korea.

    I'd also guess trucks are included in miles driven, in which case the statistic is further distorted, because huge trucks will drive most of the distance on highways, so in Australia this relatively low danger driving by professionals must be longer (in terms of mileage; not in terms of hours driven), as opposed to South Korea, where such long haul truck routes are non-existent, with the longest distance being something like 250 miles or shorter (less than half the Melbourne-Sydney distance).
    , @Twinkie

    As for the NHTSA chart it should be obvious to you that it can’t be a true reflection of asian driving ability. Why don’t you apply your nitpicking skills to figure out what’s wrong with that chart?
     
    You don’t have a good reply for that, do you?

    That graph controls for environment far more than anything else anyone has brought up so far, making comparisons as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity (though it would be nice if we could break down the data further for American-born only and controlled for age/sex).

    By the way, there is also a persistent stereotype in the US that East Asians can’t shoot (guns) very well... which is hilarious given that East Asians dominate Olympic shooting events, a fact not well-known among the general public in the US. The same goes for archery... that pesky visuospatial IQ.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. @Bliss

    Mixed traffic will badly distort the fatality/mileage metric but not the fatality/population metric
     
    You keep repeating this BS as if you are making sense. The fatality/population metric does not measure driving ability because it includes non-drivers (who may be the majority in densely populated cities). It is distorted from the get go. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

    Whether you drive 100 fast miles on the freeway, 10 medium paced miles in the suburbs or 1 slow mile in the city, you are still driving. It still requires visuospatial skill. You can nitpick the fatality/mileage metric all you want, but it is still the best metric available.

    Running over pedestrians and cyclists while driving at slow speeds in the city is very bad driving. Capische?

    I think this picture alone is enough to explain how density neatly increases accidents:
     
    Laughable stupidity. As if this picture trumps the data I provided. It is truly foolish to think such traffic congestions lead to accidents that result in death or injury.

    As for the NHTSA chart it should be obvious to you that it can’t be a true reflection of asian driving ability. Why don’t you apply your nitpicking skills to figure out what’s wrong with that chart?

    Whether you drive 100 fast miles on the freeway, 10 medium paced miles in the suburbs or 1 slow mile in the city, you are still driving. It still requires visuospatial skill. You can nitpick the fatality/mileage metric all you want, but it is still the best metric available

    Whether you ride 100, 10 or just 1 mile on a bike, you will not be recorded. It’s such a great metric that the WHO does not even record it.

    Like I said, enjoy being wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Whether you ride 100, 10 or just 1 mile on a bike, you will not be recorded. It’s such a great metric that the WHO does not even record it.
     
    How the hell could WHO record bike mileage anyway? WHO does not record pedestrian mileage either. How could it? Does that make the fatality/mileage metric pointless as you insist? Get real. You don’t have even a single good point to make.

    enjoy being wrong.
     
    Lol. Continue deluding yourself. You have plenty of company here. Your HBD/alt-right buddies invite you to their circle jerk.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Bliss says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Whether you drive 100 fast miles on the freeway, 10 medium paced miles in the suburbs or 1 slow mile in the city, you are still driving. It still requires visuospatial skill. You can nitpick the fatality/mileage metric all you want, but it is still the best metric available
     
    Whether you ride 100, 10 or just 1 mile on a bike, you will not be recorded. It's such a great metric that the WHO does not even record it.

    Like I said, enjoy being wrong.

    Whether you ride 100, 10 or just 1 mile on a bike, you will not be recorded. It’s such a great metric that the WHO does not even record it.

    How the hell could WHO record bike mileage anyway? WHO does not record pedestrian mileage either. How could it? Does that make the fatality/mileage metric pointless as you insist? Get real. You don’t have even a single good point to make.

    enjoy being wrong.

    Lol. Continue deluding yourself. You have plenty of company here. Your HBD/alt-right buddies invite you to their circle jerk.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    Does that make the fatality/mileage metric pointless as you insist?
     
    Well, there are two vehicles involved, and if you had ever driven in a city with a large pedestrian/cyclist population, you surely noticed that neither cyclists nor pedestrians are especially prone to follow traffic lights, or any rules whatsoever. So, accidents involving them will be very often the fault of the cyclists or pedestrians involved.

    Imagine two situations, one in which 1000 cars are driven 1000 miles without pedestrians (and resulting in, say, 3 accidents), and the exact same number of cars and miles driven, but with 500 cyclists and 500 pedestrians added, and besides the 3 accidents between cars, there will now be an additional 3 accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists. It does not necessarily follow that the drivers are worse in the second case, it's just that the opportunities for accidents are double that of the no pedestrian cases.

    Besides, you're not counting accidents (which are impossible to measure, many of them not even recorded by the police in many countries), only fatalities. Imagine a small accident between cars at low speeds, say a car traveling at 15 miles hits another car, and no one dies as a result. Now imagine the same accident with a car traveling at 15 miles, but now hitting a cyclist or a pedestrian. It's actually quite likely that the cyclist or pedestrian will at least be seriously injured, and could often die, as a result. It's simply safer to have accidents while sitting inside a one-and-a-half or two-ton piece of metal designed to protect you.

    Anyway, I don't know if Asians are good or bad drivers, I just think the statistics might not be as conclusive as you think.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. @Bliss

    Mixed traffic will badly distort the fatality/mileage metric but not the fatality/population metric
     
    You keep repeating this BS as if you are making sense. The fatality/population metric does not measure driving ability because it includes non-drivers (who may be the majority in densely populated cities). It is distorted from the get go. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

    Whether you drive 100 fast miles on the freeway, 10 medium paced miles in the suburbs or 1 slow mile in the city, you are still driving. It still requires visuospatial skill. You can nitpick the fatality/mileage metric all you want, but it is still the best metric available.

    Running over pedestrians and cyclists while driving at slow speeds in the city is very bad driving. Capische?

    I think this picture alone is enough to explain how density neatly increases accidents:
     
    Laughable stupidity. As if this picture trumps the data I provided. It is truly foolish to think such traffic congestions lead to accidents that result in death or injury.

    As for the NHTSA chart it should be obvious to you that it can’t be a true reflection of asian driving ability. Why don’t you apply your nitpicking skills to figure out what’s wrong with that chart?

    Running over pedestrians and cyclists while driving at slow speeds in the city is very bad driving.

    I’d say driving at high speeds on a highway is easier than driving in a densely populated city full of cyclists and pedestrians, though. Especially on a mileage basis – you can drive 20 miles in 20 minutes at the highway while taking over, say, 20 cars, whereas in a city it takes several hours and encountering thousands of other vehicles.

    Actually, I mostly drive in a city, but something like a fifth of my mileage comes from longer trips on the highway. In huge countries with low population densities this could be more. For example in Australia there must be a number of Sydney or Melbourne residents regularly (like every other month) driving between these two cities, while in South Korea the percentage of Gangnam residents driving to Busan must be lower (because Busan is much smaller relative to Seoul than Melbourne is relative to Sydney), and, to top it off, the Seoul-Busan distance is also much smaller. Therefore, the number of miles driven under not very dangerous circumstances (on a highway) must be inflated in Australia relative to South Korea.

    I’d also guess trucks are included in miles driven, in which case the statistic is further distorted, because huge trucks will drive most of the distance on highways, so in Australia this relatively low danger driving by professionals must be longer (in terms of mileage; not in terms of hours driven), as opposed to South Korea, where such long haul truck routes are non-existent, with the longest distance being something like 250 miles or shorter (less than half the Melbourne-Sydney distance).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. @Bliss

    Whether you ride 100, 10 or just 1 mile on a bike, you will not be recorded. It’s such a great metric that the WHO does not even record it.
     
    How the hell could WHO record bike mileage anyway? WHO does not record pedestrian mileage either. How could it? Does that make the fatality/mileage metric pointless as you insist? Get real. You don’t have even a single good point to make.

    enjoy being wrong.
     
    Lol. Continue deluding yourself. You have plenty of company here. Your HBD/alt-right buddies invite you to their circle jerk.

    Does that make the fatality/mileage metric pointless as you insist?

    Well, there are two vehicles involved, and if you had ever driven in a city with a large pedestrian/cyclist population, you surely noticed that neither cyclists nor pedestrians are especially prone to follow traffic lights, or any rules whatsoever. So, accidents involving them will be very often the fault of the cyclists or pedestrians involved.

    Imagine two situations, one in which 1000 cars are driven 1000 miles without pedestrians (and resulting in, say, 3 accidents), and the exact same number of cars and miles driven, but with 500 cyclists and 500 pedestrians added, and besides the 3 accidents between cars, there will now be an additional 3 accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists. It does not necessarily follow that the drivers are worse in the second case, it’s just that the opportunities for accidents are double that of the no pedestrian cases.

    Besides, you’re not counting accidents (which are impossible to measure, many of them not even recorded by the police in many countries), only fatalities. Imagine a small accident between cars at low speeds, say a car traveling at 15 miles hits another car, and no one dies as a result. Now imagine the same accident with a car traveling at 15 miles, but now hitting a cyclist or a pedestrian. It’s actually quite likely that the cyclist or pedestrian will at least be seriously injured, and could often die, as a result. It’s simply safer to have accidents while sitting inside a one-and-a-half or two-ton piece of metal designed to protect you.

    Anyway, I don’t know if Asians are good or bad drivers, I just think the statistics might not be as conclusive as you think.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Besides, you’re not counting accidents (which are impossible to measure, many of them not even recorded by the police in many countries), only fatalities.
     
    You can count accidents that result in injury, and the links I posted provide that information. That data looks even worse for Japan:

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/japan_irtad-2015-25-en#page3

    Injury crashes in Japan are 122 times the fatal crashes. In the UK it is 81.6 times. In South Korea it is 42.3 times.

    Well, there are two vehicles involved, and if you had ever driven in a city with a large pedestrian/cyclist population, you surely noticed that neither cyclists nor pedestrians are especially prone to follow traffic lights, or any rules whatsoever
     
    The Japanese are not known for breaking rules. Certainly not as much as westerners. Yet the death rate of pedestrians is 2.4 times the UK rate.

