The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
IQ by Religious Denomination Among Whites
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

On twatter, F0RHEXET shares a table from Helmuth Nyborg:

The high figures across the board immediately jump out as indicative of something being amiss. The average for Nyborg’s entire white sample is 106.09, nearly half a standard deviation above the conventional white mean. Adjusting for that apparent inflation across the board, though, his results correlate extraordinarily well (r = .91) with the estimates that can be gleaned from the General Social Survey utilizing a far more modest total sample of merely 5,928 (“merely” compared to Nyborg’s nearly 11 million!).

Restricting responses to those born in the US to avoid language fluency issues, to whites to avoid racial confounding, and from the years 2000-2016 for contemporary relevance, average IQ scores among whites, by religious affiliation, as computed from Wordsum scores assuming a white population mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15:

Affiliation IQ
Jewish 109.0
Episcopalian 108.0
Presbyterian 105.0
Mormon 102.3
None 101.7
Lutheran 100.8
Other 100.7
Methodist 99.5
Catholic 99.1
Pentecostal 95.3
Baptist 94.7

The GSS is a great resource. It houses troves of fascinating sociological information yet is woefully underutilized by industry professionals in part because said professionals are largely innumerate and also because the truth often hurts–emotionally and professionally. One man’s neglected treasure is another man’s appreciated treasure!

GSS variables used: RELIG(2)(3)(4)(5-13), OTHER(64)(66-69) , DENOM(10-19)(22-29)(30-39)(40-49)(50), WORDSUM, BORN(1), RACECEN1(1), YEAR(2000-2016)

 
• Category: Arts/Letters, Ideology, Science • Tags: Christianity, GSS, IQ, Jews, Religion 
Hide 101 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Do you have any ethnic or genetic data that you could combine with this IQ data? F.e. Episcopalians being largely elite Anglos and Baptists being Scot-Irish?
    Jews are obviously a different ethnic group, but are Episcopalians a distinct ethnic group with high IQ genes?

    • Replies: @TelfoedJohn
    If you look at maps, the Episcopalians are mainly in mainly northern states, like the Dakotas. Scots-Irish Baptists are in the South. An under-investigated cause of low achievement is how different the environment of a people is from their ancestral lands.

    In the same way, blacks do better in Atlanta than Detroit.
    , @Gordo
    Scots-Irish are Presbyterian surely?
    , @RadicalCenter
    Our Baptist congregation in suburban Los Angeles appears to be heavily Scotch-Irish, for sure, but probably equally English and German, with some Dutch and Scandinavian names as well. This being SoCal, there are some Hispanics, and a couple families from India who recently joined.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    The GSS does ask about ethnicity, though self-reported ethnicity in the US is 'problematic' as they say because once we get to the boomers, most white Americans are European mutts. The percentages identifying as English, for example, has dropped significantly over the last thirty years. And that's among whites, not among the population in general.

    Here's a post on ethnicity and wordsum for the GSS that might approach what you're after.
    , @Flip
    I think lots of Episcopalians are upwardly mobile converts, who presumably would have higher IQs.
  2. @Conglomerate
    Do you have any ethnic or genetic data that you could combine with this IQ data? F.e. Episcopalians being largely elite Anglos and Baptists being Scot-Irish?
    Jews are obviously a different ethnic group, but are Episcopalians a distinct ethnic group with high IQ genes?

    If you look at maps, the Episcopalians are mainly in mainly northern states, like the Dakotas. Scots-Irish Baptists are in the South. An under-investigated cause of low achievement is how different the environment of a people is from their ancestral lands.

    In the same way, blacks do better in Atlanta than Detroit.

  3. But muh Jewish Jew! Verbal IQ, fluent verbal fluence!

    That table is literally Hitler.

  4. not surprised of atheists and low iq of bible thumpers.

    • Replies: @J1234

    not surprised of atheists and low iq of bible thumpers.
     
    A great comment to illustrate the informal Rorschach test we all take when interpreting the IQ test results of others, especially when the results are listed by group. The problem with interpreting these results with regards to atheists is that, IMO, there are many flavors of non-believers which aren't defined outside of atheist and agnostic on this table. I guess those flavors aren't defined because atheists don't have a network of established organizations that evolved from differences and disputes with each other, like Christians do.

    There are thoughtful contemplative non-believers who take on the label "atheist" very consciously and I can believe they're intelligent people. There are also "I can't be bothered" non-believers. I wonder which ones are represented on the list? Hard to say. Which ones would be most likely to identify as atheist on an IQ test?

    There are many lower IQ non-believers in Britain. My wife (a college professor) lived there about 30 years ago, and according to her, the white working and lower classes were mostly non-believers. When she would get dressed for church on Sunday morning they would ask, "Are you going to a party or something?"

    It would be interesting to know how many non-believers receive welfare assistance (or the dole, as they say in Britain.) Of course, now that there are so many foreigners in Britain, Muslims certainly make up a larger portion of the lower and working classes than when my wife lived there.

    As I said, we all take the Rorschach, myself included. Among Americans, I see Episcopalians as the Christian group most like the Jews in that they are less inclined to see their church experience as strictly a religious experience. So a corresponding high IQ like the Jews? Who knows.

  5. Regarding Nyborg’s chart, the Muslim number jumps out to me. Even if we adjust for his grade inflation, I know of no study that supports a > 95-IQ for Arab Muslims. The Muslims of the Caucuses are probably the smartest “white” Muslims. They are estimated in the low 90’s, with extra helpings of chaotic violence.

    Now, it’s possible his data set is limited to Europe, so maybe his data set has a high number of Balkan Muslims or maybe he has included Eat Asian Muslims.

    I’ll also note that AE’s chart seems to correlate with the embrace of the poz. Jews are the font of poz, but Episcopalians are giving them a run for their money. You know it is an Episcopal church because it is festooned with rainbows. At the other end, the Baptists have been the the spear point of the anti-pox for generations.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    Jews are the font of poz, but Episcopalians are giving them a run for their money. You know it is an Episcopal church because it is festooned with rainbows. At the other end, the Baptists have been the the spear point of the anti-pox for generations.
     
    Perhaps the smarter you are, the harder the hit from the Jew mind virus. Thus a dumb Baptist remains closer to his true European apex predator self than the Jew pozzed Episcopalian “genius”?
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Yeah, even accounting for the "cream of the crap" immigration of Muslims that the US gets relative to Europe, this seems strikingly high for the US and way too high for Europe.
    , @Anonymous

    Jews are the font of poz, but Episcopalians are giving them a run for their money. You know it is an Episcopal church because it is festooned with rainbows
     
    This has been apparent to me since the Episcopalians started ordaining gays 15 years ago. I've noticed that over the past 5-10 years the Methodists have been trying to close the gap. God loves fags!
    , @Steve-O
    White converts to Islam are often pretty smart people. Sure, you get ding dongs like Tsarnaev’s wife, but it says a lot that some of the most articulate Muslims out there are white converts. It’s a bit like how the Ottoman Empire’s best soldiers, scholars, and engineers were Europeans who had ‘turned Turk’.

    Can you imagine a Somali or a Pashtun being this articulate? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5qJdhhOCv04
  6. Baptized and raised Presbyterian, atheist by reason of sanity, heck – I’m almost a Jew according to this ranking!

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    That’s a great line :) but I have to take issue with your view that theists are somehow not sane, that sanity and rationality of course lead to atheism. Just not the case. Highly intelligent and thoughtful people through history have often been theists, as an intelligent person should know.

    In any event, isn’t the most logical conclusion that we can never prove the existence of God satisfactorily, nor explain the existence of the universe (all matter and energy that exists) without positing a God, I.e. agnosticism rather than atheism?

    Finally, do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity (but not Islam or Judaism, oh my) and traditional values and lifestyles? Atheists, too, can act like members of a herd.

    , @Mr. Rational
    Funny you say that; I had a Jew ask me once if I was Jewish after getting into a technically deep discussion.  Apparently he didn't meet many goyim who could operate at his level.
  7. Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?
     
    Just a guess, but how about less camel piss in their diet? Not so many camels in America. Maybe they could take up the African/Indian habit of substituting cow piss and achieve the same effects?
    , @Audacious Epigone
    American Jews are almost all Ashkenazi (European). That's the bulk of the explanation.
    , @j2
    "Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?"

    Richard Lynn proposed that the high IQ of American Jews (Ashkenazi in Israel 103.5, Ashkenazi in the USA 110) is due to selective migration, the smarter ones emigrated. I think this explanation is correct and I looked at the paper from where the article took Nyberg's table. There is an IQ distribution of American Jews in 1997 (that is, not the present one, Ron Unz's data in his meritocracy articles indicates the mean is lower now). This distribution is more narrow than it should be on both ends and supports Lynn's explanation that the reason is selective migration, see my short note on this distribution:

    http://www.pienisalaliittotutkimus.com/2019/01/26/yet-another-short-note-on-american-ashkenazi-iq/
    , @Nachum
    Israeli Jews are about 55% non-Ashkenazic. I'm surprised the number is so high.
  8. Where are the Christian Scientists in all this? They should be way up there, being scientists and all.

    As for me, I’ve both read lots of brochures from the Jehovah’s Witnesses (nice ladies) AND stayed numerous times in a Holiday Inn Express. You’re gonna need a bigger chart.

    • LOL: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
    Slow your roll there cowpoke, Stan’s used up his allocation of LOLs for the hour.
    , @MBlanc46
    Christian Science—in which I got such religious indoctrination as I got—seems to be disappearing. I know of quite a few disused or demolished CS churches in the Chicago area. It made a bit of a stir around the turn of the last century—founded by a woman and all—but has been on a downhill slide ever since.
  9. @The Z Blog
    Regarding Nyborg's chart, the Muslim number jumps out to me. Even if we adjust for his grade inflation, I know of no study that supports a > 95-IQ for Arab Muslims. The Muslims of the Caucuses are probably the smartest "white" Muslims. They are estimated in the low 90's, with extra helpings of chaotic violence.

    Now, it's possible his data set is limited to Europe, so maybe his data set has a high number of Balkan Muslims or maybe he has included Eat Asian Muslims.

    I'll also note that AE's chart seems to correlate with the embrace of the poz. Jews are the font of poz, but Episcopalians are giving them a run for their money. You know it is an Episcopal church because it is festooned with rainbows. At the other end, the Baptists have been the the spear point of the anti-pox for generations.

    Jews are the font of poz, but Episcopalians are giving them a run for their money. You know it is an Episcopal church because it is festooned with rainbows. At the other end, the Baptists have been the the spear point of the anti-pox for generations.

    Perhaps the smarter you are, the harder the hit from the Jew mind virus. Thus a dumb Baptist remains closer to his true European apex predator self than the Jew pozzed Episcopalian “genius”?

  10. @Don
    Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?

    Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?

    Just a guess, but how about less camel piss in their diet? Not so many camels in America. Maybe they could take up the African/Indian habit of substituting cow piss and achieve the same effects?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Hey, don't knock it - maybe they are continually worried about Type 2 diabetes. A doctor friend told me that you can take a sip of your piss and immediately know if there's a problem. I sure hope he wasn't bullshitting me. Of course, you could also go to the drugstore and spend 10 bucks.
  11. @Achmed E. Newman
    Where are the Christian Scientists in all this? They should be way up there, being scientists and all.

    As for me, I've both read lots of brochures from the Jehovah's Witnesses (nice ladies) AND stayed numerous times in a Holiday Inn Express. You're gonna need a bigger chart.

    Slow your roll there cowpoke, Stan’s used up his allocation of LOLs for the hour.

  12. At a glance i suspect that this is more indicative of regional differences more than religious belief. Though it is interesting.

    In short your claim is that the more fundamental the belief system the lower one’s IQ. Laughing,

    given the critical thinking that leads to same sex choices equivelent to heterosexual relations, transgender normalization, lying is ok if its for God, etc. I would agree it takes a lot of intellectual gymnastics to come to those conclusions and more to maintain them.

    What it demonstrates above all is that IQ is overrated as a requirement to function effectively in the US.

  13. @Conglomerate
    Do you have any ethnic or genetic data that you could combine with this IQ data? F.e. Episcopalians being largely elite Anglos and Baptists being Scot-Irish?
    Jews are obviously a different ethnic group, but are Episcopalians a distinct ethnic group with high IQ genes?

    Scots-Irish are Presbyterian surely?