    Methinks this HBD dogma of superior visuospatial IQ in East Asians is the usual pseudoscience you guys are notorious for.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Bliss says:
    @reiner Tor

    Does that make the fatality/mileage metric pointless as you insist?
     
    Well, there are two vehicles involved, and if you had ever driven in a city with a large pedestrian/cyclist population, you surely noticed that neither cyclists nor pedestrians are especially prone to follow traffic lights, or any rules whatsoever. So, accidents involving them will be very often the fault of the cyclists or pedestrians involved.

    Imagine two situations, one in which 1000 cars are driven 1000 miles without pedestrians (and resulting in, say, 3 accidents), and the exact same number of cars and miles driven, but with 500 cyclists and 500 pedestrians added, and besides the 3 accidents between cars, there will now be an additional 3 accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists. It does not necessarily follow that the drivers are worse in the second case, it's just that the opportunities for accidents are double that of the no pedestrian cases.

    Besides, you're not counting accidents (which are impossible to measure, many of them not even recorded by the police in many countries), only fatalities. Imagine a small accident between cars at low speeds, say a car traveling at 15 miles hits another car, and no one dies as a result. Now imagine the same accident with a car traveling at 15 miles, but now hitting a cyclist or a pedestrian. It's actually quite likely that the cyclist or pedestrian will at least be seriously injured, and could often die, as a result. It's simply safer to have accidents while sitting inside a one-and-a-half or two-ton piece of metal designed to protect you.

    Anyway, I don't know if Asians are good or bad drivers, I just think the statistics might not be as conclusive as you think.

    Besides, you’re not counting accidents (which are impossible to measure, many of them not even recorded by the police in many countries), only fatalities.

    You can count accidents that result in injury, and the links I posted provide that information. That data looks even worse for Japan:

    https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/transport/road-safety-annual-report-2015/japan_irtad-2015-25-en#page3

    Injury crashes in Japan are 122 times the fatal crashes. In the UK it is 81.6 times. In South Korea it is 42.3 times.

    Well, there are two vehicles involved, and if you had ever driven in a city with a large pedestrian/cyclist population, you surely noticed that neither cyclists nor pedestrians are especially prone to follow traffic lights, or any rules whatsoever

    The Japanese are not known for breaking rules. Certainly not as much as westerners. Yet the death rate of pedestrians is 2.4 times the UK rate.

    Methinks this HBD dogma of superior visuospatial IQ in East Asians is the usual pseudoscience you guys are notorious for.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. Twinkie says:
    @Bliss

    Mixed traffic will badly distort the fatality/mileage metric but not the fatality/population metric
     
    You keep repeating this BS as if you are making sense. The fatality/population metric does not measure driving ability because it includes non-drivers (who may be the majority in densely populated cities). It is distorted from the get go. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

    Whether you drive 100 fast miles on the freeway, 10 medium paced miles in the suburbs or 1 slow mile in the city, you are still driving. It still requires visuospatial skill. You can nitpick the fatality/mileage metric all you want, but it is still the best metric available.

    Running over pedestrians and cyclists while driving at slow speeds in the city is very bad driving. Capische?

    I think this picture alone is enough to explain how density neatly increases accidents:
     
    Laughable stupidity. As if this picture trumps the data I provided. It is truly foolish to think such traffic congestions lead to accidents that result in death or injury.

    As for the NHTSA chart it should be obvious to you that it can’t be a true reflection of asian driving ability. Why don’t you apply your nitpicking skills to figure out what’s wrong with that chart?

    As for the NHTSA chart it should be obvious to you that it can’t be a true reflection of asian driving ability. Why don’t you apply your nitpicking skills to figure out what’s wrong with that chart?

    You don’t have a good reply for that, do you?

    That graph controls for environment far more than anything else anyone has brought up so far, making comparisons as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity (though it would be nice if we could break down the data further for American-born only and controlled for age/sex).

    By the way, there is also a persistent stereotype in the US that East Asians can’t shoot (guns) very well… which is hilarious given that East Asians dominate Olympic shooting events, a fact not well-known among the general public in the US. The same goes for archery… that pesky visuospatial IQ.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    That graph controls for environment far more than anything else anyone has brought up so far, making comparisons as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity
     
    Not true.

    1. Not all asian-americans are East Asians. Not even close, more like half. While the drivers in Japan and South Korea are overwhelmingly east asian.

    2. The environment is not the same either. A much greater proportion of east asians in America live in high density urban areas (which have lower accident rates).

    3. The proportion of asian-americans who drive is below the national average, a very large percentage (half?) of them not being born in America.

    4. The graph does not control for drunk/drugged driving which is far more common among American-born drivers.
    , @Bliss

    East Asians dominate Olympic shooting events.......The same goes for archery… that pesky visuospatial IQ.
     
    This must be the umpteenth time you have boasted about asian domination in shooting and archery. Here is the list of Olympic champions in shooting and there is no such domination:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_shooting#rifle_three_positions_2

    There is South Korean domination in Olympic archery though. But archery and shooting are two of the least popular sports. How can performance by a few individuals in activities with few participants trump performance in an activity like driving which is extremely common, when you are comparing races?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. Twinkie says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    Mixed traffic will badly distort the fatality/mileage metric but not the fatality/population metric, which I just explained and which you failed to understand. And as far as the effort to cherry pick in an increasingly futile effort to make your point(suburbs with less road development are going to have more accidents, what a surprise), I think this picture alone is enough to explain how density neatly increases accidents:

    https://cdn.citylab.com/media/img/citylab/2015/10/RTS3HL3/940.jpg

    Again, traffic mix alters things. In Tokyo, where commuting by foot via public transportation exceeds all other forms of transportation, you will have...fewer road deaths.

    Such an amazing thought.

    Really, the most useful comparison in this that minimizes other variables is National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which compares ethnicity directly against each other, with at least the same mix of vehicles, in the same driving conditions, in the same country.

    https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/810995

    https://i.imgur.com/FUsPI0Q.png

    Which is, in fact, a nontrivial difference in fatality rate.

    Have fun being wrong as you continue to cherry pick for your ego.

    By the way, another thing to note is that driving fatalities are correlated well to drunk-driving. Though Asians don’t drunk-drive much in the US, the practice is much more culturally acceptable in Japan and South Korea, with predictable results.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    There is only one way to legitimately settle this:
    1) Archery battle of best 15 each of Africans and East Asians - last man standing.

    And...

    2) Mad-Max style demolition derby - caveat (Africans can get help from Euros for the cars).

    Let's make it happen folks!

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. @Anon
    I repeat:

    why pretend you're engaging in some sort of disagreement with our host Sr. Karlin about it?
     
    Yes, when you have learned pinyin, you have not learned Chinese, any more than my using the Latin alphabet proves I read Spanish (I do, but that's beside the point). This is a valid point, but one wonders in what way you imagine you are disagreeing with any point anyone else has made? Is there something else you are trying to say?

    This is a valid point, but one wonders in what way you imagine you are disagreeing with any point anyone else has made? Is there something else you are trying to say?

    Yes. Read my post again: literate ‘Chinese’ is a huge amalgamation of several languages, including several dead ones. Characters are built around this idea, and facilitate understanding. Pinyin makes understanding harder.

    Conceivably, if the Chinese were forced by some dictator to use only pinyin then they’d have to invent some other (simpler) written language, and after a few generations things would stabilize. But by then they’d have lost all their literate tradition and gained a massive generation gap, and choice of writing system would be the least of their problems.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. notanon says:
    @phil
    Apart from IQ considerations, women are less interested, on average, in abstract speculation.

    risk aversion

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. utu says:

    Road fatalities metric is the product of a very complex process controlled by many parameters. Intelligence or education are the least important parameters that will be overshadowed by many other parameters. That’s why an attempt to pull out intelligence signal from data is futile and idiotic. Bliss, I know what and why you are doing but again it comes to the question whether you are an idiot or you are acting in bad faith. Probably a combination of both. I am surprised that you have managed to get DC engaged. I thought he was above the kind of baiting you like to engage in.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/a-map-of-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-drivers/283886/

    France and Japan reduced road fatalities by factor of 20 since 1970. The US was slightly better than Sweden and UK in 1970 but Sweden and France made greater improvements than the US since.

    For whatever reasons South Korea is where the US was 1980s. More kimchi?

    Some countries in Europe are much worse than Sweden or UK. Czechia has 13.9 (per miles) which is closer to S. Korea than to Germany.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I mostly wanted to explore flaws in metrics and treating them religiously; for what it is worth, I think you may have inspired me in part for that in your mathematical approach to the many statistics that people claim to hold great, sacred meaning. You and res do not agree on many things, but reading your discussions with him has been of epistemic value to me.
    , @Bliss

    an attempt to pull out intelligence signal from data is futile and idiotic.
     
    What an idiot. How do you propose to measure driving ability if not from real world data?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. @utu
    Road fatalities metric is the product of a very complex process controlled by many parameters. Intelligence or education are the least important parameters that will be overshadowed by many other parameters. That's why an attempt to pull out intelligence signal from data is futile and idiotic. Bliss, I know what and why you are doing but again it comes to the question whether you are an idiot or you are acting in bad faith. Probably a combination of both. I am surprised that you have managed to get DC engaged. I thought he was above the kind of baiting you like to engage in.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/a-map-of-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-drivers/283886/

    France and Japan reduced road fatalities by factor of 20 since 1970. The US was slightly better than Sweden and UK in 1970 but Sweden and France made greater improvements than the US since.

    For whatever reasons South Korea is where the US was 1980s. More kimchi?

    Some countries in Europe are much worse than Sweden or UK. Czechia has 13.9 (per miles) which is closer to S. Korea than to Germany.

    I mostly wanted to explore flaws in metrics and treating them religiously; for what it is worth, I think you may have inspired me in part for that in your mathematical approach to the many statistics that people claim to hold great, sacred meaning. You and res do not agree on many things, but reading your discussions with him has been of epistemic value to me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    I mostly wanted to explore flaws in metrics and treating them religiously
     
    Software improvements and availability to draw interesting pictures from lists of numbers leads to the increase of this kind of religiosity. I noticed here on these pages many maps showing poll numbers about, say, attitudes to homosexuality or immigration. Our host or Polish Perspective are good examples of very intelligent people who can ditch their common sense because they are seduced by good looking graphic presentation based on numbers of dubious provenience. The seduction is complete when bias confirmation enter the picture. I think there might be also some aura of mathematics and of being scientific. It is a false objectivism: 'This is not me talking these are the numbers talking.' Hiding behind the numbers.

    Just like some degree of improved literacy led to crazy religiosity among various Protestant sects similarly improved numeracy leads to this kind of religiosity where you believe in numbers w/o questioning where ddi they come from. Bible literalists can't handle questions about which translation do they use and if it is King James then why. But questions like these need to be asked. Anyway, improved numeracy can be as dangerous as improved literacy. Literacy and numeracy are just tools that do not replace common sense and in wrong hands can be fatal. Look at our friend Bliss.

    I had some good exchanges with res. I have learned from him quite a lot and he is a very good sport. Two or so years ago I knew nothing about the IQism. This is work in progress in refining my position and arguments. I made some bad arguments in the past but usually pointing in right direction. Epistemology is under appreciated discipline. But there is a reason behind it because too many epistemic questions leads to paralysis. So it is better to have research done by young PhD students who still is power hungry yahoo and thus does not ask too many questions. Yes, it is about power, ie. finding a place in society for yourself.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. utu says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    I mostly wanted to explore flaws in metrics and treating them religiously; for what it is worth, I think you may have inspired me in part for that in your mathematical approach to the many statistics that people claim to hold great, sacred meaning. You and res do not agree on many things, but reading your discussions with him has been of epistemic value to me.

    I mostly wanted to explore flaws in metrics and treating them religiously

    Software improvements and availability to draw interesting pictures from lists of numbers leads to the increase of this kind of religiosity. I noticed here on these pages many maps showing poll numbers about, say, attitudes to homosexuality or immigration. Our host or Polish Perspective are good examples of very intelligent people who can ditch their common sense because they are seduced by good looking graphic presentation based on numbers of dubious provenience. The seduction is complete when bias confirmation enter the picture. I think there might be also some aura of mathematics and of being scientific. It is a false objectivism: ‘This is not me talking these are the numbers talking.’ Hiding behind the numbers.

    Just like some degree of improved literacy led to crazy religiosity among various Protestant sects similarly improved numeracy leads to this kind of religiosity where you believe in numbers w/o questioning where ddi they come from. Bible literalists can’t handle questions about which translation do they use and if it is King James then why. But questions like these need to be asked. Anyway, improved numeracy can be as dangerous as improved literacy. Literacy and numeracy are just tools that do not replace common sense and in wrong hands can be fatal. Look at our friend Bliss.

    I had some good exchanges with res. I have learned from him quite a lot and he is a very good sport. Two or so years ago I knew nothing about the IQism. This is work in progress in refining my position and arguments. I made some bad arguments in the past but usually pointing in right direction. Epistemology is under appreciated discipline. But there is a reason behind it because too many epistemic questions leads to paralysis. So it is better to have research done by young PhD students who still is power hungry yahoo and thus does not ask too many questions. Yes, it is about power, ie. finding a place in society for yourself.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. Talha says:
    @Twinkie
    By the way, another thing to note is that driving fatalities are correlated well to drunk-driving. Though Asians don’t drunk-drive much in the US, the practice is much more culturally acceptable in Japan and South Korea, with predictable results.

    There is only one way to legitimately settle this:
    1) Archery battle of best 15 each of Africans and East Asians – last man standing.

    And…

    2) Mad-Max style demolition derby – caveat (Africans can get help from Euros for the cars).

    Let’s make it happen folks!

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    There is only one way to legitimately settle this:
    1) Archery battle of best 15 each of Africans and East Asians – last man standing.

    And…

    2) Mad-Max style demolition derby – caveat (Africans can get help from Euros for the cars).
     
    You know that will be very unfair to the Africans. I mean look at all those black faces on the podium: https://www.olympic.org/news/south-korean-archers-extend-their-olympic-reign

    And just look at two of those "Russians" who placed second. https://stillmed.olympic.org/media/Images/OlympicOrg/News/2016/08/07/2016-08-07-archery-inside-02.jpg?interpolation=lanczos-none&resize=1060:*

    And, bro, haven't you seen "The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift"? That's not entirely fiction you know: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3STxo5oYm4
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. Bliss says:
    @utu
    Road fatalities metric is the product of a very complex process controlled by many parameters. Intelligence or education are the least important parameters that will be overshadowed by many other parameters. That's why an attempt to pull out intelligence signal from data is futile and idiotic. Bliss, I know what and why you are doing but again it comes to the question whether you are an idiot or you are acting in bad faith. Probably a combination of both. I am surprised that you have managed to get DC engaged. I thought he was above the kind of baiting you like to engage in.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/a-map-of-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-drivers/283886/

    France and Japan reduced road fatalities by factor of 20 since 1970. The US was slightly better than Sweden and UK in 1970 but Sweden and France made greater improvements than the US since.

    For whatever reasons South Korea is where the US was 1980s. More kimchi?

    Some countries in Europe are much worse than Sweden or UK. Czechia has 13.9 (per miles) which is closer to S. Korea than to Germany.

    an attempt to pull out intelligence signal from data is futile and idiotic.

    What an idiot. How do you propose to measure driving ability if not from real world data?

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    How do you propose to measure driving ability if not from real world data?
     
    You can't get it from these data because other factors are much stronger than driving ability. Look at France and Japan in 1970-2005 period:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/a-map-of-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-drivers/283886/

    The number of fatalities (per billion km) was reduced by factor of 10. Do you want to tell me that it took 35 years for Japanese and French to improve their driving abilities to get from 100 to 10 fatalities/bkm? Driving abilities by ten fold factor? Don't you have a feel for reality, no common sense? It was not driving abilities but (1) road conditions (multi lane highways, wide road shoulders, trees removed from road sides, better signs and speed limits), (2) regulations and enforcement, (3) safer cars and seat belts and airbags, (4) special lanes for pedestrians and bikes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. Bliss says:
    @Twinkie

    As for the NHTSA chart it should be obvious to you that it can’t be a true reflection of asian driving ability. Why don’t you apply your nitpicking skills to figure out what’s wrong with that chart?
     
    You don’t have a good reply for that, do you?

    That graph controls for environment far more than anything else anyone has brought up so far, making comparisons as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity (though it would be nice if we could break down the data further for American-born only and controlled for age/sex).

    By the way, there is also a persistent stereotype in the US that East Asians can’t shoot (guns) very well... which is hilarious given that East Asians dominate Olympic shooting events, a fact not well-known among the general public in the US. The same goes for archery... that pesky visuospatial IQ.

    That graph controls for environment far more than anything else anyone has brought up so far, making comparisons as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity

    Not true.

    1. Not all asian-americans are East Asians. Not even close, more like half. While the drivers in Japan and South Korea are overwhelmingly east asian.

    2. The environment is not the same either. A much greater proportion of east asians in America live in high density urban areas (which have lower accident rates).

    3. The proportion of asian-americans who drive is below the national average, a very large percentage (half?) of them not being born in America.

    4. The graph does not control for drunk/drugged driving which is far more common among American-born drivers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    1. Not all asian-americans are East Asians. Not even close, more like half. While the drivers in Japan and South Korea are overwhelmingly east asian.
     
    This argument hurts your earlier assertion. Asian countries outside Japan and South Korea generally have higher (some much higher) driving fatalities than they do, so by this logic "Asian-American" fatalities rate should be higher, not lower. Yet it is a fraction of the rates of the other ethno-racial groups in the United States.

    2. The environment is not the same either. A much greater proportion of east asians in America live in high density urban areas (which have lower accident rates).
     
    Of course the environment is not the same. But within the same country, the environmental differences are controlled far better.

    Are you suggesting that driving environments of different countries are more similar than those found within the same country? If so, you are a moron.

    3. The proportion of asian-americans who drive is below the national average, a very large percentage (half?) of them not being born in America.
     
    Thanks for bringing up yet another argument that hurts your assertion. Asian-American car ownership is HIGHER than car ownership in Asia. So they should have FAR HIGHER fatalities rate per capita than those in Asia. But, in fact, they don't.

    4. The graph does not control for drunk/drugged driving which is far more common among American-born drivers.
     
    This one is likely true, but then there is another problem. Drunk driving is extremely common in countries such as South Korea and accounts for the great majority of traffic fatalities cases. So by that same logic, cross-country comparisons are less meaningful.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. meis says:
    @AaronB

    Almost everything can be explained by IQ, and differential rates in the appearance of intensive agriculture, urbanization, and literacy.
     
    Bah!

    It is all almost spiritual factors.



    Some people will invest all their energy into developing materially and uproot, destabilize, and reorganize their entire culture to achieve material advantage - other people's will prefer spiritual happiness, or at least a better balance.

    East Asians simply aren't willing to become as gloomy and frustrated as the West in order to gain some material advantage - which reminds me I really need to live there!

    And the people who invest all their energy into material advantage eventually burn out and become gloomy and apathetic and self hating and try and destroy themselves or get overrun by people who invest more of their energy in spiritual happiness - so it's a short term strategy, a few centuries at most.

    And that is is the TRUE history of the world - not this incoherent genetic nonsense.

    This is a reply to all, especially White men, not just the original poster of the comment.

    Confucianism. Morality. Discipline. Humble. Guilt (which Karlin has touched).

    Recently, I watched these programs from China:

    Millionaires going back to the village life (in Yunnan I think)
    2014
    Season 1

    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRKN8nAk12Zf909jTwje09KOEOSfnJTm3

    2015
    Season 2

    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRKN8nAk12ZeL8M8Sq4NPMj_Nxq9Glf_e

    Another title with a similar theme with celebs

    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUM8x224JrX83Ai3H3ZndAfN9uvI_UUH3

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. My apologies to Mr.Karlin for accusing him of censorship.

    Tough in my defense I would like to mention, that this is my first time commenting on Unz.com.