    • Replies: @Jack Highlands
    Less than previously in America. Same ethnic stock in Ireland (Ulster Scots) and Scotland (Border Scots) are still majority Presbyterian (and minority Anglican).

    http://robslink.com/SAS/democd42/church_maps/PRUSA.htm
    , @Flip
    I think lots of Scotch-Irish switched to Baptist in the backwoods of the Upper South.
  14. @Conglomerate
    Do you have any ethnic or genetic data that you could combine with this IQ data? F.e. Episcopalians being largely elite Anglos and Baptists being Scot-Irish?
    Jews are obviously a different ethnic group, but are Episcopalians a distinct ethnic group with high IQ genes?

    Our Baptist congregation in suburban Los Angeles appears to be heavily Scotch-Irish, for sure, but probably equally English and German, with some Dutch and Scandinavian names as well. This being SoCal, there are some Hispanics, and a couple families from India who recently joined.

  15. @Stan d Mute
    Baptized and raised Presbyterian, atheist by reason of sanity, heck - I’m almost a Jew according to this ranking!

    That’s a great line 🙂 but I have to take issue with your view that theists are somehow not sane, that sanity and rationality of course lead to atheism. Just not the case. Highly intelligent and thoughtful people through history have often been theists, as an intelligent person should know.

    In any event, isn’t the most logical conclusion that we can never prove the existence of God satisfactorily, nor explain the existence of the universe (all matter and energy that exists) without positing a God, I.e. agnosticism rather than atheism?

    Finally, do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity (but not Islam or Judaism, oh my) and traditional values and lifestyles? Atheists, too, can act like members of a herd.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @advancedatheist

    Highly intelligent and thoughtful people through history have often been theists, as an intelligent person should know.

     

    Will Durant in his series of books, The Story of Civilization, points out in several places that nations during their especially culturally productive eras, like Elizabethan England, also tend to produce underground cultures of religious skepticism. In our era this sort of skepticism has gone pretty much mainstream.

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.
    , @Mr. Rational

    do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity.... ?
     
    There's a third possibility, and that's dissatisfaction with the teachings and atmosphere of the churches.  If people find nothing there that improves their lives, they'll stop going.

    I started my own drift away when my parents' church started preaching things like book-burning when I was learning mathematics, physics and chemistry.  The sciences made sense, theology not only didn't but was righteously self-assured about doctrine that was unsupported or even false to fact.  At that point I knew that if I was going to find the truth I wasn't going to find it in Christianity (in 2oth century America, at least) and probably wouldn't find it in religion because it used faulty epistemology.  I learned the word "epistemology" from Objectivist writings and found that its authorities made many of the same mistakes!

    One of the more significant trends of late is the rise of the "nones", people who aren't avowedly atheist but have no religious affiliation.  Vox Day (who is usually either pretty close to right or flagrantly wrong) pushes the notion that a lack of orthodoxy and prescriptions for living has left a vacuum which got filled with things like mindless entertainment, consumerism, meaningless sex and porn.  The Christian population is splitting, some becoming more fundamentalist/orthodox and some drifting away.  This is a problem IMO because the fundamentalists will have the cohesion to be a pressure group and the saner heads won't.

    To steal a line from Ashleigh Brilliant, I don't have a solution but I sure appreciate the problem.
    , @Stan d Mute

    In any event, isn’t the most logical conclusion that we can never prove the existence of God satisfactorily, nor explain the existence of the universe (all matter and energy that exists) without positing a God, I.e. agnosticism rather than atheism?
     
    Strictly speaking, I am agnostic, but most idiot theists don’t know the difference so I use the terms interchangeably. I am certain, positive in fact, however, that a tribe of camel piss drinkers wasn’t the sole intermediary with anything that could have been responded for our Universe. That fable is exactly as plausible as the Tooth Fairy.

    Finally, do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity (but not Islam or Judaism, oh my) and traditional values and lifestyles? Atheists, too, can act like members of a herd.
     
    On this I think there is a blend for sure. There are some really dumb atheists whom I doubt could have independently arrived at their conclusions. We live in an age of mass propaganda heretofore unimaginable. But the “war on Christianity” - rightly understood - is a war on white masculinity. We’ve just conflated the two to the point of our own undoing.
  16. @Stan d Mute

    Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?
     
    Just a guess, but how about less camel piss in their diet? Not so many camels in America. Maybe they could take up the African/Indian habit of substituting cow piss and achieve the same effects?

    Hey, don’t knock it – maybe they are continually worried about Type 2 diabetes. A doctor friend told me that you can take a sip of your piss and immediately know if there’s a problem. I sure hope he wasn’t bullshitting me. Of course, you could also go to the drugstore and spend 10 bucks.

  17. @Conglomerate
    Do you have any ethnic or genetic data that you could combine with this IQ data? F.e. Episcopalians being largely elite Anglos and Baptists being Scot-Irish?
    Jews are obviously a different ethnic group, but are Episcopalians a distinct ethnic group with high IQ genes?

    The GSS does ask about ethnicity, though self-reported ethnicity in the US is ‘problematic’ as they say because once we get to the boomers, most white Americans are European mutts. The percentages identifying as English, for example, has dropped significantly over the last thirty years. And that’s among whites, not among the population in general.

    Here’s a post on ethnicity and wordsum for the GSS that might approach what you’re after.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Did you forget to include a link?
  18. @The Z Blog
    Regarding Nyborg's chart, the Muslim number jumps out to me. Even if we adjust for his grade inflation, I know of no study that supports a > 95-IQ for Arab Muslims. The Muslims of the Caucuses are probably the smartest "white" Muslims. They are estimated in the low 90's, with extra helpings of chaotic violence.

    Now, it's possible his data set is limited to Europe, so maybe his data set has a high number of Balkan Muslims or maybe he has included Eat Asian Muslims.

    I'll also note that AE's chart seems to correlate with the embrace of the poz. Jews are the font of poz, but Episcopalians are giving them a run for their money. You know it is an Episcopal church because it is festooned with rainbows. At the other end, the Baptists have been the the spear point of the anti-pox for generations.

    Yeah, even accounting for the “cream of the crap” immigration of Muslims that the US gets relative to Europe, this seems strikingly high for the US and way too high for Europe.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    You mean "cream of the *crop*", no?
    , @Chris Renner
    Nyborg's data don't pertain to Europe, though. The source article for that table , titled "The intelligence–religiosity nexus: A representative study of white adolescent Americans" can be found here (table 6 is the one shared above) .

    As far as the reason for the unexpectedly high-IQ of Muslims: if I'm reading correctly, Nyberg used a sample from the NLSY.
    The "Actual white N used for the ensuing analyses" (see Table 2) for Muslem (sic) is n=20. I'm not good enough with statistics to quickly calculate how much of a sample error you'd expect from that small of a group, but it's got to be significant.
  19. @Don
    Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?

    American Jews are almost all Ashkenazi (European). That’s the bulk of the explanation.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    The interesting thing, though, is that one would have expected a stronger top performance for Israeli Hebrew-speaking students on the PISA exam than actually ended up being the case. After all, Israel's top Hebrew-speaking students are presumably almost all Ashkenazi.
  20. @RadicalCenter
    That’s a great line :) but I have to take issue with your view that theists are somehow not sane, that sanity and rationality of course lead to atheism. Just not the case. Highly intelligent and thoughtful people through history have often been theists, as an intelligent person should know.

    In any event, isn’t the most logical conclusion that we can never prove the existence of God satisfactorily, nor explain the existence of the universe (all matter and energy that exists) without positing a God, I.e. agnosticism rather than atheism?

    Finally, do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity (but not Islam or Judaism, oh my) and traditional values and lifestyles? Atheists, too, can act like members of a herd.

    Highly intelligent and thoughtful people through history have often been theists, as an intelligent person should know.

    Will Durant in his series of books, The Story of Civilization, points out in several places that nations during their especially culturally productive eras, like Elizabethan England, also tend to produce underground cultures of religious skepticism. In our era this sort of skepticism has gone pretty much mainstream.

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.
     
    IMO this is largely the product of their own mistakes.

    Take anthropogenic climate change.  Lots of Christian denominations have denounced the very concept on theological grounds, ignoring both the historical examples of people screwing up their lands and the biblical stories about the Hebrews being punished as a people for taking the wrong course of action.  There's also the little fact that 7 billion humans backed up by massive amounts of extra-somatic energy in the form of fossil fuels can and will have orders of magnitude more influence over things natural than 450 million humans with little but muscle power and a bit of small-scale hydro.  It's simple mathematics... but these people won't do math.  Their whole way of thinking won't let them.

    If they keep screwing up like that, it's no wonder that they start looking like cargo cultists to people who actually put in the effort to understand the world, our place in it and our outsized influence upon it.

    , @Stan d Mute

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.
     
    I think we scare the crap out of them because we threaten their sacred worldview. The idea that dead mommy is just a bunch of worm eaten mulch forgotten and gone forever is pretty bleak. Christianity is a warm comfy fairy tale for children frightened by the apparent meaningless of reality as we understand it in realist terms. Normally I’m inclined to let people keep their fairy tale unmolested (I don’t go to churches with “god is dead” signs) like I do with small children and Santa Claus. But here, where there is so much rabid Jew hate (much admittedly for very good reasons), I am compelled to lambaste the hypocrisy of hating Jews while worshipping JewGod. If you’re grown up enough to see what harm Judaism is causing, you need to take the bitter pill and see the harm your own idiotic “faith” is doing.
  21. Anonymous[222] • Disclaimer says:

    Last year sometime I saw BAP or Camacho or somebody post a pic of a study that showed certain groups of Anglos to have a higher mean IQ than Ashkenazi Jews, but it didn’t have a link or attribution and I’ve been looking for the study since. I remembered it showing Anglo IQ > Jewish IQ, but maybe it was “Anglican” rather than “Anglo”.

    What would be interesting would be to see a more granular ethnic breakdown along with IQs. Presbyterian, for example can mean different things – evangelicals are not the same as nominally religious “presbyterians”.

  22. Anonymous[222] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Z Blog
    Regarding Nyborg's chart, the Muslim number jumps out to me. Even if we adjust for his grade inflation, I know of no study that supports a > 95-IQ for Arab Muslims. The Muslims of the Caucuses are probably the smartest "white" Muslims. They are estimated in the low 90's, with extra helpings of chaotic violence.

    Now, it's possible his data set is limited to Europe, so maybe his data set has a high number of Balkan Muslims or maybe he has included Eat Asian Muslims.

    I'll also note that AE's chart seems to correlate with the embrace of the poz. Jews are the font of poz, but Episcopalians are giving them a run for their money. You know it is an Episcopal church because it is festooned with rainbows. At the other end, the Baptists have been the the spear point of the anti-pox for generations.

    Jews are the font of poz, but Episcopalians are giving them a run for their money. You know it is an Episcopal church because it is festooned with rainbows

    This has been apparent to me since the Episcopalians started ordaining gays 15 years ago. I’ve noticed that over the past 5-10 years the Methodists have been trying to close the gap. God loves fags!

  23. @Stan d Mute
    Baptized and raised Presbyterian, atheist by reason of sanity, heck - I’m almost a Jew according to this ranking!

    Funny you say that; I had a Jew ask me once if I was Jewish after getting into a technically deep discussion.  Apparently he didn’t meet many goyim who could operate at his level.

  24. @RadicalCenter
    That’s a great line :) but I have to take issue with your view that theists are somehow not sane, that sanity and rationality of course lead to atheism. Just not the case. Highly intelligent and thoughtful people through history have often been theists, as an intelligent person should know.

    In any event, isn’t the most logical conclusion that we can never prove the existence of God satisfactorily, nor explain the existence of the universe (all matter and energy that exists) without positing a God, I.e. agnosticism rather than atheism?

    Finally, do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity (but not Islam or Judaism, oh my) and traditional values and lifestyles? Atheists, too, can act like members of a herd.

    do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity…. ?

    There’s a third possibility, and that’s dissatisfaction with the teachings and atmosphere of the churches.  If people find nothing there that improves their lives, they’ll stop going.

    I started my own drift away when my parents’ church started preaching things like book-burning when I was learning mathematics, physics and chemistry.  The sciences made sense, theology not only didn’t but was righteously self-assured about doctrine that was unsupported or even false to fact.  At that point I knew that if I was going to find the truth I wasn’t going to find it in Christianity (in 2oth century America, at least) and probably wouldn’t find it in religion because it used faulty epistemology.  I learned the word “epistemology” from Objectivist writings and found that its authorities made many of the same mistakes!

    One of the more significant trends of late is the rise of the “nones”, people who aren’t avowedly atheist but have no religious affiliation.  Vox Day (who is usually either pretty close to right or flagrantly wrong) pushes the notion that a lack of orthodoxy and prescriptions for living has left a vacuum which got filled with things like mindless entertainment, consumerism, meaningless sex and porn.  The Christian population is splitting, some becoming more fundamentalist/orthodox and some drifting away.  This is a problem IMO because the fundamentalists will have the cohesion to be a pressure group and the saner heads won’t.

    To steal a line from Ashleigh Brilliant, I don’t have a solution but I sure appreciate the problem.

    • Agree: Stan d Mute
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Great post fodder, Mr. Rational. Thanks!
    , @Almost Missouri
    This comment is interesting to me because it is almost the mirror image of my own experience.

    "I started my own drift away when my parents’ church started preaching things like book-burning"
     
    I was born to and raised by atheists, among atheists, to be an atheist, and I started my own drift away from atheism when I noticed my parents "faith" was preaching things like book burning—not necessarily literal book burning, but saying that certain books or ideas are heretical and forbidden, "hate speech" in modern parlance, though I don't think that term existed back then. Youth are keenly sensitive to the hypocrisies of their elders and I was no exception. I wondered why, if they did not believe in religion, they acted as if they had a religion in all but name anyway. Why they were religious about being anti-religious, to put it at its most epigrammatic. (I am not speaking so much of my parents per se, who evinced more of an indifference, but of their peers and other of my elders and educators.)

    Gradually looking into the more esoteric forms of various religions, combined with my own reasoning and reflection on basic philosophical/metaphysical questions (e.g., Aristotle's unmoved mover), I gradually came to the view that maybe those religions had a point after all, however obscured it has become by the caricatures produced by marketplace churches (and amplified by secular media).

    Agree with your last paragraphs. As Matthew Arnold already observed in the 19th century, the "long, withdrawing roar" of faith has left us with a world that is new but barren, a

    darkling plain
    Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
    Where ignorant armies clash by night.
     
    Or, as Vox Day said, a "vacuum which got filled with things like mindless entertainment, consumerism, meaningless sex and porn" ... and mindless anti-religionism.
  25. second list looks about right.

    episcopalians may have been higher in the past, could be in slow decline now. they did outperform jews historically. it’s possible that was due to organizational and institutional inertia. but they were close, either way.

    the bushes were episcopals. GW switched to methodist later. perhaps auguring the slow decline.

  26. what religion are jeb bush’s kids. catholics? that would be more decline then.

  27. “Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews”

    israelis are mostly orthodox. they aren’t that smart. fecund though.

    the methodist church split in half about 5 years ago over homo marriage.

    no unitarians on that chart, but they’d be above average. and also, they’re on their way to oblivion, like the episcopals.

    i guess not enough amish or mennonites to make a data observation. no orthodox churches like greece or serbia either. certainly not enough people who follow retarded stuff like bahai to do much stats.

    would be interesting to know korean assembly of god. they are crazy. are these the dumber than average koreans? koreans becoming more like western europeans every year.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    I looked at each of the denominations mentioned save for the Korean one and the sample sizes are too small for all of them. Unitarians did come in close to Episcopalians but there were fewer than 40 responses IIRC so I didn't include them.
    , @Nachum
    Israeli Jews are about 25% Orthodox, of which about a third is ultra-Orthodox. The lower end of the bell curve comes from non-Orthodox "traditional" types.
  28. @advancedatheist

    Highly intelligent and thoughtful people through history have often been theists, as an intelligent person should know.

     

    Will Durant in his series of books, The Story of Civilization, points out in several places that nations during their especially culturally productive eras, like Elizabethan England, also tend to produce underground cultures of religious skepticism. In our era this sort of skepticism has gone pretty much mainstream.

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.

    IMO this is largely the product of their own mistakes.

    Take anthropogenic climate change.  Lots of Christian denominations have denounced the very concept on theological grounds, ignoring both the historical examples of people screwing up their lands and the biblical stories about the Hebrews being punished as a people for taking the wrong course of action.  There’s also the little fact that 7 billion humans backed up by massive amounts of extra-somatic energy in the form of fossil fuels can and will have orders of magnitude more influence over things natural than 450 million humans with little but muscle power and a bit of small-scale hydro.  It’s simple mathematics… but these people won’t do math.  Their whole way of thinking won’t let them.

    If they keep screwing up like that, it’s no wonder that they start looking like cargo cultists to people who actually put in the effort to understand the world, our place in it and our outsized influence upon it.

  29. @RadicalCenter
    That’s a great line :) but I have to take issue with your view that theists are somehow not sane, that sanity and rationality of course lead to atheism. Just not the case. Highly intelligent and thoughtful people through history have often been theists, as an intelligent person should know.

    In any event, isn’t the most logical conclusion that we can never prove the existence of God satisfactorily, nor explain the existence of the universe (all matter and energy that exists) without positing a God, I.e. agnosticism rather than atheism?

    Finally, do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity (but not Islam or Judaism, oh my) and traditional values and lifestyles? Atheists, too, can act like members of a herd.

    In any event, isn’t the most logical conclusion that we can never prove the existence of God satisfactorily, nor explain the existence of the universe (all matter and energy that exists) without positing a God, I.e. agnosticism rather than atheism?

    Strictly speaking, I am agnostic, but most idiot theists don’t know the difference so I use the terms interchangeably. I am certain, positive in fact, however, that a tribe of camel piss drinkers wasn’t the sole intermediary with anything that could have been responded for our Universe. That fable is exactly as plausible as the Tooth Fairy.

    Finally, do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity (but not Islam or Judaism, oh my) and traditional values and lifestyles? Atheists, too, can act like members of a herd.

    On this I think there is a blend for sure. There are some really dumb atheists whom I doubt could have independently arrived at their conclusions. We live in an age of mass propaganda heretofore unimaginable. But the “war on Christianity” – rightly understood – is a war on white masculinity. We’ve just conflated the two to the point of our own undoing.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    been responded
     
    WTF? How about responsible instead? Damn autocorrect!
  30. @advancedatheist

    Highly intelligent and thoughtful people through history have often been theists, as an intelligent person should know.

     

    Will Durant in his series of books, The Story of Civilization, points out in several places that nations during their especially culturally productive eras, like Elizabethan England, also tend to produce underground cultures of religious skepticism. In our era this sort of skepticism has gone pretty much mainstream.

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.

    I think we scare the crap out of them because we threaten their sacred worldview. The idea that dead mommy is just a bunch of worm eaten mulch forgotten and gone forever is pretty bleak. Christianity is a warm comfy fairy tale for children frightened by the apparent meaningless of reality as we understand it in realist terms. Normally I’m inclined to let people keep their fairy tale unmolested (I don’t go to churches with “god is dead” signs) like I do with small children and Santa Claus. But here, where there is so much rabid Jew hate (much admittedly for very good reasons), I am compelled to lambaste the hypocrisy of hating Jews while worshipping JewGod. If you’re grown up enough to see what harm Judaism is causing, you need to take the bitter pill and see the harm your own idiotic “faith” is doing.

    • Agree: Catiline
    • Replies: @Pericles

    I think we scare the crap out of them because we threaten their sacred worldview. The idea that dead mommy is just a bunch of worm eaten mulch forgotten and gone forever is pretty bleak.

     

    Don't forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions, and that whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten. Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same. Just elementary particles in various configurations.

    I am compelled to lambaste the hypocrisy

     

    But you see, that's just your opinion maaan. So what if some mammal is grunting something that makes you, another grunting mammal, badthink. It's on you. It doesn't matter.
    , @Murray
    LOL. You don't scare me at all. As a Catholic ex-atheist, I hardly give you any thought.

    Atheism? A comfy fairy tale for children who want to indulge in the pleasures of the flesh without consequences. Do as thou wilt, be a Law unto yourself, become like God, knowing good and evil, all that--let's see how it turns out. I'm happy to wait.

    , @c matt

    Christianity is a warm comfy fairy tale for children frightened by the apparent meaningless of reality as we understand it in realist terms.
     
    Yes, because meeting an all powerful and knowing judge whom you cannot deceive and determines your eternal bliss or damnation just gives me the warm fuzzies. Not like that scary atheism, where nothing I do will ever have consequences and the only smart rule to live by is "don't get caught."
  31. @Don
    Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?

    “Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?”

    Richard Lynn proposed that the high IQ of American Jews (Ashkenazi in Israel 103.5, Ashkenazi in the USA 110) is due to selective migration, the smarter ones emigrated. I think this explanation is correct and I looked at the paper from where the article took Nyberg’s table. There is an IQ distribution of American Jews in 1997 (that is, not the present one, Ron Unz’s data in his meritocracy articles indicates the mean is lower now). This distribution is more narrow than it should be on both ends and supports Lynn’s explanation that the reason is selective migration, see my short note on this distribution:

    http://www.pienisalaliittotutkimus.com/2019/01/26/yet-another-short-note-on-american-ashkenazi-iq/

    • Replies: @Nachum
    Except Israeli Ashkenazim also migrated. Although perhaps more Israeli Ashkenazim, percentage wise, were forced out of Europe immediately pre-Holocaust or came as survivors immediately post. Otherwise you'd have to say that before then, the smarter ones went to the US.
  32. @Stan d Mute

    In any event, isn’t the most logical conclusion that we can never prove the existence of God satisfactorily, nor explain the existence of the universe (all matter and energy that exists) without positing a God, I.e. agnosticism rather than atheism?
     
    Strictly speaking, I am agnostic, but most idiot theists don’t know the difference so I use the terms interchangeably. I am certain, positive in fact, however, that a tribe of camel piss drinkers wasn’t the sole intermediary with anything that could have been responded for our Universe. That fable is exactly as plausible as the Tooth Fairy.

    Finally, do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity (but not Islam or Judaism, oh my) and traditional values and lifestyles? Atheists, too, can act like members of a herd.
     
    On this I think there is a blend for sure. There are some really dumb atheists whom I doubt could have independently arrived at their conclusions. We live in an age of mass propaganda heretofore unimaginable. But the “war on Christianity” - rightly understood - is a war on white masculinity. We’ve just conflated the two to the point of our own undoing.

    been responded

    WTF? How about responsible instead? Damn autocorrect!

  33. Everybody’s favorite Episcopalian, Madeleine Albright, is a rancid representative of the WASP/JEW ruling class of the American Empire. Maybe not everybody’s favorite Episcopalian.

    Madeleine Albright was in pure spiritual joy when she played her part in the attack on European Christians in the Balkans. Madeleine Albright says she’s an Episcopalian.

    The only bright spot out of all that Balkan bombing done by the American Empire in 1999 was the accidental pinpoint bombing of the Chinese embassy by some crazed CIA kook. US military might have been in on it too, but it’s fun to blame the CIA.

    The ruling class of the American Empire used to be old stocker Anglo-Norman or Anglo-Saxon Episcopalians, now it’s Madeleine Albright types all the way down.

    Tweet from 2014:

  34. @gate666
    not surprised of atheists and low iq of bible thumpers.

    not surprised of atheists and low iq of bible thumpers.

    A great comment to illustrate the informal Rorschach test we all take when interpreting the IQ test results of others, especially when the results are listed by group. The problem with interpreting these results with regards to atheists is that, IMO, there are many flavors of non-believers which aren’t defined outside of atheist and agnostic on this table. I guess those flavors aren’t defined because atheists don’t have a network of established organizations that evolved from differences and disputes with each other, like Christians do.

    There are thoughtful contemplative non-believers who take on the label “atheist” very consciously and I can believe they’re intelligent people. There are also “I can’t be bothered” non-believers. I wonder which ones are represented on the list? Hard to say. Which ones would be most likely to identify as atheist on an IQ test?

    There are many lower IQ non-believers in Britain. My wife (a college professor) lived there about 30 years ago, and according to her, the white working and lower classes were mostly non-believers. When she would get dressed for church on Sunday morning they would ask, “Are you going to a party or something?”

    It would be interesting to know how many non-believers receive welfare assistance (or the dole, as they say in Britain.) Of course, now that there are so many foreigners in Britain, Muslims certainly make up a larger portion of the lower and working classes than when my wife lived there.