    May I ask what the reason was, for my comment to be marked as spam?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hyperborean
    What was the exact wording? Are you sure it wasn't just put in moderation?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. Does anyone know how far away we are technologically from some form of radical IQ enhancement? Gene editing could be done on embryos, nootropics can raise IQs but only by a small amount, and in the long term, Hans Moravec suggested using what is known as the Moravec Transfer, where neurons are gradually replaced with artificial neurons. Does anyone else know of other potential emerging technologies that could be used to significantly raise IQs of adult humans?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  195. @Unknown128
    My apologies to Mr.Karlin for accusing him of censorship.

    Tough in my defense I would like to mention, that this is my first time commenting on Unz.com.

    May I ask what the reason was, for my comment to be marked as spam?

    What was the exact wording? Are you sure it wasn’t just put in moderation?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. @Dmitry
    This may be offtopip or little relevant - an interesting article this week in Nature's website, about various problems in the research culture in South Korea.

    South Korean science needs restructuring

    Something is wrong with the South Korean R&D system, and everyone knows it. The country invests a lot but gets less and less back. Scientists feel disenfranchised by the government’s opaque system for funding. The public is not seeing solutions to pressing problems, such as air pollution. Even government ministers and economists complain that all those highly cited papers are not generating enough new technologies.
     

    Full article:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05508-z

    The South Koreans piggybacked their way into display and other technologies on the back of Russian scientists and engineers brought to Korea on short term contracts. At the time they thought this was cheaper than funding whole teams in Russia. Just cherry pick to top talent. It did’t work sustainably. The eco system to support them wasn’t there. It’s not just about having the best equipment. It would have been better to hire the whole team in Russia.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. utu says:
    @Bliss

    an attempt to pull out intelligence signal from data is futile and idiotic.
     
    What an idiot. How do you propose to measure driving ability if not from real world data?

    How do you propose to measure driving ability if not from real world data?

    You can’t get it from these data because other factors are much stronger than driving ability. Look at France and Japan in 1970-2005 period:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/a-map-of-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-drivers/283886/

    The number of fatalities (per billion km) was reduced by factor of 10. Do you want to tell me that it took 35 years for Japanese and French to improve their driving abilities to get from 100 to 10 fatalities/bkm? Driving abilities by ten fold factor? Don’t you have a feel for reality, no common sense? It was not driving abilities but (1) road conditions (multi lane highways, wide road shoulders, trees removed from road sides, better signs and speed limits), (2) regulations and enforcement, (3) safer cars and seat belts and airbags, (4) special lanes for pedestrians and bikes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Look at France and Japan in 1970-2005 period:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/a-map-of-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-drivers/283886/
     
    What an imbecile. The moron is using data from 1970-2005 in a futile attempt at discrediting conclusions based on data from 2015.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. Bliss says:
    @utu

    How do you propose to measure driving ability if not from real world data?
     
    You can't get it from these data because other factors are much stronger than driving ability. Look at France and Japan in 1970-2005 period:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/a-map-of-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-drivers/283886/

    The number of fatalities (per billion km) was reduced by factor of 10. Do you want to tell me that it took 35 years for Japanese and French to improve their driving abilities to get from 100 to 10 fatalities/bkm? Driving abilities by ten fold factor? Don't you have a feel for reality, no common sense? It was not driving abilities but (1) road conditions (multi lane highways, wide road shoulders, trees removed from road sides, better signs and speed limits), (2) regulations and enforcement, (3) safer cars and seat belts and airbags, (4) special lanes for pedestrians and bikes.

    Look at France and Japan in 1970-2005 period:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/a-map-of-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-drivers/283886/

    What an imbecile. The moron is using data from 1970-2005 in a futile attempt at discrediting conclusions based on data from 2015.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    What an imbecile. The moron is using data from 1970-2005 in a futile attempt at discrediting conclusions based on data from 2015.
     
    I brought up the 1970-2005 data to show the dramatic change by 10-fold factor to make a point that 'driving ability' can't be extracted form the data that you are looking at because other factors than 'driving ability' dominate the outcome of the fatalities/bkm metric:

    It was not driving abilities but (1) road conditions (multi lane highways, wide road shoulders, trees removed from road sides, better signs and speed limits), (2) regulations and enforcement, (3) safer cars and seat belts and airbags, (4) special lanes for pedestrians and bikes.
     
    Is calling me imbecile and moron all that you got?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. @Anatoly Karlin

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed).
     
    E.L. Jones makes this point in The European Miracle. More capital in China was destroyed during nomad invasions than in Europe.

    Of course, one aspect of this is just China's plain back luck in being a giant plane abutting the Eurasian steppe, which could masses of steppe cavalry on home soil. Largest plain in Europe west of the Wild Fields is in Hungary, which, however, is relatively small and can only support 1-2 tyumens. Main reason the Mongols decided to call off their invasion.

    Still, while acknowledging that the nomads did nothing good for China, I don't really buy the idea that they explain why Europe "won" instead of China. Nomad dynasties inevitably became Sinicized; populations bounced back; the Confucian bureaucracy seems to have been remarkably resilient, and provided continuity of governance. And of course Japan did not have that problem, but in many respects followed in China's footsteps (self-imposed isolation; improvement over innovation).

    Imagine that Newton, an extremely high IQ man (one would assume), was born in China in the 1600s. Could he have invented Calculus & Mechanics? That is to ask: without Euclid and Kepler, can it happen? One might answer: with the IQ situation of China, there should have been Kepler and Euclid around, no? Why? But we don’t really know the IQ situation in China 2000 years ago. Something happened in Greece and it had profound impact down the road that is not to be explained away by only looking at the world of recent two hundreds years, I think.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Didn’t Pascal invent Calculus?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. @Anatoly Karlin

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed).
     
    E.L. Jones makes this point in The European Miracle. More capital in China was destroyed during nomad invasions than in Europe.

    Of course, one aspect of this is just China's plain back luck in being a giant plane abutting the Eurasian steppe, which could masses of steppe cavalry on home soil. Largest plain in Europe west of the Wild Fields is in Hungary, which, however, is relatively small and can only support 1-2 tyumens. Main reason the Mongols decided to call off their invasion.

    Still, while acknowledging that the nomads did nothing good for China, I don't really buy the idea that they explain why Europe "won" instead of China. Nomad dynasties inevitably became Sinicized; populations bounced back; the Confucian bureaucracy seems to have been remarkably resilient, and provided continuity of governance. And of course Japan did not have that problem, but in many respects followed in China's footsteps (self-imposed isolation; improvement over innovation).

    Next, imagine Newton was born in England in 1600s, but this time as a woman. What might happen afterwards? I guess that she would be extremely clever at picking herself a nice husband, and she might become the mother of inventors of Calculus. Of course I don’t really know, but the biological situation is there…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. utu says:
    @Bliss

    Look at France and Japan in 1970-2005 period:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/a-map-of-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-drivers/283886/
     
    What an imbecile. The moron is using data from 1970-2005 in a futile attempt at discrediting conclusions based on data from 2015.

    What an imbecile. The moron is using data from 1970-2005 in a futile attempt at discrediting conclusions based on data from 2015.

    I brought up the 1970-2005 data to show the dramatic change by 10-fold factor to make a point that ‘driving ability’ can’t be extracted form the data that you are looking at because other factors than ‘driving ability’ dominate the outcome of the fatalities/bkm metric:

    It was not driving abilities but (1) road conditions (multi lane highways, wide road shoulders, trees removed from road sides, better signs and speed limits), (2) regulations and enforcement, (3) safer cars and seat belts and airbags, (4) special lanes for pedestrians and bikes.

    Is calling me imbecile and moron all that you got?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    I brought up the 1970-2005 data to show the dramatic change by 10-fold factor
     
    It was stupid to bring that up because your data is outdated. There is much better and more recent data available, which I provided.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. @Anatoly Karlin

    Also one should not forget that China did suffer far more barbarian devastation then North-western Europe (which saw none at all after the Magyars and Vikings were tamed).
     
    E.L. Jones makes this point in The European Miracle. More capital in China was destroyed during nomad invasions than in Europe.

    Of course, one aspect of this is just China's plain back luck in being a giant plane abutting the Eurasian steppe, which could masses of steppe cavalry on home soil. Largest plain in Europe west of the Wild Fields is in Hungary, which, however, is relatively small and can only support 1-2 tyumens. Main reason the Mongols decided to call off their invasion.

    Still, while acknowledging that the nomads did nothing good for China, I don't really buy the idea that they explain why Europe "won" instead of China. Nomad dynasties inevitably became Sinicized; populations bounced back; the Confucian bureaucracy seems to have been remarkably resilient, and provided continuity of governance. And of course Japan did not have that problem, but in many respects followed in China's footsteps (self-imposed isolation; improvement over innovation).

    while acknowledging that the nomads did nothing good for China

    Do you dismiss Peter Turchin’s analysis that frontiers between very different cultures are where powerful nations develop, the conflict promoting the growth of asabiya (social solidarity)?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. @utu

    This has translated to an approximately one S.D. improvement in general intelligence.
     
    The diffrent rates of Flynn effects on verbal and Raven matrices imply that 'general intelligence' may not exist as a single component (factor), i.e., a scalar quantity. Factorization of the same battery of tests now and 40 years ago would yield two different g factors that would not be mutually parallel, meaning that another factor, let's call it s orthogonal to g, must be introduced. At this point it must be admitted that the church erected by Spearman and refurbished with new mathematical facade by Jensen is crumbling. Instead of scalar 'general intelligence' we have a 2-D vector in space spanned by two orthogonal vectors g and s and the Flynn effect consists of rotation of the 'general intelligence vector' in this space and also in change of its absolute magnitude. It is a significant departure form the dogma of Spearman. Further consequence is that each orthogonal component of the 'general intelligence vector' may have different heritability, however this is of secondary importance as the heritability tests have very poor repeatability.

    The different rates of Flynn effects on verbal and Raven matrices imply that ‘general intelligence’ may not exist as a single component (factor), i.e., a scalar quantity. Factorization of the same battery of tests now and 40 years ago would yield two different g factors that would not be mutually parallel, meaning that another factor, let’s call it s orthogonal to g, must be introduced.

    You don’t need Flynn to make this argument regarding the inconstancy of g. The same argument was made by Horn against Carroll. Horn argued against g conceived as a third order factor. The problem is that the apparent nature of g changes with the second order factors included in the analysis. Say there are 12 second order factors (there are more), then if you select six of them randomly, obviously you will get a different g than if you chose the other six second order factors.

    The argument stumped Carroll for a while, but finally he thought he had the answer. Horn was confusing a factor, which is a latent variable, with its expression. If the counter-argument is valid, it applies to the argument based on Flynn as well (probably more readily).

    I won’t try to adjudicate. Perhaps Dr. Thompson will weigh in.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. Bliss says:
    @utu

    What an imbecile. The moron is using data from 1970-2005 in a futile attempt at discrediting conclusions based on data from 2015.
     
    I brought up the 1970-2005 data to show the dramatic change by 10-fold factor to make a point that 'driving ability' can't be extracted form the data that you are looking at because other factors than 'driving ability' dominate the outcome of the fatalities/bkm metric:

    It was not driving abilities but (1) road conditions (multi lane highways, wide road shoulders, trees removed from road sides, better signs and speed limits), (2) regulations and enforcement, (3) safer cars and seat belts and airbags, (4) special lanes for pedestrians and bikes.
     
    Is calling me imbecile and moron all that you got?

    I brought up the 1970-2005 data to show the dramatic change by 10-fold factor

    It was stupid to bring that up because your data is outdated. There is much better and more recent data available, which I provided.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    It was stupid to bring that up because your data is outdated. There is much better and more recent data available, which I provided.
     
    You are either completely stupid or intellectually dishonest. Utu did not claim that the 1970-2005 data were more "up-to-date" than data from later periods. He was getting at the fact there was a substantial decline in traffic fatalities during that period across countries and that the declines in France and Japan were FAR MORE dramatic than those in the U.S. and Sweden.

    His point was that a snapshot comparison of any given year across countries was not particularly meaningful, given that there was apparently a stronger Flynn effect in some countries than others (which I speculate - reasonably - had to do with increased familiarities brought on by increased car ownership).

    At this point, I don't even know why I am arguing with you. You have zero knowledge of even the basics of statistics and a scant notion of controlling for variables.
    , @utu
    I brought up the 1970-2005 data to show the dramatic change by 10-fold factor to make a point that ‘driving ability’ can’t be extracted form the data that you are looking at because other factors than ‘driving ability’ dominate the outcome of the fatalities/bkm metric:

    It was not driving abilities but (1) road conditions (multi lane highways, wide road shoulders, trees removed from road sides, better signs and speed limits), (2) regulations and enforcement, (3) safer cars and seat belts and airbags, (4) special lanes for pedestrians and bikes.
     
    The point was that if in 2017 in countries A, B, C had 3, 6 and 9 fatalities/bkm, respectively one can't conclude that driving abilities are responsible for differences between the three countries. Other factor similar to those that were responsible for the 10-fold reduction of fatalities in France and Japan in 35 year period account for these differences. It is not driving ability that makes country C three times more dangerous than country A. The country C most likely could be improved by emulating the country A.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. Twinkie says:
    @Bliss

    That graph controls for environment far more than anything else anyone has brought up so far, making comparisons as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity
     
    Not true.

    1. Not all asian-americans are East Asians. Not even close, more like half. While the drivers in Japan and South Korea are overwhelmingly east asian.

    2. The environment is not the same either. A much greater proportion of east asians in America live in high density urban areas (which have lower accident rates).

    3. The proportion of asian-americans who drive is below the national average, a very large percentage (half?) of them not being born in America.

    4. The graph does not control for drunk/drugged driving which is far more common among American-born drivers.

    1. Not all asian-americans are East Asians. Not even close, more like half. While the drivers in Japan and South Korea are overwhelmingly east asian.

    This argument hurts your earlier assertion. Asian countries outside Japan and South Korea generally have higher (some much higher) driving fatalities than they do, so by this logic “Asian-American” fatalities rate should be higher, not lower. Yet it is a fraction of the rates of the other ethno-racial groups in the United States.

    2. The environment is not the same either. A much greater proportion of east asians in America live in high density urban areas (which have lower accident rates).

    Of course the environment is not the same. But within the same country, the environmental differences are controlled far better.

    Are you suggesting that driving environments of different countries are more similar than those found within the same country? If so, you are a moron.

    3. The proportion of asian-americans who drive is below the national average, a very large percentage (half?) of them not being born in America.

    Thanks for bringing up yet another argument that hurts your assertion. Asian-American car ownership is HIGHER than car ownership in Asia. So they should have FAR HIGHER fatalities rate per capita than those in Asia. But, in fact, they don’t.

    4. The graph does not control for drunk/drugged driving which is far more common among American-born drivers.

    This one is likely true, but then there is another problem. Drunk driving is extremely common in countries such as South Korea and accounts for the great majority of traffic fatalities cases. So by that same logic, cross-country comparisons are less meaningful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Asian countries outside Japan and South Korea generally have higher (some much higher) driving fatalities than they do,
     
    It was utterly idiotic of you to claim that chart was “as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity”. That clearly identifies you as either a shameless liar or a clueless fool. To be purely based on race/ethnicity all Asian-Americans would have to be East Asians (which is the race/ethnicity being compared).

    Instead of acknowledging your mistake you piled on with more stupidity. Did you “control for variables” like third world infrastructure and services in these “countries outside Japan and South Korea)” when you judged them to be worse drivers than East Asians?

    Are you suggesting that driving environments of different countries are more similar than those found within the same country? If so, you are a moron.
     
    The research I quoted was not a comparison between different countries but between driving environments within America. You are just trying to avoid answering my point. Here it is again, you sneaky liar:

    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/eb63/be3106ea8fa91f1ad1b39b90bd852ce8f0f1.pdf

    Population density was also associated with fewer crashes. Each additional person per net residential acre decreased accident incidence by 0.05%.

    A study by Reid Ewing of the University of Maryland 2009[3] also concluded that dense urban areas appear to be safer than the lower volume environments of the suburbs.

    Asian-American car ownership is HIGHER than car ownership in Asia. So they should have FAR HIGHER fatalities rate per capita than those in Asia. But, in fact, they don’t.
     
    More dishonest sneakiness. You are still pretending as if that chart (from 2006 by the way) is the last word on East Asian driving IQ when in fact it far from it. As I showed in post#191

    Show us where you learned that car ownership among East Asian Americans in 2006 (the “graph” you are clinging to so desperately) was higher than car ownership in Japan and South Korea in 2015. More relevantly, show us whether East Asian Americans had higher car ownership rates than the American average, in 2006.


    Bottom line, based on the best metric we have: fatal and injury crashes per billion vehicle-kilometers, drivers in Japan and South Korea have significantly worse driving records than drivers in the UK. Which raises doubts about the claims of the superior visio-spatial IQ of east asians. No wonder you and Chieh got your tails up on this issue.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. Twinkie says:
    @Bliss

    I brought up the 1970-2005 data to show the dramatic change by 10-fold factor
     
    It was stupid to bring that up because your data is outdated. There is much better and more recent data available, which I provided.

    It was stupid to bring that up because your data is outdated. There is much better and more recent data available, which I provided.

    You are either completely stupid or intellectually dishonest. Utu did not claim that the 1970-2005 data were more “up-to-date” than data from later periods. He was getting at the fact there was a substantial decline in traffic fatalities during that period across countries and that the declines in France and Japan were FAR MORE dramatic than those in the U.S. and Sweden.

    His point was that a snapshot comparison of any given year across countries was not particularly meaningful, given that there was apparently a stronger Flynn effect in some countries than others (which I speculate – reasonably – had to do with increased familiarities brought on by increased car ownership).

    At this point, I don’t even know why I am arguing with you. You have zero knowledge of even the basics of statistics and a scant notion of controlling for variables.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    You are either completely stupid or intellectually dishonest.
     
    Lol. That’s rich coming from a sneaky liar who can’t think rationally. It takes an idiot like you to stubbornly insist that crash deaths per 100,000 population is a true metric of driving ability. And only a complete moron would claim that data on asian-americans is “as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity”.

    His point was that a snapshot comparison of any given year across countries was not particularly meaningful, given that there was apparently a stronger Flynn effect in some countries than others (which I speculate – reasonably – had to do with increased familiarities brought on by increased car ownership).
     
    Neither of you is drawing the correct conclusion from that chart even though it was spelled out for you. Japan and France caught up with the UK and US not because of some imaginary Flynn effect but because they followed the latters’ example and adopted and implemented simple safety measures like wearing safety belts and installing air bags in cars. The playing field was leveled by 2005. That variable does not apply in 2015. And don’t lie about snapshots you weasel, the data I provided covers many years.

    https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/Screen%20Shot%202014-02-17%20at%205.42.48%20PM.png

    Btw, Utu must be smarter than you and Chieh (which is not saying much) for unlike you bozos he found a chart that uses the correct metric.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. Twinkie says:
    @Talha
    There is only one way to legitimately settle this:
    1) Archery battle of best 15 each of Africans and East Asians - last man standing.

    And...

    2) Mad-Max style demolition derby - caveat (Africans can get help from Euros for the cars).

    Let's make it happen folks!

    Peace.

    There is only one way to legitimately settle this:
    1) Archery battle of best 15 each of Africans and East Asians – last man standing.

    And…

    2) Mad-Max style demolition derby – caveat (Africans can get help from Euros for the cars).

    You know that will be very unfair to the Africans. I mean look at all those black faces on the podium: https://www.olympic.org/news/south-korean-archers-extend-their-olympic-reign

    And just look at two of those “Russians” who placed second. https://stillmed.olympic.org/media/Images/OlympicOrg/News/2016/08/07/2016-08-07-archery-inside-02.jpg?interpolation=lanczos-none&resize=1060:*

    And, bro, haven’t you seen “The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift”? That’s not entirely fiction you know:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    OK, OK - let’s do a crash derby with occupants of the car able to use bows and arrows - this should settle it for good! Archery from hanging out the windows of moving, crashing vehicles - very difficult!