    As I said, we all take the Rorschach, myself included. Among Americans, I see Episcopalians as the Christian group most like the Jews in that they are less inclined to see their church experience as strictly a religious experience. So a corresponding high IQ like the Jews? Who knows.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    I suspect the "atheist" category is disproportionately composed of Ashkenazim and ex-Episcopalians, ex-Presbyterians, etc., so it might be argued there is a hidden confound.
  35. @Audacious Epigone
    American Jews are almost all Ashkenazi (European). That's the bulk of the explanation.

    The interesting thing, though, is that one would have expected a stronger top performance for Israeli Hebrew-speaking students on the PISA exam than actually ended up being the case. After all, Israel’s top Hebrew-speaking students are presumably almost all Ashkenazi.

  36. @Audacious Epigone
    Yeah, even accounting for the "cream of the crap" immigration of Muslims that the US gets relative to Europe, this seems strikingly high for the US and way too high for Europe.

    You mean “cream of the *crop*”, no?

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Um, yes, yes... of course! (whew)
  37. GSS is at sda.berkeley.edu which begs the question of when the left will corrupt this database like they did NASA’s to support global warming hoax. GSS is full of inconvenient truths so eventually its leftist caretakers will either destroy it or simply block access to kulaks like yourself.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    It is partially government-funded so that works in our favor. Will a president Kamala Harris snuff that funding out, though? It's not inconceivable.
    , @Almost Missouri
    Is it possible to download the raw data to a private server and preserve a snapshot of truth for posterity? Obviously, the SJWs will claim that any research conclusion based on non-converged data are invalid, but we will know, we will know!

    Or maybe there is some blockchain-y thing that can be done to preserve the public validity of a privately held dataset.
  38. Once again, can’t find any information on this test. Is this another one based on estimates? Why are there no actual tests available to confirm if this sample is accurate?

    • Replies: @j2
    "Once again, can’t find any information on this test. Is this another one based on estimates? Why are there no actual tests available to confirm if this sample is accurate?"

    If you mean the Table 6 from Helmuth Nyberg, it is from the 2008 paper
    http://helmuthnyborg.dk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Publ_2009_The-Intellligence-Religiosity-Nexus.pdf

    This paper is based on the large data from a national study done 1997, so it is old data, but look at the table 2 in the paper and you see the sample sizes used in the actual study. They are mostly too small, like for Jews 70, Episcopals 61. This paper tries to make a political argument that intelligent people are not religious, but as is typical for people making such arguments and working on such areas of research, the logic is flawed. The average IQ of the total sample is 106. In US norms US whites have the average IQ 102 and in international norms 100, so in international norms US Jews in 1997 had the average IQ of 104 according to this study. It can be explained by more school years, or by selective migration. Nyberg apparently used raw scores and did not subtract the Flynn effect, so it explains why the average is 106. You can check the accuracy of the data by taking the original data from the national study and selecting another sample, a larger one. Probably you get a very similar result, but at least for IQ distributions, which Nyberg also gives, one should use larger samples. It is fairly crazy to have a sample size 61 and ask what is the probability of being over 140 IQ (that is 0.4% of the population with ave=100 and sd=15). But such studies these are, on these fields.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    If you're referring to the GSS results, the interface is online. It requires user inputs and then returns output tables but none of the results have URLs. It's a little clunky to get the hang of but if you devote half an hour to it you'll be able to figure it out.
  39. @Rich
    Once again, can't find any information on this test. Is this another one based on estimates? Why are there no actual tests available to confirm if this sample is accurate?

    “Once again, can’t find any information on this test. Is this another one based on estimates? Why are there no actual tests available to confirm if this sample is accurate?”

    If you mean the Table 6 from Helmuth Nyberg, it is from the 2008 paper
    http://helmuthnyborg.dk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Publ_2009_The-Intellligence-Religiosity-Nexus.pdf

    This paper is based on the large data from a national study done 1997, so it is old data, but look at the table 2 in the paper and you see the sample sizes used in the actual study. They are mostly too small, like for Jews 70, Episcopals 61. This paper tries to make a political argument that intelligent people are not religious, but as is typical for people making such arguments and working on such areas of research, the logic is flawed. The average IQ of the total sample is 106. In US norms US whites have the average IQ 102 and in international norms 100, so in international norms US Jews in 1997 had the average IQ of 104 according to this study. It can be explained by more school years, or by selective migration. Nyberg apparently used raw scores and did not subtract the Flynn effect, so it explains why the average is 106. You can check the accuracy of the data by taking the original data from the national study and selecting another sample, a larger one. Probably you get a very similar result, but at least for IQ distributions, which Nyberg also gives, one should use larger samples. It is fairly crazy to have a sample size 61 and ask what is the probability of being over 140 IQ (that is 0.4% of the population with ave=100 and sd=15). But such studies these are, on these fields.

  40. • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    It's worth noting wrt Jews that using the Wordsum as an IQ proxy obviously overemphasizes the verbal aspects of IQ at the expense of the visuo-spatial ones.
  41. @Achmed E. Newman
    Where are the Christian Scientists in all this? They should be way up there, being scientists and all.

    As for me, I've both read lots of brochures from the Jehovah's Witnesses (nice ladies) AND stayed numerous times in a Holiday Inn Express. You're gonna need a bigger chart.

    Christian Science—in which I got such religious indoctrination as I got—seems to be disappearing. I know of quite a few disused or demolished CS churches in the Chicago area. It made a bit of a stir around the turn of the last century—founded by a woman and all—but has been on a downhill slide ever since.

  42. People really have no concept just how nepotistic Jews are, meet so many way over promoted above their talent level, Elena Kagan being a poster girl for this phenomenon.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    Then why do so many of them marry outside their race?
  43. @LondonBob
    People really have no concept just how nepotistic Jews are, meet so many way over promoted above their talent level, Elena Kagan being a poster girl for this phenomenon.

    Then why do so many of them marry outside their race?

  44. Then why do so many of them marry outside their race?

    One theory I read on Unz is that they can’t stand their women.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    Such a theory hardly supports nepotism. And it doesn't explain why Jewish women marry outside their race, which many do.
  45. @Bies Podkrakowski

    Then why do so many of them marry outside their race?
     
    One theory I read on Unz is that they can't stand their women.

    Such a theory hardly supports nepotism. And it doesn’t explain why Jewish women marry outside their race, which many do.

    • Replies: @Bies Podkrakowski

    why Jewish women marry outside their race, which many do.
     
    What are they to do when their own men left them? They also have to look outside their religion for husbands.

    Thus cycle of kvetching is restored.
  46. @Stan d Mute

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.
     
    I think we scare the crap out of them because we threaten their sacred worldview. The idea that dead mommy is just a bunch of worm eaten mulch forgotten and gone forever is pretty bleak. Christianity is a warm comfy fairy tale for children frightened by the apparent meaningless of reality as we understand it in realist terms. Normally I’m inclined to let people keep their fairy tale unmolested (I don’t go to churches with “god is dead” signs) like I do with small children and Santa Claus. But here, where there is so much rabid Jew hate (much admittedly for very good reasons), I am compelled to lambaste the hypocrisy of hating Jews while worshipping JewGod. If you’re grown up enough to see what harm Judaism is causing, you need to take the bitter pill and see the harm your own idiotic “faith” is doing.

    I think we scare the crap out of them because we threaten their sacred worldview. The idea that dead mommy is just a bunch of worm eaten mulch forgotten and gone forever is pretty bleak.

    Don’t forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions, and that whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten. Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same. Just elementary particles in various configurations.

    I am compelled to lambaste the hypocrisy

    But you see, that’s just your opinion maaan. So what if some mammal is grunting something that makes you, another grunting mammal, badthink. It’s on you. It doesn’t matter.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Lol, yeah. I've come to the conclusion there are no real atheists, just people professing "atheism" while living un-self-aware decadent Christianity.
    , @Mr. Rational

    Don’t forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions
     
    Every animal on earth has an ethos.  Humans are just the only one capable of thinking about it.

    You christards think that rejecting YOUR source of morality means rejecting morality, period.  That's a non-sequitur.

    whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten.
     
    One viewing of "The 300" is enough to debunk that notion.

    Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same.
     
    Not to them it's not.
    , @anon
    "Don’t forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions, and that whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten. Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same. Just elementary particles in various configurations."
    Wrong. See Sam Harris' 'The Moral Landscape'
  47. Damn, last place eh? Well, I did stop going when I was 12. I figured I had absorbed enough of the Good News about how I was going to hell by then. A Pentecostal meeting with a full head of steam is kind of terrifying frankly.

    The more I think about it, the more sun worship seems to make the most sense.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Sol Invictus be my god.
  48. Interesting study, because these days Episcopalian is just a fancy way of saying atheist that likes to play dress up on Sunday.

    They’re also losing members at about ~0.5-1% per year.

  49. @Mr. Rational

    do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity.... ?
     
    There's a third possibility, and that's dissatisfaction with the teachings and atmosphere of the churches.  If people find nothing there that improves their lives, they'll stop going.

    I started my own drift away when my parents' church started preaching things like book-burning when I was learning mathematics, physics and chemistry.  The sciences made sense, theology not only didn't but was righteously self-assured about doctrine that was unsupported or even false to fact.  At that point I knew that if I was going to find the truth I wasn't going to find it in Christianity (in 2oth century America, at least) and probably wouldn't find it in religion because it used faulty epistemology.  I learned the word "epistemology" from Objectivist writings and found that its authorities made many of the same mistakes!

    One of the more significant trends of late is the rise of the "nones", people who aren't avowedly atheist but have no religious affiliation.  Vox Day (who is usually either pretty close to right or flagrantly wrong) pushes the notion that a lack of orthodoxy and prescriptions for living has left a vacuum which got filled with things like mindless entertainment, consumerism, meaningless sex and porn.  The Christian population is splitting, some becoming more fundamentalist/orthodox and some drifting away.  This is a problem IMO because the fundamentalists will have the cohesion to be a pressure group and the saner heads won't.

    To steal a line from Ashleigh Brilliant, I don't have a solution but I sure appreciate the problem.

    Great post fodder, Mr. Rational. Thanks!

  50. @prime noticer
    "Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews"

    israelis are mostly orthodox. they aren't that smart. fecund though.

    the methodist church split in half about 5 years ago over homo marriage.

    no unitarians on that chart, but they'd be above average. and also, they're on their way to oblivion, like the episcopals.

    i guess not enough amish or mennonites to make a data observation. no orthodox churches like greece or serbia either. certainly not enough people who follow retarded stuff like bahai to do much stats.

    would be interesting to know korean assembly of god. they are crazy. are these the dumber than average koreans? koreans becoming more like western europeans every year.

    I looked at each of the denominations mentioned save for the Korean one and the sample sizes are too small for all of them. Unitarians did come in close to Episcopalians but there were fewer than 40 responses IIRC so I didn’t include them.

  51. @Pontius
    Damn, last place eh? Well, I did stop going when I was 12. I figured I had absorbed enough of the Good News about how I was going to hell by then. A Pentecostal meeting with a full head of steam is kind of terrifying frankly.

    The more I think about it, the more sun worship seems to make the most sense.

    Sol Invictus be my god.

  52. @Mr. XYZ
    You mean "cream of the *crop*", no?

    Um, yes, yes… of course! (whew)

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    I dunno, mooselimbs act enough like crap that think it is pretty on-target.
  53. @Corvinus
    "Jewish = 109 IQ".

    Not so fast.

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-myth-of-jewish-intelligence.html

    There is also research indicating that atheists are more intelligent than non-atheists (i.e. people who are religious).

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/atheists-more-intelligent-than-religious-people-faith-instinct-cleverness-a7742766.html

    https://www.indy100.com/article/scientist-looked-through-63-studies-conclude-atheists-more-intelligent-religious-people-metanalysis-7733926

    It’s worth noting wrt Jews that using the Wordsum as an IQ proxy obviously overemphasizes the verbal aspects of IQ at the expense of the visuo-spatial ones.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "It’s worth noting wrt Jews that using the Wordsum as an IQ proxy obviously overemphasizes the verbal aspects of IQ at the expense of the visuo-spatial one"

    You mean with regards to Jews AND non-Jews.

    Here is more background regarding Wordsum. An interesting tidbt...