    Two teams enter, one team leaves!!!

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. Bliss says:
    @Twinkie

    1. Not all asian-americans are East Asians. Not even close, more like half. While the drivers in Japan and South Korea are overwhelmingly east asian.
     
    This argument hurts your earlier assertion. Asian countries outside Japan and South Korea generally have higher (some much higher) driving fatalities than they do, so by this logic "Asian-American" fatalities rate should be higher, not lower. Yet it is a fraction of the rates of the other ethno-racial groups in the United States.

    2. The environment is not the same either. A much greater proportion of east asians in America live in high density urban areas (which have lower accident rates).
     
    Of course the environment is not the same. But within the same country, the environmental differences are controlled far better.

    Are you suggesting that driving environments of different countries are more similar than those found within the same country? If so, you are a moron.

    3. The proportion of asian-americans who drive is below the national average, a very large percentage (half?) of them not being born in America.
     
    Thanks for bringing up yet another argument that hurts your assertion. Asian-American car ownership is HIGHER than car ownership in Asia. So they should have FAR HIGHER fatalities rate per capita than those in Asia. But, in fact, they don't.

    4. The graph does not control for drunk/drugged driving which is far more common among American-born drivers.
     
    This one is likely true, but then there is another problem. Drunk driving is extremely common in countries such as South Korea and accounts for the great majority of traffic fatalities cases. So by that same logic, cross-country comparisons are less meaningful.

    Asian countries outside Japan and South Korea generally have higher (some much higher) driving fatalities than they do,

    It was utterly idiotic of you to claim that chart was “as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity”. That clearly identifies you as either a shameless liar or a clueless fool. To be purely based on race/ethnicity all Asian-Americans would have to be East Asians (which is the race/ethnicity being compared).

    Instead of acknowledging your mistake you piled on with more stupidity. Did you “control for variables” like third world infrastructure and services in these “countries outside Japan and South Korea)” when you judged them to be worse drivers than East Asians?

    Are you suggesting that driving environments of different countries are more similar than those found within the same country? If so, you are a moron.

    The research I quoted was not a comparison between different countries but between driving environments within America. You are just trying to avoid answering my point. Here it is again, you sneaky liar:

    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/eb63/be3106ea8fa91f1ad1b39b90bd852ce8f0f1.pdf

    Population density was also associated with fewer crashes. Each additional person per net residential acre decreased accident incidence by 0.05%.

    A study by Reid Ewing of the University of Maryland 2009[3] also concluded that dense urban areas appear to be safer than the lower volume environments of the suburbs.

    Asian-American car ownership is HIGHER than car ownership in Asia. So they should have FAR HIGHER fatalities rate per capita than those in Asia. But, in fact, they don’t.

    More dishonest sneakiness. You are still pretending as if that chart (from 2006 by the way) is the last word on East Asian driving IQ when in fact it far from it. As I showed in post#191

    Show us where you learned that car ownership among East Asian Americans in 2006 (the “graph” you are clinging to so desperately) was higher than car ownership in Japan and South Korea in 2015. More relevantly, show us whether East Asian Americans had higher car ownership rates than the American average, in 2006.

    Bottom line, based on the best metric we have: fatal and injury crashes per billion vehicle-kilometers, drivers in Japan and South Korea have significantly worse driving records than drivers in the UK. Which raises doubts about the claims of the superior visio-spatial IQ of east asians. No wonder you and Chieh got your tails up on this issue.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. Bliss says:
    @Twinkie

    It was stupid to bring that up because your data is outdated. There is much better and more recent data available, which I provided.
     
    You are either completely stupid or intellectually dishonest. Utu did not claim that the 1970-2005 data were more "up-to-date" than data from later periods. He was getting at the fact there was a substantial decline in traffic fatalities during that period across countries and that the declines in France and Japan were FAR MORE dramatic than those in the U.S. and Sweden.

    His point was that a snapshot comparison of any given year across countries was not particularly meaningful, given that there was apparently a stronger Flynn effect in some countries than others (which I speculate - reasonably - had to do with increased familiarities brought on by increased car ownership).

    At this point, I don't even know why I am arguing with you. You have zero knowledge of even the basics of statistics and a scant notion of controlling for variables.

    You are either completely stupid or intellectually dishonest.

    Lol. That’s rich coming from a sneaky liar who can’t think rationally. It takes an idiot like you to stubbornly insist that crash deaths per 100,000 population is a true metric of driving ability. And only a complete moron would claim that data on asian-americans is “as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity”.

    His point was that a snapshot comparison of any given year across countries was not particularly meaningful, given that there was apparently a stronger Flynn effect in some countries than others (which I speculate – reasonably – had to do with increased familiarities brought on by increased car ownership).

    Neither of you is drawing the correct conclusion from that chart even though it was spelled out for you. Japan and France caught up with the UK and US not because of some imaginary Flynn effect but because they followed the latters’ example and adopted and implemented simple safety measures like wearing safety belts and installing air bags in cars. The playing field was leveled by 2005. That variable does not apply in 2015. And don’t lie about snapshots you weasel, the data I provided covers many years.

    Btw, Utu must be smarter than you and Chieh (which is not saying much) for unlike you bozos he found a chart that uses the correct metric.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    Have fun!

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20544565

    Young drivers who were born in Asian countries were less likely to report engaging in risky driving behaviors than their Australian-born counterparts. The proportion of participants reporting a high level of risky driving was 31.5 percent (95% confidence intervale [CI], 30.8-32.1) among Australian-born drivers compared to 25.6 percent (95% CI, 23.1-28.2) among Asian-born drivers and 30.4 percent (95% CI, 28.4-32.5) among those born in other regions. Asian-born participants had half the risk of a crash as a driver than their Australian-born counterparts (relative risk [RR] 0.55; 95% CI, 0.41-0.75) after adjusting for a number of demographic factors and driving and risk-taking behaviors. The comparative risk was even lower among those aged 17 years (RR 0.29; 95% CI, 0.29-0.75). Risk estimates for people born in other regions did not differ to those for Australian-born respondents. [Boldface mine.]
     
    Supposedly this was later replicated in a Canadian study.

    And of course those evil, irrationally racist* insurance companies charge Asians less, despite their allegedly worse driving ability!

    https://augustafreepress.com/myth-busting-the-bad-asian-driver-myth-car-insurance-rates-dont-lie/

    What you can find is that on average, auto insurance premiums for all drivers comes out to just north of $900 per year, or about $75 per month. If we were to break that out into racial categories, the average Asian driver in the U.S. is actually paying an annual premium of about $815 per year, or $68 per month – 10 percent less than the average U.S. driver. [Boldface mine.]
     
    *Another news flash - black drivers incur higher auto insurance premiums than white drivers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. Twinkie says:
    @Bliss

    You are either completely stupid or intellectually dishonest.
     
    Lol. That’s rich coming from a sneaky liar who can’t think rationally. It takes an idiot like you to stubbornly insist that crash deaths per 100,000 population is a true metric of driving ability. And only a complete moron would claim that data on asian-americans is “as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity”.

    His point was that a snapshot comparison of any given year across countries was not particularly meaningful, given that there was apparently a stronger Flynn effect in some countries than others (which I speculate – reasonably – had to do with increased familiarities brought on by increased car ownership).
     
    Neither of you is drawing the correct conclusion from that chart even though it was spelled out for you. Japan and France caught up with the UK and US not because of some imaginary Flynn effect but because they followed the latters’ example and adopted and implemented simple safety measures like wearing safety belts and installing air bags in cars. The playing field was leveled by 2005. That variable does not apply in 2015. And don’t lie about snapshots you weasel, the data I provided covers many years.

    https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/Screen%20Shot%202014-02-17%20at%205.42.48%20PM.png

    Btw, Utu must be smarter than you and Chieh (which is not saying much) for unlike you bozos he found a chart that uses the correct metric.

    Have fun!

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20544565

    Young drivers who were born in Asian countries were less likely to report engaging in risky driving behaviors than their Australian-born counterparts. The proportion of participants reporting a high level of risky driving was 31.5 percent (95% confidence intervale [CI], 30.8-32.1) among Australian-born drivers compared to 25.6 percent (95% CI, 23.1-28.2) among Asian-born drivers and 30.4 percent (95% CI, 28.4-32.5) among those born in other regions. Asian-born participants had half the risk of a crash as a driver than their Australian-born counterparts (relative risk [RR] 0.55; 95% CI, 0.41-0.75) after adjusting for a number of demographic factors and driving and risk-taking behaviors. The comparative risk was even lower among those aged 17 years (RR 0.29; 95% CI, 0.29-0.75). Risk estimates for people born in other regions did not differ to those for Australian-born respondents. [Boldface mine.]

    Supposedly this was later replicated in a Canadian study.

    And of course those evil, irrationally racist* insurance companies charge Asians less, despite their allegedly worse driving ability!

    https://augustafreepress.com/myth-busting-the-bad-asian-driver-myth-car-insurance-rates-dont-lie/

    What you can find is that on average, auto insurance premiums for all drivers comes out to just north of $900 per year, or about $75 per month. If we were to break that out into racial categories, the average Asian driver in the U.S. is actually paying an annual premium of about $815 per year, or $68 per month – 10 percent less than the average U.S. driver. [Boldface mine.]

    *Another news flash – black drivers incur higher auto insurance premiums than white drivers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Young drivers who were born in Asian countries were less likely to report engaging in risky driving behaviors than their Australian-born counterparts.
     
    So asians are less prone to risky driving? That’s a good thing. But it’s bad for your argument: it makes the high crash rates in Japan and South Korea even better evidence of low visuospatial IQ in East Asians.

    the average Asian driver in the U.S. is actually paying an annual premium of about $815 per year, or $68 per month – 10 percent less than the average U.S. driver.
     
    Considering that asian drivers are less prone to risky driving, less likely to drive while impaired (by alcohol and/or drugs) and more likely to drive in safer environments, the 10% discount seems low. Perhaps it would be higher if they were better drivers?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. utu says:
    @Bliss

    I brought up the 1970-2005 data to show the dramatic change by 10-fold factor
     
    It was stupid to bring that up because your data is outdated. There is much better and more recent data available, which I provided.

    I brought up the 1970-2005 data to show the dramatic change by 10-fold factor to make a point that ‘driving ability’ can’t be extracted form the data that you are looking at because other factors than ‘driving ability’ dominate the outcome of the fatalities/bkm metric:

    It was not driving abilities but (1) road conditions (multi lane highways, wide road shoulders, trees removed from road sides, better signs and speed limits), (2) regulations and enforcement, (3) safer cars and seat belts and airbags, (4) special lanes for pedestrians and bikes.

    The point was that if in 2017 in countries A, B, C had 3, 6 and 9 fatalities/bkm, respectively one can’t conclude that driving abilities are responsible for differences between the three countries. Other factor similar to those that were responsible for the 10-fold reduction of fatalities in France and Japan in 35 year period account for these differences. It is not driving ability that makes country C three times more dangerous than country A. The country C most likely could be improved by emulating the country A.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson
    This is anecdotal, but based on my experience in India working-class people are much dumber than their equivalents in the West.

    Carpenters will for instance simply run out of nails on the job and expect you to provide them with more nails.

    Hotel employees misunderstand very simple instructions, and not just in English. Instructions given in native dialects are also misunderstood. Bizarre things like asking for three chairs to be brought up to the room and ending up with ten chairs and a bunch of soda pop.

    There are electricians who don't even know the difference between single-phase and three-phase and have never heard of grounding.

    The quality of welding is abysmal and would be rejected by quality control in any Western country.

    The emigration of so many talented Indians to the West is also a very serious problem, and something which the Indian government irrationally continues to insist on as part of its foreign policy. Indians are perversely proud that some of their most talented sons are now employed as coolie CEOs of M$FT and Goolag instead of lending their talents to their own country.

    The achievements, or lack thereof, of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and the Defence Research and Development Organization are embarrassing. The Tejas (light fighter) and Arjun (main battle tank) projects are fiascos. Indian space program appears to be a rare bright spot.

    Now granted India is still a very poor country and has problems with illiteracy (only Kerala has reached 100% primary school enrollment), malnutrition, and certainly pathogen burden as well. There wasn't much to boast about in China 30 years ago either (the delusions of Godfree Roberts aside).

    The government of India has strict affirmative action for the low IQ lower castes.

    So the upper castes migrate to America where they are hired instead of White men because they are high IQ POCs and keep the EEOC gestapo and black Hispanic and women activists away.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson


    Indian traders ask me to sell curry powder and mangoes to Russia. They seem to have no cultural awareness.
     
    This is another odd thing about Indians. I've never met more insular people. Civilizationally, they're completely self-absorbed. They have less curiosity about other cultures, religions, and races than any other group of (intelligent) people I've ever encountered.

    In fact if I understand their religions correctly, there was even some sort of taboo about venturing outside of India itself. The Indian Ocean was something you weren't supposed to venture out into.

    You can see this in their diaspora as well. Racially speaking they're a lot more similar to whites than Northeast Asians. But Northeast Asians in white countries adopt white names (even when simply travelling on business), date whites, don't wear traditional costumes, happily enjoy white foods, etc.

    19th early 20th century Indian travelers to Europe went by ship and took barrels of Ganges water with them for religious reasons.

    It’s sacred and Hindus are not supposed to go to far from the Ganges. Ganges water is for purification and to worship the Goddess of the Ganges.
    Now days Ganges water is exported from India in plastic pouches.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Noname Guy
    Imagine that Newton, an extremely high IQ man (one would assume), was born in China in the 1600s. Could he have invented Calculus & Mechanics? That is to ask: without Euclid and Kepler, can it happen? One might answer: with the IQ situation of China, there should have been Kepler and Euclid around, no? Why? But we don't really know the IQ situation in China 2000 years ago. Something happened in Greece and it had profound impact down the road that is not to be explained away by only looking at the world of recent two hundreds years, I think.

    Didn’t Pascal invent Calculus?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    Not to mention Leibnitz and Archimedes got very very close to integration. It depends on what country you live in. The whole modern rush to publish in a peer reviewed journal is rooted in the claim to have developed calculus. Modern calculus uses Leibnitz's notation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. bispora says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Certainly a major factor, but assuming equal IQs, an female S.D. of 13.5 vs. 15 for men (James Thompson usually uses 14), and a discovery threshold of 145, women would still account for almost a quarter of eminent figures; at a discovery threshold of 160, they would still account for ~12% of eminent figures. Whereas the actual number is just 2%. So other factors must clearly play a role.

    My pet theory is that even though female capacity to contribute to innovation has been getting progressively better throughout history - absolute conditions may be even better than for men, these days - the threshold discovery rate has also been steadily going up. The two factors have canceled each other out, resulting in zero net progress in the percentage of female eminent figures. They might even fall this century, since female access is now maxed out, whereas the problems that need to be solved will continue getting harder.

    “assuming equal IQs”

    This is the key point. Lynn hypothesized about 5 IQ point higher male cognitive ability. Check your numbers whit this knowledge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. Bliss says:
    @Twinkie
    Have fun!

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20544565

    Young drivers who were born in Asian countries were less likely to report engaging in risky driving behaviors than their Australian-born counterparts. The proportion of participants reporting a high level of risky driving was 31.5 percent (95% confidence intervale [CI], 30.8-32.1) among Australian-born drivers compared to 25.6 percent (95% CI, 23.1-28.2) among Asian-born drivers and 30.4 percent (95% CI, 28.4-32.5) among those born in other regions. Asian-born participants had half the risk of a crash as a driver than their Australian-born counterparts (relative risk [RR] 0.55; 95% CI, 0.41-0.75) after adjusting for a number of demographic factors and driving and risk-taking behaviors. The comparative risk was even lower among those aged 17 years (RR 0.29; 95% CI, 0.29-0.75). Risk estimates for people born in other regions did not differ to those for Australian-born respondents. [Boldface mine.]
     
    Supposedly this was later replicated in a Canadian study.

    And of course those evil, irrationally racist* insurance companies charge Asians less, despite their allegedly worse driving ability!

    https://augustafreepress.com/myth-busting-the-bad-asian-driver-myth-car-insurance-rates-dont-lie/

    What you can find is that on average, auto insurance premiums for all drivers comes out to just north of $900 per year, or about $75 per month. If we were to break that out into racial categories, the average Asian driver in the U.S. is actually paying an annual premium of about $815 per year, or $68 per month – 10 percent less than the average U.S. driver. [Boldface mine.]
     
    *Another news flash - black drivers incur higher auto insurance premiums than white drivers.

    Young drivers who were born in Asian countries were less likely to report engaging in risky driving behaviors than their Australian-born counterparts.

    So asians are less prone to risky driving? That’s a good thing. But it’s bad for your argument: it makes the high crash rates in Japan and South Korea even better evidence of low visuospatial IQ in East Asians.

    the average Asian driver in the U.S. is actually paying an annual premium of about $815 per year, or $68 per month – 10 percent less than the average U.S. driver.

    Considering that asian drivers are less prone to risky driving, less likely to drive while impaired (by alcohol and/or drugs) and more likely to drive in safer environments, the 10% discount seems low. Perhaps it would be higher if they were better drivers?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    So asians are less prone to risky driving? That’s a good thing. But it’s bad for your argument: it makes the high crash rates in Japan and South Korea even better evidence of low visuospatial IQ in East Asians.
     
    Reading comprehension! One more time:

    Young drivers who were born in Asian countries were less likely to report engaging in risky driving behaviors than their Australian-born counterparts. The proportion of participants reporting a high level of risky driving was 31.5 percent (95% confidence intervale [CI], 30.8-32.1) among Australian-born drivers compared to 25.6 percent (95% CI, 23.1-28.2) among Asian-born drivers and 30.4 percent (95% CI, 28.4-32.5) among those born in other regions. Asian-born participants had half the risk of a crash as a driver than their Australian-born counterparts (relative risk [RR] 0.55; 95% CI, 0.41-0.75) after adjusting for a number of demographic factors and driving and risk-taking behaviors. The comparative risk was even lower among those aged 17 years (RR 0.29; 95% CI, 0.29-0.75). Risk estimates for people born in other regions did not differ to those for Australian-born respondents. [Boldface mine.]
     
    For the third time, for those with low verbal IQ! "Asian-born... half the risk of a crash... after adjusting for a number of demographic factors and driving and risk-taking behaviors."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. Bliss says:
    @Twinkie

    As for the NHTSA chart it should be obvious to you that it can’t be a true reflection of asian driving ability. Why don’t you apply your nitpicking skills to figure out what’s wrong with that chart?
     
    You don’t have a good reply for that, do you?

    That graph controls for environment far more than anything else anyone has brought up so far, making comparisons as close as possible to being purely based on race/ethnicity (though it would be nice if we could break down the data further for American-born only and controlled for age/sex).

    By the way, there is also a persistent stereotype in the US that East Asians can’t shoot (guns) very well... which is hilarious given that East Asians dominate Olympic shooting events, a fact not well-known among the general public in the US. The same goes for archery... that pesky visuospatial IQ.

    East Asians dominate Olympic shooting events…….The same goes for archery… that pesky visuospatial IQ.

    This must be the umpteenth time you have boasted about asian domination in shooting and archery. Here is the list of Olympic champions in shooting and there is no such domination:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_shooting#rifle_three_positions_2

    There is South Korean domination in Olympic archery though. But archery and shooting are two of the least popular sports. How can performance by a few individuals in activities with few participants trump performance in an activity like driving which is extremely common, when you are comparing races?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Okechukwu
    Brilliant stuff throughout the thread. I appreciate how thoroughly you dismantled this drivel. You're the one writer here that I always take time to read.
    , @utu

    How can performance by a few individuals in activities with few participants trump performance in an activity like driving which is extremely common, when you are comparing races?
     
    Di you say also this?

    The field is dominated by Europeans but the very best driver is an Afro-Brit, Lewis Hamilton.
     