    "I [the author] recalled that I’ve previously read another paper that reviewed Wordsum (posted about that here), which noted: I first examined the data of Stewart and of Harrell and Harrell several years ago, long before the specter of IQ was raised by Herrnstein and Murray, and it occurred to me to wonder whether other data, not subject to the selection and truncation of the scores for enlisted men in the Armed Forces, would show the same pattern of variability of test scores across occupations. I looked first at variation in verbal ability among occupation groups of American adults interviewed in the NORC General Social Survey from 1974 to 1989. In almost every year, the entire GSS sample or a large, randomly selected fraction of it, was administered a 10-item vocabulary test, WORDSUM, which was selected from items originally constructed for a standard IQ test. The ten GSS vocabulary items were chosen from “Form A,” one of two parallel, twenty-item vocabulary tests selected by Thorndike. Each form contained two vocabulary test items from each of the levels of the vocabulary section of the Institute for Educational Research Intelligence Scale: Completion, Arithmetic Problems, Vocabulary, and Directions (Thorndike 1942). Form A was developed by Thorndike in response to the need for a very brief test of intelligence in a social survey (Thorndike and Gallup 1944), and it was also used in an attempt to study the feasibility of an aptitude census (Thorndike and Hagen 1952). Form A was later used by Miner (1957) in his monograph, Intelligence in the United States, which attempted to assess the intellectual ability of the U.S. population using a national household sample survey."

    "So, there we have it apparently. All these studies rely on a single value from the 1940s by one of the original test developers. Seems crazy, but apparently, that is the case. What needs to be done is a new norming of the Wordsum items against a test with known reliability and relation to general g."

    https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/?p=7645
  54. @Rich
    Once again, can't find any information on this test. Is this another one based on estimates? Why are there no actual tests available to confirm if this sample is accurate?

    If you’re referring to the GSS results, the interface is online. It requires user inputs and then returns output tables but none of the results have URLs. It’s a little clunky to get the hang of but if you devote half an hour to it you’ll be able to figure it out.

  55. @David
    GSS is at sda.berkeley.edu which begs the question of when the left will corrupt this database like they did NASA’s to support global warming hoax. GSS is full of inconvenient truths so eventually its leftist caretakers will either destroy it or simply block access to kulaks like yourself.

    It is partially government-funded so that works in our favor. Will a president Kamala Harris snuff that funding out, though? It’s not inconceivable.

  56. @Stan d Mute

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.
     
    I think we scare the crap out of them because we threaten their sacred worldview. The idea that dead mommy is just a bunch of worm eaten mulch forgotten and gone forever is pretty bleak. Christianity is a warm comfy fairy tale for children frightened by the apparent meaningless of reality as we understand it in realist terms. Normally I’m inclined to let people keep their fairy tale unmolested (I don’t go to churches with “god is dead” signs) like I do with small children and Santa Claus. But here, where there is so much rabid Jew hate (much admittedly for very good reasons), I am compelled to lambaste the hypocrisy of hating Jews while worshipping JewGod. If you’re grown up enough to see what harm Judaism is causing, you need to take the bitter pill and see the harm your own idiotic “faith” is doing.

    LOL. You don’t scare me at all. As a Catholic ex-atheist, I hardly give you any thought.

    Atheism? A comfy fairy tale for children who want to indulge in the pleasures of the flesh without consequences. Do as thou wilt, be a Law unto yourself, become like God, knowing good and evil, all that–let’s see how it turns out. I’m happy to wait.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    You don’t scare me at all. As a Catholic ex-atheist, I hardly give you any thought.
     
    No? But you scare me plenty. With your child molesters wearing dresses and importation of millions of African and Mesoamerican savages, sending my kin to fight and die in some worthless desert for your delusions, endless whining about abortion of dysgenic freaks and parasites, you are the problem there dipshit.

    I’d say you hardly have any thought at all.
  57. @Audacious Epigone
    The GSS does ask about ethnicity, though self-reported ethnicity in the US is 'problematic' as they say because once we get to the boomers, most white Americans are European mutts. The percentages identifying as English, for example, has dropped significantly over the last thirty years. And that's among whites, not among the population in general.

    Here's a post on ethnicity and wordsum for the GSS that might approach what you're after.

    Did you forget to include a link?

  58. @Mr. Rational

    do you think that the recent surge in people identifying as atheist is usually the result of serious thought, as your atheism is? Or is it just confirming to the new media-driven and school-driven fashion for mocking and looking down on Christianity.... ?
     
    There's a third possibility, and that's dissatisfaction with the teachings and atmosphere of the churches.  If people find nothing there that improves their lives, they'll stop going.

    I started my own drift away when my parents' church started preaching things like book-burning when I was learning mathematics, physics and chemistry.  The sciences made sense, theology not only didn't but was righteously self-assured about doctrine that was unsupported or even false to fact.  At that point I knew that if I was going to find the truth I wasn't going to find it in Christianity (in 2oth century America, at least) and probably wouldn't find it in religion because it used faulty epistemology.  I learned the word "epistemology" from Objectivist writings and found that its authorities made many of the same mistakes!

    One of the more significant trends of late is the rise of the "nones", people who aren't avowedly atheist but have no religious affiliation.  Vox Day (who is usually either pretty close to right or flagrantly wrong) pushes the notion that a lack of orthodoxy and prescriptions for living has left a vacuum which got filled with things like mindless entertainment, consumerism, meaningless sex and porn.  The Christian population is splitting, some becoming more fundamentalist/orthodox and some drifting away.  This is a problem IMO because the fundamentalists will have the cohesion to be a pressure group and the saner heads won't.

    To steal a line from Ashleigh Brilliant, I don't have a solution but I sure appreciate the problem.

    This comment is interesting to me because it is almost the mirror image of my own experience.

    “I started my own drift away when my parents’ church started preaching things like book-burning”

    I was born to and raised by atheists, among atheists, to be an atheist, and I started my own drift away from atheism when I noticed my parents “faith” was preaching things like book burning—not necessarily literal book burning, but saying that certain books or ideas are heretical and forbidden, “hate speech” in modern parlance, though I don’t think that term existed back then. Youth are keenly sensitive to the hypocrisies of their elders and I was no exception. I wondered why, if they did not believe in religion, they acted as if they had a religion in all but name anyway. Why they were religious about being anti-religious, to put it at its most epigrammatic. (I am not speaking so much of my parents per se, who evinced more of an indifference, but of their peers and other of my elders and educators.)

    Gradually looking into the more esoteric forms of various religions, combined with my own reasoning and reflection on basic philosophical/metaphysical questions (e.g., Aristotle’s unmoved mover), I gradually came to the view that maybe those religions had a point after all, however obscured it has become by the caricatures produced by marketplace churches (and amplified by secular media).

    Agree with your last paragraphs. As Matthew Arnold already observed in the 19th century, the “long, withdrawing roar” of faith has left us with a world that is new but barren, a

    darkling plain
    Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
    Where ignorant armies clash by night.

    Or, as Vox Day said, a “vacuum which got filled with things like mindless entertainment, consumerism, meaningless sex and porn” … and mindless anti-religionism.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    that maybe those religions had a point after all, however obscured it has become by the caricatures produced by marketplace churches (and amplified by secular media).
     
    This is all explicable by defective epistemology.  Societies which had a more successful formula than their competitors expanded at the others' expense.  Sometimes this formula was genetic (e.g. the proto-Indo-Europeans and their innovation of dairying made possible via their lactase persistence), sometimes it was geographic, sometimes it was technological, sometimes it was social.  Having erroneous explanations for such advantages doesn't make them go away, but it does make it more likely that they'll be lost, opportunities missed, or errors made due to misunderstanding.  Doing the right thing for the wrong reason is still doing the right thing.  On the other hand, it does stand in the way of finding a better thing to do.  If you can spread an advantage by rational argument and demonstration of efficacy, you're going to progress a lot faster than if you have to fight literal wars over doctrine.

    Islam is proof positive that divine revelation is defective epistemology.

  59. @J1234

    not surprised of atheists and low iq of bible thumpers.
     
    A great comment to illustrate the informal Rorschach test we all take when interpreting the IQ test results of others, especially when the results are listed by group. The problem with interpreting these results with regards to atheists is that, IMO, there are many flavors of non-believers which aren't defined outside of atheist and agnostic on this table. I guess those flavors aren't defined because atheists don't have a network of established organizations that evolved from differences and disputes with each other, like Christians do.

    There are thoughtful contemplative non-believers who take on the label "atheist" very consciously and I can believe they're intelligent people. There are also "I can't be bothered" non-believers. I wonder which ones are represented on the list? Hard to say. Which ones would be most likely to identify as atheist on an IQ test?

    There are many lower IQ non-believers in Britain. My wife (a college professor) lived there about 30 years ago, and according to her, the white working and lower classes were mostly non-believers. When she would get dressed for church on Sunday morning they would ask, "Are you going to a party or something?"

    It would be interesting to know how many non-believers receive welfare assistance (or the dole, as they say in Britain.) Of course, now that there are so many foreigners in Britain, Muslims certainly make up a larger portion of the lower and working classes than when my wife lived there.

    As I said, we all take the Rorschach, myself included. Among Americans, I see Episcopalians as the Christian group most like the Jews in that they are less inclined to see their church experience as strictly a religious experience. So a corresponding high IQ like the Jews? Who knows.

    I suspect the “atheist” category is disproportionately composed of Ashkenazim and ex-Episcopalians, ex-Presbyterians, etc., so it might be argued there is a hidden confound.

    • Replies: @LondonBob
    Jews will be a big portion of the atheist category.
  60. @Pericles

    I think we scare the crap out of them because we threaten their sacred worldview. The idea that dead mommy is just a bunch of worm eaten mulch forgotten and gone forever is pretty bleak.

     

    Don't forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions, and that whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten. Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same. Just elementary particles in various configurations.

    I am compelled to lambaste the hypocrisy

     

    But you see, that's just your opinion maaan. So what if some mammal is grunting something that makes you, another grunting mammal, badthink. It's on you. It doesn't matter.

    Lol, yeah. I’ve come to the conclusion there are no real atheists, just people professing “atheism” while living un-self-aware decadent Christianity.

  61. @David
    GSS is at sda.berkeley.edu which begs the question of when the left will corrupt this database like they did NASA’s to support global warming hoax. GSS is full of inconvenient truths so eventually its leftist caretakers will either destroy it or simply block access to kulaks like yourself.

    Is it possible to download the raw data to a private server and preserve a snapshot of truth for posterity? Obviously, the SJWs will claim that any research conclusion based on non-converged data are invalid, but we will know, we will know!

    Or maybe there is some blockchain-y thing that can be done to preserve the public validity of a privately held dataset.

    • Replies: @res
    You can download the full dataset at http://gss.norc.org/get-the-data/stata
  62. @Gordo
    Scots-Irish are Presbyterian surely?

    Less than previously in America. Same ethnic stock in Ireland (Ulster Scots) and Scotland (Border Scots) are still majority Presbyterian (and minority Anglican).

    http://robslink.com/SAS/democd42/church_maps/PRUSA.htm

  63. @Almost Missouri
    I suspect the "atheist" category is disproportionately composed of Ashkenazim and ex-Episcopalians, ex-Presbyterians, etc., so it might be argued there is a hidden confound.

    Jews will be a big portion of the atheist category.

  64. @Pericles

    I think we scare the crap out of them because we threaten their sacred worldview. The idea that dead mommy is just a bunch of worm eaten mulch forgotten and gone forever is pretty bleak.

     

    Don't forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions, and that whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten. Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same. Just elementary particles in various configurations.

    I am compelled to lambaste the hypocrisy

     

    But you see, that's just your opinion maaan. So what if some mammal is grunting something that makes you, another grunting mammal, badthink. It's on you. It doesn't matter.

    Don’t forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions

    Every animal on earth has an ethos.  Humans are just the only one capable of thinking about it.

    You christards think that rejecting YOUR source of morality means rejecting morality, period.  That’s a non-sequitur.

    whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten.

    One viewing of “The 300” is enough to debunk that notion.

    Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same.

    Not to them it’s not.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "Every animal on earth has an ethos."
     
    Can you say what is the ethos of ...

    An amoeba?

    A honey bee?

    An eel?

    A murrelet?

    A dog?

    Calhoun's mice?
    , @Pericles

    Every animal on earth has an ethos. Humans are just the only one capable of thinking about it.

     

    Whatever that means. Ethos based on genetics?

    You christards think that rejecting YOUR source of morality means rejecting morality, period. That’s a non-sequitur.

     

    Not at all, what it means is, anyone's morals is just their opinion, maaan. And if you were honest you'd agree with me. You can influence the expressed morals of others by terror or violence of course. But that's about it.