    You meant that he was a good driver because he was Afro or despite of being Afro?
    , @utu

    How can performance by a few individuals in activities with few participants trump performance in an activity like driving which is extremely common, when you are comparing races?
     
    Did you say this?

    The field is dominated by Europeans but the very best driver is an Afro-Brit, Lewis Hamilton.
     
    You meant that he was a good driver because he was Afro or despite of being Afro?
    , @Twinkie

    Here is the list of Olympic champions in shooting and there is no such domination:
     
    Shooting events medal count in the last several Olympic Games:
    2004
    1 China (CHN) 4 2 3 9
    2 Russia (RUS) 3 4 3 10
    3 Germany (GER) 2 1 0 3
    United States (USA) 2 1 0 3
    5 Italy (ITA) 1 2 0 3
    6 Australia (AUS) 1 0 1 2
    6 Bulgaria (BUL) 1 0 1 2
    8 Hungary (HUN) 1 0 0 1
    Ukraine (UKR) 1 0 0 1
    United Arab Emirates (UAE) 1 0 0 1

    2008
    1 China (CHN) 5 2 1 8
    2 United States (USA) 2 2 2 6
    3 Czech Republic (CZE) 2 1 0 3
    Ukraine (UKR) 2 1 0 3
    5 Italy (ITA) 1 2 0 3
    6 South Korea (KOR) 1 1 0 2
    7 Finland (FIN) 1 0 1 2
    8 India (IND) 1 0 0 1
    9 Russia (RUS) 0 2 2 4
    10 Germany (GER) 0 1 3 4

    2012
    1 South Korea 3 2 0 5
    2 United States 3 0 1 4
    3 Italy 2 3 0 5
    4 China 2 2 3 7
    5 Belarus 1 0 0 1
    Croatia 1 0 0 1
    Cuba 1 0 0 1
    Great Britain 1 0 0 1
    Romania 1 0 0 1
    10 France 0 1 1 2
    India 0 1 1 2
    Serbia 0 1 1 2
    Slovakia 0 1 1 2

    2016
    1 Italy 4 3 0 7
    2 Germany 3 1 0 4
    3 China 1 2 4 7
    4 South Korea 1 1 0 2
    Vietnam 1 1 0 2
    6. United States 1 0 2 3
    7 Greece 1 0 1 2
    Independent Olympic Athletes 1 0 1 2
    9 Australia 1 0 0 1
    9 Croatia 1 0 0 1

    China was also no. 1 and no. 2, respectively at 2000 and 1996 Summer Games in shooting events. In 1992, China was no. 2 only behind "Unified Team" (12 former Soviet Republics) and South Korea was no. 4, Japan no. 9.

    I'd say this is pretty dominant, especially considering that civilians are basically not allowed to touch guns in East Asia unlike in Europe and North America. Also, medal winners from some non-East Asian countries were of East Asian background (e.g. Felipe Wu of Brazil who won silver at the last Sumer Games).

    There is South Korean domination in Olympic archery though.
     
    Domination is not enough of a word. South Korea basically wins gold medal every time in archery and it's a huge upset when it doesn't once in a blue moon. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archery_at_the_Summer_Olympics#From_1972

    Since modern archery competition began in 1972, South Korea has won more gold medals than the rest of the competition COMBINED (23 out of 40 total).

    But archery and shooting are two of the least popular sports. How can performance by a few individuals in activities with few participants trump performance in an activity like driving which is extremely common, when you are comparing races?
     
    So blacks (of West African ancestry) dominating the 100 meter dash and whites dominating swimming simply stems from participation selection and has little to do with HBD?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  218. Okechukwu says:
    @Bliss

    East Asians dominate Olympic shooting events.......The same goes for archery… that pesky visuospatial IQ.
     
    This must be the umpteenth time you have boasted about asian domination in shooting and archery. Here is the list of Olympic champions in shooting and there is no such domination:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_shooting#rifle_three_positions_2

    There is South Korean domination in Olympic archery though. But archery and shooting are two of the least popular sports. How can performance by a few individuals in activities with few participants trump performance in an activity like driving which is extremely common, when you are comparing races?

    Brilliant stuff throughout the thread. I appreciate how thoroughly you dismantled this drivel. You’re the one writer here that I always take time to read.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss
    Thanks. I enjoy reading your posts too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. “Jaychick” = HBD Chick? Or a gestalt with Jayman?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  220. utu says:
    @Bliss

    East Asians dominate Olympic shooting events.......The same goes for archery… that pesky visuospatial IQ.
     
    This must be the umpteenth time you have boasted about asian domination in shooting and archery. Here is the list of Olympic champions in shooting and there is no such domination:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_shooting#rifle_three_positions_2

    There is South Korean domination in Olympic archery though. But archery and shooting are two of the least popular sports. How can performance by a few individuals in activities with few participants trump performance in an activity like driving which is extremely common, when you are comparing races?

    How can performance by a few individuals in activities with few participants trump performance in an activity like driving which is extremely common, when you are comparing races?

    Di you say also this?

    The field is dominated by Europeans but the very best driver is an Afro-Brit, Lewis Hamilton.

    You meant that he was a good driver because he was Afro or despite of being Afro?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. utu says:
    @Bliss

    East Asians dominate Olympic shooting events.......The same goes for archery… that pesky visuospatial IQ.
     
    This must be the umpteenth time you have boasted about asian domination in shooting and archery. Here is the list of Olympic champions in shooting and there is no such domination:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_shooting#rifle_three_positions_2

    There is South Korean domination in Olympic archery though. But archery and shooting are two of the least popular sports. How can performance by a few individuals in activities with few participants trump performance in an activity like driving which is extremely common, when you are comparing races?

    How can performance by a few individuals in activities with few participants trump performance in an activity like driving which is extremely common, when you are comparing races?

    Did you say this?

    The field is dominated by Europeans but the very best driver is an Afro-Brit, Lewis Hamilton.

    You meant that he was a good driver because he was Afro or despite of being Afro?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. Talha says:
    @Twinkie

    There is only one way to legitimately settle this:
    1) Archery battle of best 15 each of Africans and East Asians – last man standing.

    And…

    2) Mad-Max style demolition derby – caveat (Africans can get help from Euros for the cars).
     
    You know that will be very unfair to the Africans. I mean look at all those black faces on the podium: https://www.olympic.org/news/south-korean-archers-extend-their-olympic-reign

    And just look at two of those "Russians" who placed second. https://stillmed.olympic.org/media/Images/OlympicOrg/News/2016/08/07/2016-08-07-archery-inside-02.jpg?interpolation=lanczos-none&resize=1060:*

    And, bro, haven't you seen "The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift"? That's not entirely fiction you know: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3STxo5oYm4

    OK, OK – let’s do a crash derby with occupants of the car able to use bows and arrows – this should settle it for good! Archery from hanging out the windows of moving, crashing vehicles – very difficult!

    Two teams enter, one team leaves!!!

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. “(Christianity) did play a role in conserving knowledge during the Dark Ages, and in advancing knowledge after 1100, but it’s not clear how it did that”

    Well – European book-knowledge (the law, science in general, mathematics, medicine, logic…theology…history) took off mainly in the middle ages’ monasteries (and universities) – all of which were Christian (as an aside: lots of Dominicans amongst those scholars). – Just think of Meister Eckhart, Duns Scotus, Occham, Hermann der Lahme (= Hermanus contractus – astronomer, musician, historian (he was the one who started history with the year 0 = Birth of Jesus …and he wrote a book about time (how to exactly measure it- nobody had done this before…) – ((yes, Heidegger went to the Gmnasium in Konstanz, just a few kilometers away from were Hermann had been writing ca. 900 years before him)).

    Here’s middel ages historian Arno Borst drawing a line from Hermanus Contractus to the Computer

    https://www.amazon.com/Ordering-Time-Ancient-Computus-Computer/dp/0226066592/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1531221699&sr=8-1&keywords=arno+borst&dpID=514DK45S4JL&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

    If you want to know better, how all of this this happened, you might want to have a look at the Universalien-Streit (universals controversy). There’s a direct link from there (from Duns Scotus, Thomas Aquinas, Ockham, Eckhart, to Kant, Frege, Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Habermas, Quine, Richard Brandom (Making it Explicit) and Kambartel and… you might have gotten the idea….(I – but that was just me, ok, I only recently claimed, that there’d be a direct link between Ockham and Freud, too (Freud’s concept of the joke as something like a short-cut – now you go from there to wit and insight – – and remember, you’re still on Ockham’s (and Goethe’s, Heine’s territory…) – and you’re at the roots of the European State of Mind, i’d hold.
    The Freud-connection to Ockham runs through his (very useful) concept of the neurotic defense-mechanisms too, because neurotic ways of thinking tend to be – rather long (see, Ockham didn’t like thoughts to be rather (=too= unneccesarily) long.
    But as I said, this last idea is just mine, I guess, in our whole wide world at least.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    Robert Brandom wrote Making it Explicit, Richard Branson's autobiography I bought on the Reichenau after church, two weeks back, for 1 Euro at a garage sale of the Soroptimists. A few meters away from the monastery, were the above mentioned Hermanus Contractus lived in the Eleventh century...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. @Dieter Kief

    "(Christianity) did play a role in conserving knowledge during the Dark Ages, and in advancing knowledge after 1100, but it’s not clear how it did that"

     

    Well - European book-knowledge (the law, science in general, mathematics, medicine, logic...theology...history) took off mainly in the middle ages' monasteries (and universities) - all of which were Christian (as an aside: lots of Dominicans amongst those scholars). - Just think of Meister Eckhart, Duns Scotus, Occham, Hermann der Lahme (= Hermanus contractus - astronomer, musician, historian (he was the one who started history with the year 0 = Birth of Jesus ...and he wrote a book about time (how to exactly measure it- nobody had done this before...) - ((yes, Heidegger went to the Gmnasium in Konstanz, just a few kilometers away from were Hermann had been writing ca. 900 years before him)).

    Here's middel ages historian Arno Borst drawing a line from Hermanus Contractus to the Computer
    https://www.amazon.com/Ordering-Time-Ancient-Computus-Computer/dp/0226066592/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=153