    One viewing of “The 300” is enough to debunk that notion.

     

    Lol. Give it another geological blink of an eye.


    Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same.

     

    Not to them it’s not.

     

    Reminder that they're just collections of atoms. Right?
  65. @Audacious Epigone
    Um, yes, yes... of course! (whew)

    I dunno, mooselimbs act enough like crap that think it is pretty on-target.

  66. @Almost Missouri
    This comment is interesting to me because it is almost the mirror image of my own experience.

    "I started my own drift away when my parents’ church started preaching things like book-burning"
     
    I was born to and raised by atheists, among atheists, to be an atheist, and I started my own drift away from atheism when I noticed my parents "faith" was preaching things like book burning—not necessarily literal book burning, but saying that certain books or ideas are heretical and forbidden, "hate speech" in modern parlance, though I don't think that term existed back then. Youth are keenly sensitive to the hypocrisies of their elders and I was no exception. I wondered why, if they did not believe in religion, they acted as if they had a religion in all but name anyway. Why they were religious about being anti-religious, to put it at its most epigrammatic. (I am not speaking so much of my parents per se, who evinced more of an indifference, but of their peers and other of my elders and educators.)

    Gradually looking into the more esoteric forms of various religions, combined with my own reasoning and reflection on basic philosophical/metaphysical questions (e.g., Aristotle's unmoved mover), I gradually came to the view that maybe those religions had a point after all, however obscured it has become by the caricatures produced by marketplace churches (and amplified by secular media).

    Agree with your last paragraphs. As Matthew Arnold already observed in the 19th century, the "long, withdrawing roar" of faith has left us with a world that is new but barren, a

    darkling plain
    Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
    Where ignorant armies clash by night.
     
    Or, as Vox Day said, a "vacuum which got filled with things like mindless entertainment, consumerism, meaningless sex and porn" ... and mindless anti-religionism.

    that maybe those religions had a point after all, however obscured it has become by the caricatures produced by marketplace churches (and amplified by secular media).

    This is all explicable by defective epistemology.  Societies which had a more successful formula than their competitors expanded at the others’ expense.  Sometimes this formula was genetic (e.g. the proto-Indo-Europeans and their innovation of dairying made possible via their lactase persistence), sometimes it was geographic, sometimes it was technological, sometimes it was social.  Having erroneous explanations for such advantages doesn’t make them go away, but it does make it more likely that they’ll be lost, opportunities missed, or errors made due to misunderstanding.  Doing the right thing for the wrong reason is still doing the right thing.  On the other hand, it does stand in the way of finding a better thing to do.  If you can spread an advantage by rational argument and demonstration of efficacy, you’re going to progress a lot faster than if you have to fight literal wars over doctrine.

    Islam is proof positive that divine revelation is defective epistemology.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Not sure what the sequitur was here, but to respond to the comment on it's own terms...

    "Societies which had a more successful formula than their competitors expanded at the others’ expense."
     
    True, as are all tautologies. But I don't see the connection to epistemology.

    "If you can spread an advantage by rational argument and demonstration of efficacy, you’re going to progress a lot faster than if you have to fight literal wars over doctrine."
     
    Yes, and as so many items at iSteve demonstrate, the modern West is in thrall to dogmatic doctrines over which we will very likely have to fight a literal war, and arguably already have fought literal wars, in which, it may be argued, the non-dogmatic lost despite arguably less doctrinaire epistemology.

    "Islam is proof positive that divine revelation is defective epistemology."
     
    If Islam prevails over the West, will that mean that Islam's epistemology is superior after all?
  67. @Audacious Epigone
    It's worth noting wrt Jews that using the Wordsum as an IQ proxy obviously overemphasizes the verbal aspects of IQ at the expense of the visuo-spatial ones.

    “It’s worth noting wrt Jews that using the Wordsum as an IQ proxy obviously overemphasizes the verbal aspects of IQ at the expense of the visuo-spatial one”

    You mean with regards to Jews AND non-Jews.

    Here is more background regarding Wordsum. An interesting tidbt…

    “I [the author] recalled that I’ve previously read another paper that reviewed Wordsum (posted about that here), which noted: I first examined the data of Stewart and of Harrell and Harrell several years ago, long before the specter of IQ was raised by Herrnstein and Murray, and it occurred to me to wonder whether other data, not subject to the selection and truncation of the scores for enlisted men in the Armed Forces, would show the same pattern of variability of test scores across occupations. I looked first at variation in verbal ability among occupation groups of American adults interviewed in the NORC General Social Survey from 1974 to 1989. In almost every year, the entire GSS sample or a large, randomly selected fraction of it, was administered a 10-item vocabulary test, WORDSUM, which was selected from items originally constructed for a standard IQ test. The ten GSS vocabulary items were chosen from “Form A,” one of two parallel, twenty-item vocabulary tests selected by Thorndike. Each form contained two vocabulary test items from each of the levels of the vocabulary section of the Institute for Educational Research Intelligence Scale: Completion, Arithmetic Problems, Vocabulary, and Directions (Thorndike 1942). Form A was developed by Thorndike in response to the need for a very brief test of intelligence in a social survey (Thorndike and Gallup 1944), and it was also used in an attempt to study the feasibility of an aptitude census (Thorndike and Hagen 1952). Form A was later used by Miner (1957) in his monograph, Intelligence in the United States, which attempted to assess the intellectual ability of the U.S. population using a national household sample survey.”

    “So, there we have it apparently. All these studies rely on a single value from the 1940s by one of the original test developers. Seems crazy, but apparently, that is the case. What needs to be done is a new norming of the Wordsum items against a test with known reliability and relation to general g.”

    https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/?p=7645

    • Troll: Mr. Rational
  68. @Mr. Rational

    that maybe those religions had a point after all, however obscured it has become by the caricatures produced by marketplace churches (and amplified by secular media).
     
    This is all explicable by defective epistemology.  Societies which had a more successful formula than their competitors expanded at the others' expense.  Sometimes this formula was genetic (e.g. the proto-Indo-Europeans and their innovation of dairying made possible via their lactase persistence), sometimes it was geographic, sometimes it was technological, sometimes it was social.  Having erroneous explanations for such advantages doesn't make them go away, but it does make it more likely that they'll be lost, opportunities missed, or errors made due to misunderstanding.  Doing the right thing for the wrong reason is still doing the right thing.  On the other hand, it does stand in the way of finding a better thing to do.  If you can spread an advantage by rational argument and demonstration of efficacy, you're going to progress a lot faster than if you have to fight literal wars over doctrine.

    Islam is proof positive that divine revelation is defective epistemology.

    Not sure what the sequitur was here, but to respond to the comment on it’s own terms…

    “Societies which had a more successful formula than their competitors expanded at the others’ expense.”

    True, as are all tautologies. But I don’t see the connection to epistemology.

    “If you can spread an advantage by rational argument and demonstration of efficacy, you’re going to progress a lot faster than if you have to fight literal wars over doctrine.”

    Yes, and as so many items at iSteve demonstrate, the modern West is in thrall to dogmatic doctrines over which we will very likely have to fight a literal war, and arguably already have fought literal wars, in which, it may be argued, the non-dogmatic lost despite arguably less doctrinaire epistemology.

    “Islam is proof positive that divine revelation is defective epistemology.”

    If Islam prevails over the West, will that mean that Islam’s epistemology is superior after all?

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    I don’t see the connection to epistemology.
     
    It's about understanding why something works.  This is important for understanding when something is not going to work.

    "We worshipped the One True God and he favored us" is a poor guide to military tactics, for example.

    , @Stan d Mute

    Societies which had a more successful formula than their competitors expanded at the others’ expense.”

    True, as are all tautologies. But I don’t see the connection to epistemology.
     
    Do you understand the meaning of the word “epistemology”?

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/

    How about “society”?

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/society

    Islam, for example, is both with the former the central organizing feature of the latter.

    Beat that Good Book against your noodle a few more times...
  69. @Mr. Rational

    Don’t forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions
     
    Every animal on earth has an ethos.  Humans are just the only one capable of thinking about it.

    You christards think that rejecting YOUR source of morality means rejecting morality, period.  That's a non-sequitur.

    whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten.
     
    One viewing of "The 300" is enough to debunk that notion.

    Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same.
     
    Not to them it's not.

    “Every animal on earth has an ethos.”

    Can you say what is the ethos of …

    An amoeba?

    A honey bee?

    An eel?

    A murrelet?

    A dog?

    Calhoun’s mice?

  70. There is something wrong with this table. The white in USA have an average IQ of 106 ? So, they have an IQ as high as Asians ?

  71. @Mr. Rational

    Don’t forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions
     
    Every animal on earth has an ethos.  Humans are just the only one capable of thinking about it.

    You christards think that rejecting YOUR source of morality means rejecting morality, period.  That's a non-sequitur.

    whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten.
     
    One viewing of "The 300" is enough to debunk that notion.

    Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same.
     
    Not to them it's not.

    Every animal on earth has an ethos. Humans are just the only one capable of thinking about it.

    Whatever that means. Ethos based on genetics?

    You christards think that rejecting YOUR source of morality means rejecting morality, period. That’s a non-sequitur.

    Not at all, what it means is, anyone’s morals is just their opinion, maaan. And if you were honest you’d agree with me. You can influence the expressed morals of others by terror or violence of course. But that’s about it.

    One viewing of “The 300” is enough to debunk that notion.

    Lol. Give it another geological blink of an eye.

    Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same.

    Not to them it’s not.

    Reminder that they’re just collections of atoms. Right?

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    Every animal on earth has an ethos. Humans are just the only one capable of thinking about it.

    Whatever that means. Ethos based on genetics?
     
    Why the hell not? At least then it’ll be based on something demonstrably real.
  72. @Almost Missouri
    Not sure what the sequitur was here, but to respond to the comment on it's own terms...

    "Societies which had a more successful formula than their competitors expanded at the others’ expense."
     
    True, as are all tautologies. But I don't see the connection to epistemology.

    "If you can spread an advantage by rational argument and demonstration of efficacy, you’re going to progress a lot faster than if you have to fight literal wars over doctrine."
     
    Yes, and as so many items at iSteve demonstrate, the modern West is in thrall to dogmatic doctrines over which we will very likely have to fight a literal war, and arguably already have fought literal wars, in which, it may be argued, the non-dogmatic lost despite arguably less doctrinaire epistemology.

    "Islam is proof positive that divine revelation is defective epistemology."
     
    If Islam prevails over the West, will that mean that Islam's epistemology is superior after all?

    I don’t see the connection to epistemology.

    It’s about understanding why something works.  This is important for understanding when something is not going to work.

    “We worshipped the One True God and he favored us” is a poor guide to military tactics, for example.

  73. @Pincher Martin
    Such a theory hardly supports nepotism. And it doesn't explain why Jewish women marry outside their race, which many do.

    why Jewish women marry outside their race, which many do.

    What are they to do when their own men left them? They also have to look outside their religion for husbands.

    Thus cycle of kvetching is restored.

  74. @Murray
    LOL. You don't scare me at all. As a Catholic ex-atheist, I hardly give you any thought.

    Atheism? A comfy fairy tale for children who want to indulge in the pleasures of the flesh without consequences. Do as thou wilt, be a Law unto yourself, become like God, knowing good and evil, all that--let's see how it turns out. I'm happy to wait.

    You don’t scare me at all. As a Catholic ex-atheist, I hardly give you any thought.

    No? But you scare me plenty. With your child molesters wearing dresses and importation of millions of African and Mesoamerican savages, sending my kin to fight and die in some worthless desert for your delusions, endless whining about abortion of dysgenic freaks and parasites, you are the problem there dipshit.

    I’d say you hardly have any thought at all.

    • LOL: Mr. Rational
  75. @Almost Missouri
    Is it possible to download the raw data to a private server and preserve a snapshot of truth for posterity? Obviously, the SJWs will claim that any research conclusion based on non-converged data are invalid, but we will know, we will know!

    Or maybe there is some blockchain-y thing that can be done to preserve the public validity of a privately held dataset.

    You can download the full dataset at http://gss.norc.org/get-the-data/stata

  76. @Stan d Mute

    I suspect the increasing visibility of atheists gives Christians the creeps because we look like an invasion of time travelers from an advanced civilization in the future after Christianity has disappeared.
     
    I think we scare the crap out of them because we threaten their sacred worldview. The idea that dead mommy is just a bunch of worm eaten mulch forgotten and gone forever is pretty bleak. Christianity is a warm comfy fairy tale for children frightened by the apparent meaningless of reality as we understand it in realist terms. Normally I’m inclined to let people keep their fairy tale unmolested (I don’t go to churches with “god is dead” signs) like I do with small children and Santa Claus. But here, where there is so much rabid Jew hate (much admittedly for very good reasons), I am compelled to lambaste the hypocrisy of hating Jews while worshipping JewGod. If you’re grown up enough to see what harm Judaism is causing, you need to take the bitter pill and see the harm your own idiotic “faith” is doing.

    Christianity is a warm comfy fairy tale for children frightened by the apparent meaningless of reality as we understand it in realist terms.

    Yes, because meeting an all powerful and knowing judge whom you cannot deceive and determines your eternal bliss or damnation just gives me the warm fuzzies. Not like that scary atheism, where nothing I do will ever have consequences and the only smart rule to live by is “don’t get caught.”

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    Yes, because meeting an all powerful and knowing judge whom you cannot deceive and determines your eternal bliss or damnation just gives me the warm fuzzies.
     
    You ever visit a pediatric infusion room? If your Sky Fairy existed, I’d love to see the look on your face when you realize S/he/it (Sheit) doesn’t give a flying fuck about you or your karmic balance sheet. But you keep on worshipping the worst child torturer and murderer that ever existed dumbass. Keep praying to your loving Sheit that condemned 99.999% of every human ever born to eternal sulfuric flames simply because they’d never heard of it.

    And guzzle some more camel piss, your Sheit’s inventors’ descendants are positive that helps...
  77. You christards think that rejecting YOUR source of morality means rejecting morality, period. That’s a non-sequitur.

    I suppose every system has something you would call morality (system to live by?). The atheist one is do what you want. Not much of a system, but it is simple.

  78. @c matt

    Christianity is a warm comfy fairy tale for children frightened by the apparent meaningless of reality as we understand it in realist terms.
     
    Yes, because meeting an all powerful and knowing judge whom you cannot deceive and determines your eternal bliss or damnation just gives me the warm fuzzies. Not like that scary atheism, where nothing I do will ever have consequences and the only smart rule to live by is "don't get caught."

    Yes, because meeting an all powerful and knowing judge whom you cannot deceive and determines your eternal bliss or damnation just gives me the warm fuzzies.

    You ever visit a pediatric infusion room? If your Sky Fairy existed, I’d love to see the look on your face when you realize S/he/it (Sheit) doesn’t give a flying fuck about you or your karmic balance sheet. But you keep on worshipping the worst child torturer and murderer that ever existed dumbass. Keep praying to your loving Sheit that condemned 99.999% of every human ever born to eternal sulfuric flames simply because they’d never heard of it.

    And guzzle some more camel piss, your Sheit’s inventors’ descendants are positive that helps…

  79. @Almost Missouri
    Not sure what the sequitur was here, but to respond to the comment on it's own terms...

    "Societies which had a more successful formula than their competitors expanded at the others’ expense."
     
    True, as are all tautologies. But I don't see the connection to epistemology.

    "If you can spread an advantage by rational argument and demonstration of efficacy, you’re going to progress a lot faster than if you have to fight literal wars over doctrine."
     
    Yes, and as so many items at iSteve demonstrate, the modern West is in thrall to dogmatic doctrines over which we will very likely have to fight a literal war, and arguably already have fought literal wars, in which, it may be argued, the non-dogmatic lost despite arguably less doctrinaire epistemology.

    "Islam is proof positive that divine revelation is defective epistemology."
     
    If Islam prevails over the West, will that mean that Islam's epistemology is superior after all?

    Societies which had a more successful formula than their competitors expanded at the others’ expense.”

    True, as are all tautologies. But I don’t see the connection to epistemology.

    Do you understand the meaning of the word “epistemology”?

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/

    How about “society”?

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/society

    Islam, for example, is both with the former the central organizing feature of the latter.

    Beat that Good Book against your noodle a few more times…

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    So the fact that Christian societies expanded at the expense of non-Christian societies means that ... ?
  80. @Pericles

    Every animal on earth has an ethos. Humans are just the only one capable of thinking about it.

     

    Whatever that means. Ethos based on genetics?

    You christards think that rejecting YOUR source of morality means rejecting morality, period. That’s a non-sequitur.

     

    Not at all, what it means is, anyone's morals is just their opinion, maaan. And if you were honest you'd agree with me. You can influence the expressed morals of others by terror or violence of course. But that's about it.

    One viewing of “The 300” is enough to debunk that notion.

     

    Lol. Give it another geological blink of an eye.


    Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same.

     

    Not to them it’s not.

     

    Reminder that they're just collections of atoms. Right?

    Every animal on earth has an ethos. Humans are just the only one capable of thinking about it.

    Whatever that means. Ethos based on genetics?

    Why the hell not? At least then it’ll be based on something demonstrably real.

  81. @The Z Blog
    Regarding Nyborg's chart, the Muslim number jumps out to me. Even if we adjust for his grade inflation, I know of no study that supports a > 95-IQ for Arab Muslims. The Muslims of the Caucuses are probably the smartest "white" Muslims. They are estimated in the low 90's, with extra helpings of chaotic violence.

    Now, it's possible his data set is limited to Europe, so maybe his data set has a high number of Balkan Muslims or maybe he has included Eat Asian Muslims.

    I'll also note that AE's chart seems to correlate with the embrace of the poz. Jews are the font of poz, but Episcopalians are giving them a run for their money. You know it is an Episcopal church because it is festooned with rainbows. At the other end, the Baptists have been the the spear point of the anti-pox for generations.

    White converts to Islam are often pretty smart people. Sure, you get ding dongs like Tsarnaev’s wife, but it says a lot that some of the most articulate Muslims out there are white converts. It’s a bit like how the Ottoman Empire’s best soldiers, scholars, and engineers were Europeans who had ‘turned Turk’.

    Can you imagine a Somali or a Pashtun being this articulate?

  82. anon[156] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pericles

    I think we scare the crap out of them because we threaten their sacred worldview. The idea that dead mommy is just a bunch of worm eaten mulch forgotten and gone forever is pretty bleak.

     

    Don't forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions, and that whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten. Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same. Just elementary particles in various configurations.

    I am compelled to lambaste the hypocrisy

     

    But you see, that's just your opinion maaan. So what if some mammal is grunting something that makes you, another grunting mammal, badthink. It's on you. It doesn't matter.

    “Don’t forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions, and that whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten. Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same. Just elementary particles in various configurations.”
    Wrong. See Sam Harris’ ‘The Moral Landscape’

    • Replies: @Pericles
    I'll just have a quick look into wikipedia, which tells me that:


    Harris contends that the only moral framework worth talking about is one where "morally good" things pertain to increases in the "well-being of conscious creatures". He then argues that, problems with philosophy of science and reason in general notwithstanding, 'moral questions' will have objectively right and wrong answers which are grounded in empirical facts about what causes people to flourish.

     

    So it's still just his opinion ("Harris contends") and his 'objectively right' is based on his own definition. Seems mostly like an authoritarian sort of utilitarianism, since he can presumably smite those of wrongful morals with a clear heart. But again, there's nothing inherently valuable in privileging the 'well-being of conscious creatures', etc, in a materialist world. Just his opinion.

    Pragmatically speaking, there are furthermore problems with establishing 'empirical facts' of the sort of complexity Harris envisions. Perhaps in such situations Harris would say morals are silent? Or what if science changes its mind, strong opinions weakly held and all? Do morals flip too? I don't know and don't really care. It seems a flawed approach at best and has the usual problems.

    In short, this moral theory seems flawed and impractical and still relies on just opinions maaan.

    PS. Consider furthermore that religion appears to cause many people to flourish by forming families, having children, being happy, having a more positive outlook on life, etc. Is this considered an empirical fact? If so, whether to follow a religion would be answered by a Harrisian (if you will) affirmative.

    PPS. A bit further down the article, Harris appears to discard free will too ("The illusion of free will"). Well, I'm sure we all can think up some fundamental issues with morality as a concept if our actions are predetermined. It's materialist enough, though, I'll give him that.
  83. @Audacious Epigone
    Yeah, even accounting for the "cream of the crap" immigration of Muslims that the US gets relative to Europe, this seems strikingly high for the US and way too high for Europe.

    Nyborg’s data don’t pertain to Europe, though. The source article for that table , titled “The intelligence–religiosity nexus: A representative study of white adolescent Americans” can be found here (table 6 is the one shared above) .

    As far as the reason for the unexpectedly high-IQ of Muslims: if I’m reading correctly, Nyberg used a sample from the NLSY.
    The “Actual white N used for the ensuing analyses” (see Table 2) for Muslem (sic) is n=20. I’m not good enough with statistics to quickly calculate how much of a sample error you’d expect from that small of a group, but it’s got to be significant.

  84. anon[156] • Disclaimer says:

    This post seems to have initiated some boisterous fun, but that’s about all it’s been good for.
    We already have good data about the average genetically-based IQ differences between white, black, hispanic and asian peoples, and we also know that there are some SNPs on genes that have been transmitted from former Ashkenazi tribe members that can confer higher than average intelligence on some of their descendants.
    As for who is a ‘Baptist’, a ‘Zoroastrian’ or a ‘Jew’……these categories are so mushy and subject to so many influences and opinions as to tell us, basically, nothing.
    So when this nothing, which can’t be measured, is correlated with something – namely IQ, the product is…..excepting noise and confusion……nothing.

  85. anon[156] • Disclaimer says:

    As for religion and belief in a creator, and its relation to IQ – not a smart position. View some of the conversations with Dan Dennett, Chris Hitchens, Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris and you’ll find that their religious adversaries are no match for them and always lose the argument.

  86. @anon
    "Don’t forget to teach your children that there are no objective morals or values, just opinions, and that whatever they do, good or bad, will be destroyed and forgotten. Whether they live a hundred years, or become immortal or get killed by their daddy in the next hour is all the same. Just elementary particles in various configurations."
    Wrong. See Sam Harris' 'The Moral Landscape'

    I’ll just have a quick look into wikipedia, which tells me that:

    Harris contends that the only moral framework worth talking about is one where “morally good” things pertain to increases in the “well-being of conscious creatures”. He then argues that, problems with philosophy of science and reason in general notwithstanding, ‘moral questions’ will have objectively right and wrong answers which are grounded in empirical facts about what causes people to flourish.

    So it’s still just his opinion (“Harris contends”) and his ‘objectively right’ is based on his own definition. Seems mostly like an authoritarian sort of utilitarianism, since he can presumably smite those of wrongful morals with a clear heart. But again, there’s nothing inherently valuable in privileging the ‘well-being of conscious creatures’, etc, in a materialist world. Just his opinion.

    Pragmatically speaking, there are furthermore problems with establishing ’empirical facts’ of the sort of complexity Harris envisions. Perhaps in such situations Harris would say morals are silent? Or what if science changes its mind, strong opinions weakly held and all? Do morals flip too? I don’t know and don’t really care. It seems a flawed approach at best and has the usual problems.

    In short, this moral theory seems flawed and impractical and still relies on just opinions maaan.

    PS. Consider furthermore that religion appears to cause many people to flourish by forming families, having children, being happy, having a more positive outlook on life, etc. Is this considered an empirical fact? If so, whether to follow a religion would be answered by a Harrisian (if you will) affirmative.

    PPS. A bit further down the article, Harris appears to discard free will too (“The illusion of free will”). Well, I’m sure we all can think up some fundamental issues with morality as a concept if our actions are predetermined. It’s materialist enough, though, I’ll give him that.

    • Replies: @Futurethirdworlder
    Ppps Sam Harris is Jewish and he his moral formula includes quite a few exceptions for his chosen kin.
  87. @j2
    "Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?"

    Richard Lynn proposed that the high IQ of American Jews (Ashkenazi in Israel 103.5, Ashkenazi in the USA 110) is due to selective migration, the smarter ones emigrated. I think this explanation is correct and I looked at the paper from where the article took Nyberg's table. There is an IQ distribution of American Jews in 1997 (that is, not the present one, Ron Unz's data in his meritocracy articles indicates the mean is lower now). This distribution is more narrow than it should be on both ends and supports Lynn's explanation that the reason is selective migration, see my short note on this distribution:

    http://www.pienisalaliittotutkimus.com/2019/01/26/yet-another-short-note-on-american-ashkenazi-iq/

    Except Israeli Ashkenazim also migrated. Although perhaps more Israeli Ashkenazim, percentage wise, were forced out of Europe immediately pre-Holocaust or came as survivors immediately post. Otherwise you’d have to say that before then, the smarter ones went to the US.

    • Replies: @j2
    "Except Israeli Ashkenazim also migrated. Although perhaps more Israeli Ashkenazim, percentage wise, were forced out of Europe immediately pre-Holocaust or came as survivors immediately post. Otherwise you’d have to say that before then, the smarter ones went to the US."

    It is easy to explain and there is no contradiction.

    Scaling the USA average IQ to 100, the US white average is 102. In international (that is British) norms, the Northern European average is set to 100. Then the US white population average is also 100 and the US average IQ is 98. Thus, there is a 2 point difference between the US norms and the international norms.

    In Helmuth Nyborg's data, which is not scaled, the US white average is 106 and the US Ashkenazi Jewish IQ is 110. Scaling to international norms, US Ashkenazi Jewish average in 1997 (this is the data Nyborg used) was 104.

    According to Richard Lynn, the average IQ of Ashkenazi in Israel was 103.5 in 1997. There is no large difference between these figures. Thus, the Israel Ashkenazi who migrated also had a higher IQ.

    I calculated that most likely 2.5 million Jews died in the war. (you are free to think it was higher as it only makes the point stronger.) If the IQ of those who migrated was over 100, then those who stayed had an average below 100. As so many died, the IQ of those who remained is above 100. You do not need a genetic explanation for the higher than 100 average: if a large factor of less intelligent die, the average of the survivors is over the original average.

    The average IQ of immigrants is often above the average of the population. This is especially so in the case of Jews immigrating to the USA because they recently lost jobs in Russia and having jobs to lose and money to move, they could not be the most stupid of their people.

    About the present situation, it is likely that the IQ of US Ashkenazi is about 102-103. This is what the study of Ron Unz in the meritocracy article gives if the fraction of Jewish school contest winners is converted to IQ. Such small differences mean nothing. We can compare: 1997 Finnish average IQ was measured as 1997, today it is given by Lynn as 101. 4 point difference, no genetic change. I would suggest that the Ashkenazi Jewish IQ is today the same as for Europeans, 100+-.
  88. @Don
    Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews ( 109-106 vs 100-98) ?

    Israeli Jews are about 55% non-Ashkenazic. I’m surprised the number is so high.

  89. @prime noticer
    "Why do American Jews have a higher iq than israeli Jews"

    israelis are mostly orthodox. they aren't that smart. fecund though.

    the methodist church split in half about 5 years ago over homo marriage.

    no unitarians on that chart, but they'd be above average. and also, they're on their way to oblivion, like the episcopals.

    i guess not enough amish or mennonites to make a data observation. no orthodox churches like greece or serbia either. certainly not enough people who follow retarded stuff like bahai to do much stats.

    would be interesting to know korean assembly of god. they are crazy. are these the dumber than average koreans? koreans becoming more like western europeans every year.

    Israeli Jews are about 25% Orthodox, of which about a third is ultra-Orthodox. The lower end of the bell curve comes from non-Orthodox “traditional” types.

  90. As indicated by the presence of “agnostic” and “atheist,” this is a belief chart, not a genetic one. So lots of Jews may not be “Jews” here, etc.

  91. @Stan d Mute

    Societies which had a more successful formula than their competitors expanded at the others’ expense.”

    True, as are all tautologies. But I don’t see the connection to epistemology.
     
    Do you understand the meaning of the word “epistemology”?

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/

    How about “society”?

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/society

    Islam, for example, is both with the former the central organizing feature of the latter.

    Beat that Good Book against your noodle a few more times...

    So the fact that Christian societies expanded at the expense of non-Christian societies means that … ?

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute

    So the fact that Christian societies expanded at the expense of non-Christian societies means that … ?
     
    It means that in the early stages of the Jewish mind virus, whites still possessed the will to survive and flourish. Today, due to the ultimately dysgenic effects of the mind virus, the opposite is happening.

    Christianity was invented by Semites and weaponized to destroy us. Whether when they invented it they did so for the purpose of destroying whites and our civilization, is unknowable, but that’s the effect it’s had. I suspect, like so much else that surrounds Jews, it began as a simple intra-tribal dispute about a putative messiah (one of many) and then some really good salesmen took it to the next level. Today, however, it’s clearly used as a weapon to destroy us.
  92. @Pericles
    I'll just have a quick look into wikipedia, which tells me that:


    Harris contends that the only moral framework worth talking about is one where "morally good" things pertain to increases in the "well-being of conscious creatures". He then argues that, problems with philosophy of science and reason in general notwithstanding, 'moral questions' will have objectively right and wrong answers which are grounded in empirical facts about what causes people to flourish.

     

    So it's still just his opinion ("Harris contends") and his 'objectively right' is based on his own definition. Seems mostly like an authoritarian sort of utilitarianism, since he can presumably smite those of wrongful morals with a clear heart. But again, there's nothing inherently valuable in privileging the 'well-being of conscious creatures', etc, in a materialist world. Just his opinion.

    Pragmatically speaking, there are furthermore problems with establishing 'empirical facts' of the sort of complexity Harris envisions. Perhaps in such situations Harris would say morals are silent? Or what if science changes its mind, strong opinions weakly held and all? Do morals flip too? I don't know and don't really care. It seems a flawed approach at best and has the usual problems.

    In short, this moral theory seems flawed and impractical and still relies on just opinions maaan.

    PS. Consider furthermore that religion appears to cause many people to flourish by forming families, having children, being happy, having a more positive outlook on life, etc. Is this considered an empirical fact? If so, whether to follow a religion would be answered by a Harrisian (if you will) affirmative.

    PPS. A bit further down the article, Harris appears to discard free will too ("The illusion of free will"). Well, I'm sure we all can think up some fundamental issues with morality as a concept if our actions are predetermined. It's materialist enough, though, I'll give him that.

    Ppps Sam Harris is Jewish and he his moral formula includes quite a few exceptions for his chosen kin.

  93. @Nachum
    Except Israeli Ashkenazim also migrated. Although perhaps more Israeli Ashkenazim, percentage wise, were forced out of Europe immediately pre-Holocaust or came as survivors immediately post. Otherwise you'd have to say that before then, the smarter ones went to the US.

    “Except Israeli Ashkenazim also migrated. Although perhaps more Israeli Ashkenazim, percentage wise, were forced out of Europe immediately pre-Holocaust or came as survivors immediately post. Otherwise you’d have to say that before then, the smarter ones went to the US.”

    It is easy to explain and there is no contradiction.

    Scaling the USA average IQ to 100, the US white average is 102. In international (that is British) norms, the Northern European average is set to 100. Then the US white population average is also 100 and the US average IQ is 98. Thus, there is a 2 point difference between the US norms and the international norms.

    In Helmuth Nyborg’s data, which is not scaled, the US white average is 106 and the US Ashkenazi Jewish IQ is 110. Scaling to international norms, US Ashkenazi Jewish average in 1997 (this is the data Nyborg used) was 104.

    According to Richard Lynn, the average IQ of Ashkenazi in Israel was 103.5 in 1997. There is no large difference between these figures. Thus, the Israel Ashkenazi who migrated also had a higher IQ.

    I calculated that most likely 2.5 million Jews died in the war. (you are free to think it was higher as it only makes the point stronger.) If the IQ of those who migrated was over 100, then those who stayed had an average below 100. As so many died, the IQ of those who remained is above 100. You do not need a genetic explanation for the higher than 100 average: if a large factor of less intelligent die, the average of the survivors is over the original average.

    The average IQ of immigrants is often above the average of the population. This is especially so in the case of Jews immigrating to the USA because they recently lost jobs in Russia and having jobs to lose and money to move, they could not be the most stupid of their people.

    About the present situation, it is likely that the IQ of US Ashkenazi is about 102-103. This is what the study of Ron Unz in the meritocracy article gives if the fraction of Jewish school contest winners is converted to IQ. Such small differences mean nothing. We can compare: 1997 Finnish average IQ was measured as 1997, today it is given by Lynn as 101. 4 point difference, no genetic change. I would suggest that the Ashkenazi Jewish IQ is today the same as for Europeans, 100+-.

  94. @Almost Missouri
    So the fact that Christian societies expanded at the expense of non-Christian societies means that ... ?

    So the fact that Christian societies expanded at the expense of non-Christian societies means that … ?

    It means that in the early stages of the Jewish mind virus, whites still possessed the will to survive and flourish. Today, due to the ultimately dysgenic effects of the mind virus, the opposite is happening.

    Christianity was invented by Semites and weaponized to destroy us. Whether when they invented it they did so for the purpose of destroying whites and our civilization, is unknowable, but that’s the effect it’s had. I suspect, like so much else that surrounds Jews, it began as a simple intra-tribal dispute about a putative messiah (one of many) and then some really good salesmen took it to the next level. Today, however, it’s clearly used as a weapon to destroy us.

  95. Sorry the standard deviations are wrong. I have analyzed the correlations of IQ tests along with the standard deviations of many tests taken by the higher IQ groups mostly supplied by Ronald Hoeflin. Standard deviations tend toward 0 at IQ 212. This means a group with an average IQ of 107 would have a standard deviation of 15. Something is wrong with the samples. If you want to know what the high IQ people believe did out the soapbox survey given by Norman Treolar.

  96. If I’m reading this correctly the ave. IQ of White Catholics exclusive of non-whites is lower than that of all Catholics inclusive of non-whites. Highly suspect.

    • Replies: @Catiline
    Anyone else catch this?
    , @Stan d Mute

    If I’m reading this correctly the ave. IQ of White Catholics exclusive of non-whites is lower than that of all Catholics inclusive of non-whites.
     
    It would explain a lot wouldn’t it? How stupid must you be to not notice decade after decade the men in dresses buggering little boys in the confessional box? How stupid must you be to actively and obsessively import Africans anthropophagists, Asian coprophagists, and Jihadi Arabs into your tidy Catholic communities? And that the imported Catholics are smarter than the importers would seem self-evidently true - the importees want to live in the first world and the importers want to live in the third world.
  97. @Catiline
    If I'm reading this correctly the ave. IQ of White Catholics exclusive of non-whites is lower than that of all Catholics inclusive of non-whites. Highly suspect.

    Anyone else catch this?

  98. @Catiline
    If I'm reading this correctly the ave. IQ of White Catholics exclusive of non-whites is lower than that of all Catholics inclusive of non-whites. Highly suspect.

    If I’m reading this correctly the ave. IQ of White Catholics exclusive of non-whites is lower than that of all Catholics inclusive of non-whites.

    It would explain a lot wouldn’t it? How stupid must you be to not notice decade after decade the men in dresses buggering little boys in the confessional box? How stupid must you be to actively and obsessively import Africans anthropophagists, Asian coprophagists, and Jihadi Arabs into your tidy Catholic communities? And that the imported Catholics are smarter than the importers would seem self-evidently true – the importees want to live in the first world and the importers want to live in the third world.

    • Replies: @Catiline
    Hey Stan, that was a pretty stupid low IQ answer to a serious high IQ question. A question yet unanswered.
  99. @Stan d Mute

    If I’m reading this correctly the ave. IQ of White Catholics exclusive of non-whites is lower than that of all Catholics inclusive of non-whites.
     
    It would explain a lot wouldn’t it? How stupid must you be to not notice decade after decade the men in dresses buggering little boys in the confessional box? How stupid must you be to actively and obsessively import Africans anthropophagists, Asian coprophagists, and Jihadi Arabs into your tidy Catholic communities? And that the imported Catholics are smarter than the importers would seem self-evidently true - the importees want to live in the first world and the importers want to live in the third world.

    Hey Stan, that was a pretty stupid low IQ answer to a serious high IQ question. A question yet unanswered.

  100. @Conglomerate
    Do you have any ethnic or genetic data that you could combine with this IQ data? F.e. Episcopalians being largely elite Anglos and Baptists being Scot-Irish?
    Jews are obviously a different ethnic group, but are Episcopalians a distinct ethnic group with high IQ genes?

    I think lots of Episcopalians are upwardly mobile converts, who presumably would have higher IQs.

  101. @Gordo
    Scots-Irish are Presbyterian surely?

    I think lots of Scotch-Irish switched to Baptist in the backwoods of the Upper South.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS