The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Orangutan IQ: Nurture Over Nature
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

From the NYT:

Curious Orangutans, Raised by Humans, Do Better on Cognitive Tests

James Gorman
SCIENCE TAKE DEC. 12, 2017

A lot of human beings put a high value on curiosity, like parents who want to get their children into exclusive nursery schools.

in the wild take a different approach. These great apes that live mostly alone in the forests of Borneo and Sumatra, are quite cautious, as if they had heard the adage about the cat.

But orangutans who spend a lot of time with human beings when they are young turn out to be much more inquisitive, and, apparently as a result, better at all sorts of cognitive tests. …

In addition, a species thought to be incurious turned out to be quite curious in the right circumstances. So this was a matter of environmental influence, not genetic endowment. She said it was “striking” that the different environment could elicit curiosity in orangutans. “I think there is this dormant, inherited potential.”

 
Hide 97 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. This could explain why some ethnic groups from poor countries consistently do well in the US even into the 2nd and 3rd generation.

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature. If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50. This is simply because they are not in the habit of test-taking in a school-exam setting, and literacy was scarcer.

    But then why are US blacks still underperforming? They have every resource at their disposal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NickG

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.
     
    That's the PC Stephen Jay Gouldian view.

    Most of the evidence I have seen suggests otherwise, that with regards life outcomes and the underpinning cognitive ability, between nature and nurture, nature is well north of 50%, assuming any non abusive environment.

    There's lots of evidence out there, you can start with the Minnesota twin studies.

    , @radio

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.
     
    Science says it most certainly is not.

    What the hell's wrong with you?
    , @MJMD
    They have every resource at their disposal if they can survive the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos that most of them were crowded into from the First World War on (the worldview of TNC is not entirely a product of THC), or the Africa-like deprivation of rural Southern counties forgotten since the Civil War if not before. There's a reason the black intelligentsia is overrepresented by fey literary types like James Baldwin and comic book nerds like TNC: they were the ones holed up inside, reading, while all the truly terrible stuff was happening out on the street corner.

    This is why I find the lazy attribution of longstanding black under-performance to some mysterious, hereditary, genetic inferiority, for which no real evidence can be provided (especially given the fundamental genetic heterogeneity of American "black" people, who are nearly all of mixed ancestry) so infuriating. You simply cannot convince me that you've controlled for all of the other variables accumulated over two centuries of grim US history.
    , @Realist
    "If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50."

    Citation???
    , @Simon in London
    With Khoi-San hunter gatherers scoring 54 per Lynn, I doubt 1850 Englishmen would be scoring 50.
    , @kihowi

    If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50.
     
    ahahhahaahahah oh my god. I guess this what illiteracy sounds like.

    If you had ever read any 18th or 19th piece of literature or play for public consumption you'd have known that both the narrative and the use of language is much more sophisticated than what we are used to. They were written for a very intelligent general public.

    50 is absolutely laughable. How do you even arrive at something like that?

    , @Difference Maker
    Wrong
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. So, what is the article implying?

    That black kids raised by whites are more at ease and more curious whereas black kids raised by blacks are more about ‘survival’ and primal instincts?

    Solution? Let blacks have kids but let whites act as zookeepers and raise the kibblers?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Raised in captivity or raised by humans? It’s not surprising that healthier, better fed, disease-free animals would do better on cognitive tests, even though I find the assertion that one can measure animal intelligence in an absolute sense with current practices dubious at best.

    Crows in big cities, not raised by humans, also tend to be smarter than their country relatives. One way to test genes vs environment might be to take the progeny of city/country birds before hatching and switch their environment, let some time pass, collect them (radio tags), and then test them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    "Crows in big cities, not raised by humans, also tend to be smarter than their country relatives."

    I love crows! I've seen them at the top of the Sierras in wintertime. They're at the beaches in summer. Every state in the US I've visited has them. I saw them in Europe. They rule the world no matter how smart the city birds are or how dumb the country crows are.

    Steve had the city rats as a topic a while back. God bless the rats who don't look down on their country cousins. Crows and Rats! The real top of the food chain.
    , @Buffalo Joe
    Anon, in Massachusetts, not so long ago, they found large numbers of dead crows along I-95. They commissioned a study and found that the crows had been killed while feeding along the highway by passing trucks. Further study showed that while the Boston area crows could shout-out "Caw," they couldn't shout "truck."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. The Flynn effect for primates.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. So, by race denialist logic, if only we could properly adjust the environment (e.g. eliminate speciesism against orangutans), then we could close the Orangutan-human achievement gap?

    Read More
    • Replies: @J1234
    LOL. Well said.

    A lot of human beings put a high value on curiosity, like parents who want to get their children into exclusive nursery schools.

    Orangutans in the wild take a different approach. These great apes that live mostly alone in the forests of Borneo and Sumatra, are quite cautious
     

    Implies a kind of a false dichotomy. Curiosity and caution aren't really on different ends of the spectrum, as the article suggests. They're both a manifestation of instinct, but also of critical thinking, at least in creatures with larger brains. Curiosity about a raging fire isn't devoid of caution.

    Dr. Damerius said the research showed several things. It confirmed what is called the captivity effect, that time spent in a zoo or other safe environment promotes curiosity.
     
    Yes, a curiosity born out of boredom. The important question is, how does the "curiosity" displayed by apes raised in captivity enhance their lives as apes? From what I understand, poorly. Unless they're domesticated, most animals raised in captivity don't survive when re-introduced to the environment they evolved to. The idea that "we're all just primates" sort of becomes a modern form of anthropomorphism, even among people who should know better.
    , @edgeslider
    and we could get there faster by cucking human females with Orangutans
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.

    You are quick to jump on something that confirms your bias, aren’t you?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomm
    On the contrary, you are quick to attack something that conflicts with your bias, and then accuse the other person of what you are doing.

    Projection is another trait frequently displayed by blacks and WN wiggers (potayto, potahto).

    You also did not rebut Steve's main article.

    , @neutral
    Unless you can show that with correct nurture oran utans canequal humans, this goes beyond bias, it is simply laughable to believe that nurture overrides nature.
    , @Jake
    Naturally.

    This line of thought screams one thing to the Leftist: It takes a village to raise a child. And that sacrosanct writ direct from the god that is not Jehovah means that we must make parenting equal for all children, so all children can be equal in every way.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Obviously it follows that if we pour trillions of dollars of GDP each year into nurturing orang-utans, they will be winning the Fields Medal in–what, do you think 50 years would do it? 100? 150?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    They'd have a better shot at winning the Jungles Medal.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    It's only racism that's kept them from winning so far, I'll warrant!
    , @Buffalo Joe
    Olorin, if you placed 1000 orangutans at keyboards would they eventually surpass the writings of Ta nehisi Coates?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @Thomm
    This could explain why some ethnic groups from poor countries consistently do well in the US even into the 2nd and 3rd generation.

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature. If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50. This is simply because they are not in the habit of test-taking in a school-exam setting, and literacy was scarcer.

    But then why are US blacks still underperforming? They have every resource at their disposal.

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.

    That’s the PC Stephen Jay Gouldian view.

    Most of the evidence I have seen suggests otherwise, that with regards life outcomes and the underpinning cognitive ability, between nature and nurture, nature is well north of 50%, assuming any non abusive environment.

    There’s lots of evidence out there, you can start with the Minnesota twin studies.

    Read More
    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @Thomm

    between nature and nurture, nature is well north of 50%, assuming any non abusive environment.
     
    I say nature is a third or less. That is still substantial, but a lot less than half.

    As I said in the Comment #1, if 1800 white Americans or Britons had to sit to take a contemporary IQ test on the spot, the average IQ would come out to a very low number like 50, even if these people are biologically the same as their contemporary descendants.
    , @Sid
    What Richard Herrnstein pointed out is that nature becomes more important as nurture becomes more equalized, or at least higher quality for people in general.

    If you gave English peasants from 1800 modern IQ tests, yes, I am sure they would score abysmally. But if you raised them from childhood in a modern environment with modern education and sufficient nutrition, then they would match the scores of modern ethnic Englishmen.

    In contrast, give the same nurture to Australian Aborigines, and they'll still score abysmally, even if they can score better after certain kinds of upbringings than under other ones.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. @Twinkie

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.
     
    You are quick to jump on something that confirms your bias, aren’t you?

    On the contrary, you are quick to attack something that conflicts with your bias, and then accuse the other person of what you are doing.

    Projection is another trait frequently displayed by blacks and WN wiggers (potayto, potahto).

    You also did not rebut Steve’s main article.

    Read More
    • Troll: AndrewR
    • Replies: @DFH
    Rebut what?
    The idea that Orangutans become better at cognitive tasks when reared in a different environment?
    Why would that need to be rebutted?
    , @Twinkie

    Projection is another trait frequently displayed by blacks and WN wiggers (potayto, potahto).
     
    I guess you don’t know that I am ethnically East Asian.

    Nurture over nature? Try this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289617301757

    When you understand the article, let me know.

    On the contrary, you are quick to attack something that conflicts with your bias, and then accuse the other person of what you are doing.
     
    Except I am neither a pure hereditarian nor a pure environmentarian. You wouldn’t know my bias, because you seem to lack basic reading comprehension skills. Much like Mr. Sailer on most things I believe in nature + nurture. In my view, the two are not opposing forces, but usually mutually-reinforcing and auto-catalytic.
    , @Johann Ricke

    Projection is another trait frequently displayed by blacks and WN wiggers (potayto, potahto).
     
    FYI, "potayto, potahto" was just part of a whimsical line in a show tune. You will never hear anyone say "potahto" anywhere in the English-speaking world, except as part of that song. Tomahto, yes. Potahto, no.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. @Olorin
    Obviously it follows that if we pour trillions of dollars of GDP each year into nurturing orang-utans, they will be winning the Fields Medal in--what, do you think 50 years would do it? 100? 150?

    They’d have a better shot at winning the Jungles Medal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Olorin
    Sooner, too, is my guess.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @Thomm
    This could explain why some ethnic groups from poor countries consistently do well in the US even into the 2nd and 3rd generation.

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature. If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50. This is simply because they are not in the habit of test-taking in a school-exam setting, and literacy was scarcer.

    But then why are US blacks still underperforming? They have every resource at their disposal.

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.

    Science says it most certainly is not.

    What the hell’s wrong with you?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    Thommy Boy can't post on any thread without using the patently ridiculous expression "WN wiggers". All the idiocy that follows should be expected.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @Twinkie

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.
     
    You are quick to jump on something that confirms your bias, aren’t you?

    Unless you can show that with correct nurture oran utans canequal humans, this goes beyond bias, it is simply laughable to believe that nurture overrides nature.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    This is one of those “most [soft-matter] research is false”. Move on, nothing to see here. In this case, the conclusion and its implied extension are almost certainly wrong. So the people-accustomed apes did better on a series of tests that pretty much required being accustomed to strange stuff that surrounds humans. Big deal. To equate any of this with IQ is stupid.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. @Thomm
    This could explain why some ethnic groups from poor countries consistently do well in the US even into the 2nd and 3rd generation.

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature. If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50. This is simply because they are not in the habit of test-taking in a school-exam setting, and literacy was scarcer.

    But then why are US blacks still underperforming? They have every resource at their disposal.

    They have every resource at their disposal if they can survive the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos that most of them were crowded into from the First World War on (the worldview of TNC is not entirely a product of THC), or the Africa-like deprivation of rural Southern counties forgotten since the Civil War if not before. There’s a reason the black intelligentsia is overrepresented by fey literary types like James Baldwin and comic book nerds like TNC: they were the ones holed up inside, reading, while all the truly terrible stuff was happening out on the street corner.

    This is why I find the lazy attribution of longstanding black under-performance to some mysterious, hereditary, genetic inferiority, for which no real evidence can be provided (especially given the fundamental genetic heterogeneity of American “black” people, who are nearly all of mixed ancestry) so infuriating. You simply cannot convince me that you’ve controlled for all of the other variables accumulated over two centuries of grim US history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Selvar
    The children of upper class blacks generally have lower standardized test scores than the children of working class whites. Furthermore, the majority of blacks do not live in nightmarish ghettos or dilapidated rural areas. Black Americans have social and economic outcomes typical of other West African descended populations. There is also nothing particularly "tragic" about their history (as compared to everyone else's.) For example, take lynching: up until the mid 20th century something like 4,000 blacks were lynched over a 70 year time period. Compare that casualty rate to what was going on in Europe at the time.
    , @Yak-15
    You do realize that there are millions of African Americans who do not live in the conditions you cite and still score substantially worse than their equally wealthy, white and Asian peers? The richest black cohorts do worse all but the lowest white cohorts. You also realize that there are millions of whites who live in awful conditions who, on average, also test higher than rich blacks?

    http://www.jbhe.com/latest/index012209_p.html

    Continuing this logic, why don’t we see more Nobels, Fields Medals and high PISA scores from the rich Arab world?

    https://amp-businessinsider-com.cdn.ampproject.org/i/s/amp.businessinsider.com/images/58471001ba6eb6d3008b7bf9-750-1038.png

    Why has the black/white gap widened over the past 75 years despite the trillions we have spent on intervention?

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2017/02/01/race-gaps-in-sat-math-scores-are-as-big-as-ever/amp/

    If nurture is so powerful, is it that when twins raised apart are tested later in life that they show similar life outcomes, levels of intelligence, etc?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Twin_Family_Study

    On the flip side, why do Ashkenazi Jews represent 1/3 of all Nobel Prize winners, but their Asiatic Jewish cousins who also live in highly socialist Israel not show the same level of achievement?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_Nobel_laureates

    , @Simon in London
    "the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos"

    Why is their milieu violent & predatory? Why were the actual Jewish ghettos not 'violent & predatory'?
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country

    They have every resource at their disposal if they can survive the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos
     
    But who creates that violent, predatory melieu environment in poor black ghettos?

    I have seen very poor parts of cities in other parts in Asia. They have very little violence. Poor white areas in the United States have far less violence than equally poor black areas. Why?

    Perhaps you will say that historic racism has so destroyed black communities and culture that even generations later blacks can't pull themselves out of their violent ways. If so, what more can be done?

    For half a century (the original recipients will soon be becoming grandparents), whites have thrown hundreds of billions (trillions?) of dollars at the black community to pull them up to white standards. We have promoted utterly unqualified blacks to the middle class via government jobs and AA to provide examples to other blacks. The effort has failed.

    If blacks can't create reasonable communities with massive outside aid, they are simply incapable of doing so. We have too many examples of other races/peoples creating decent societies without any aid to believe that white racism/colonialism so corrupts a people that they are doomed forever.

    The simple answer is that the various population groups around the world evolved to fit their various environments and cultures. This led to certain traits to be emphasized and others to be bred out. Some races have the traits to excel in a modern, technological society and some don't.

    Of course, one could argue that whites are no longer well adapted to the current environment (welfare state, mass media, feminism) because our birthrate is so low and we've lost our will to defend our people while Africans are extremely well suited to take advantage of it.

    Times change. Traits that we extremely helpful in one era (non-kin altruism for whites from 1500 to 1965) become a negative in another (allowing non-whites to take over your societies for whites from 1965 to present).
    , @martin2
    Blacks occupy the same socio economic position vis a vis other races, wherever they settle. France, the UK, Holland also have blacks at the socio economic bottom, and at the top of all the negative social indices, crime, employment, academic lack of achievement, STDs. The reason is clearly genetic, that is to say, lower average intelligence.

    Blacks in the UK were never enslaved but they are at the bottom of all the positive social indices and at the top of all the negative ones. It appears to be the same the world over and the genetic lower IQ explanation is the only one that make sense, obviously. The low IQ explanation was recognised in earlier times, and the only reason people pretend to believe otherwise today is emotional/ideological. Race denialism is a really strange irrational phenomena but I suppose is explained in a similar fashion to religious belief. But race denialism is doing untold harm to the Western world, as one would expect since it is a systematic endorsement by society at large of a web of false beliefs about the world. If one pretends to believe P and P is in fact false then no good can come of it.

    , @Shitposter

    There’s a reason the black intelligentsia is overrepresented by fey literary types like James Baldwin and comic book nerds like TNC
     
    Don't those types make up the intelligentsia of every race?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @NickG

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.
     
    That's the PC Stephen Jay Gouldian view.

    Most of the evidence I have seen suggests otherwise, that with regards life outcomes and the underpinning cognitive ability, between nature and nurture, nature is well north of 50%, assuming any non abusive environment.

    There's lots of evidence out there, you can start with the Minnesota twin studies.

    between nature and nurture, nature is well north of 50%, assuming any non abusive environment.

    I say nature is a third or less. That is still substantial, but a lot less than half.

    As I said in the Comment #1, if 1800 white Americans or Britons had to sit to take a contemporary IQ test on the spot, the average IQ would come out to a very low number like 50, even if these people are biologically the same as their contemporary descendants.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    The science says otherwise. Multiple twin studies have shown that it is around 50%. Further, even 23&me cited a study claiming that it was up to 80% genetic by age 50 or so, meaning environment becomes less important with age.

    Even a genetic contribution of 30% could be very significant. A difference of 5-10 points between individuals is minor but the same difference between populations could be significant due to the Gaussian distribution of IQ. An average difference of 10 points between populations means that one population will have significantly more people in the genius column.

    Mexico and Japan is a example of that. Despite having similar population sizes, Japan has a much larger economy. Mexico had/has proximity to the US, oil wealth, a vast tourism industry, etc. while Japan has less land area and few natural resources. The fact that Japan has +15 IQ points on Mexico probably explains much of that.
    , @Coemgen

    if 1800 white Americans or Britons had to sit to take a contemporary IQ test on the spot, the average IQ would come out to a very low number
     
    If you compared persons with similar educations, on tests of arithmetic and English language skills, you would find the 1800s persons to be more intelligent.
    , @Yak-15
    You are looking at this in an incomplete way. I am a white guy who has spent many years of my life trying to sprint faster. Despite learning from dedicated speed coaches, reading over half dozen books on the subject and sprinting/jumping/lifting for hours on end, I never broke a 4.8 40 years dash.

    Clearly, if I did not spend time training and ate myself into obesity, I would have done substantially worse. That’s the nature.

    At the same time, my potential was capped. I could never break that time barrier because I reached the peak of my potential. By contrast, many less-devoted friends and teammates were able to easily run 4.6 40s or better.

    The construction is that there is a cap to potential that is entirely genetic and exhibits itself more evidently once nature is controlled for. Clearly, many of the worst cognitive drains - nutrition, disease and access to education are controlled for in the United States during the Internet age. Blacks have access to more information than Einstein and mostly choose not to pursue much beyond WurlStar and ESPN.
    , @JimB
    And I suppose Abraham Lincoln, who was raised in a log cabin, would have gotten a 50 on an IQ test, too. Writing the Gettysburg address and getting elected president was a complete fluke.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. The unspoken corollary to this is that orangutans raised by humans fail miserably at orangutan intelligence tests compared to orangutans raised by orangutans.

    That is, cut the human raised orangutans loose in a Borneo jungle or wherever they come from, they will probably all be dead in a week.

    So what is the story here?

    Read More
    • Agree: Buck, ben tillman
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    That is, cut the human raised orangutans loose in a Borneo jungle or wherever they come from, they will probably all be dead in a week.

     

    Yeah, actually that's an issue with this study. Are the human-raised orangutans actually smarter or infantile or naive? Who can say?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. In other news, you can train a dog if you put in the effort and do it properly — and if there’s a ‘cognitive test’ for dogs, a trained dog would probably do better than an untrained dog.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. @Dave Pinsen
    They'd have a better shot at winning the Jungles Medal.

    Sooner, too, is my guess.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @NickG

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.
     
    That's the PC Stephen Jay Gouldian view.

    Most of the evidence I have seen suggests otherwise, that with regards life outcomes and the underpinning cognitive ability, between nature and nurture, nature is well north of 50%, assuming any non abusive environment.

    There's lots of evidence out there, you can start with the Minnesota twin studies.

    What Richard Herrnstein pointed out is that nature becomes more important as nurture becomes more equalized, or at least higher quality for people in general.

    If you gave English peasants from 1800 modern IQ tests, yes, I am sure they would score abysmally. But if you raised them from childhood in a modern environment with modern education and sufficient nutrition, then they would match the scores of modern ethnic Englishmen.

    In contrast, give the same nurture to Australian Aborigines, and they’ll still score abysmally, even if they can score better after certain kinds of upbringings than under other ones.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Simon in London
    "they would match the scores of modern ethnic Englishmen."

    Given dysgenic reproduction since around 1850, I bet the 1800s would score higher.
    , @sj2001
    Exactly Nature sets the potential (i.e. limits), nurture determines the extent to which the potential is reached. This was commonly understood a hundred years ago. Not sure why so many modern people find it so difficult to grasp. (Probably has to do with political/social "philosophies" (ideologies) standing in the way of clear understanding.)

    And why should there be a fixed proportion of nature to nurture in the final result? Wouldn't the proportion depend on the particular nature and the particular nuture?

    , @Corvinus
    "If you gave English peasants from 1800 modern IQ tests, yes, I am sure they would score abysmally. But if you raised them from childhood in a modern environment with modern education and sufficient nutrition, then they would match the scores of modern ethnic Englishmen."

    They COULD match. And who is to say that these English peasants are likely to be motivated by our current educational system. Would not courses in agriculture be more up their alley?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. It’s really not clear what the “cognitive tests” are testing. Jumping to the conclusion that the chimps have been given a proxy IQ test is premature. The researchers seem to mostly be saying that the wild chimps are more cautious, not less smart.

    And the researchers had nothing to do with the selection and raising of the tame chimps and the selection of the control chimp, so there’s a blank there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. @Thomm
    On the contrary, you are quick to attack something that conflicts with your bias, and then accuse the other person of what you are doing.

    Projection is another trait frequently displayed by blacks and WN wiggers (potayto, potahto).

    You also did not rebut Steve's main article.

    Rebut what?
    The idea that Orangutans become better at cognitive tasks when reared in a different environment?
    Why would that need to be rebutted?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. @Thomm
    This could explain why some ethnic groups from poor countries consistently do well in the US even into the 2nd and 3rd generation.

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature. If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50. This is simply because they are not in the habit of test-taking in a school-exam setting, and literacy was scarcer.

    But then why are US blacks still underperforming? They have every resource at their disposal.

    “If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50.”

    Citation???

    Read More
    • Replies: @Gapeseed
    I would imagine most could not read.
    , @Jake
    If it were a written test, then all those who were not truly literate would flunk. The literacy rate in 1800 even in England and Scotland was not nearly what it would be in 1850.

    If an oral test featured matters that were primarily part of higher literate culture (say, knowing who Aristotle and Augustine were), then very smart people would flunk if they had only sufficient learning to read, write, and cypher on what to us is a 4th grade level.

    That truth always drives Liberals into insane hopefulness regarding blacks and some other non-whites (once we spend another 100 trillion dollars teaching them all to read, they will produce hordes of perfectly moral geniuses) , while simultaneously damning whites in those ages of non-mass literacy for being too stupid to have learned to read.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Oh no. From the WaPo. “Orangutan:Why I Will Not Allow My Children To Play With Whites.”

    Read More
    • LOL: jim jones
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    I normally do not use the barbarism “LOL”, but I did laugh out loud, so LOL!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. “That’s not who we are.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. bored identity just checked his HBO privilege, and now he thinks that Orangutan is New Black.

    wall-painting-mural-artwork-art-of-hip-hop-ape-orangutan-wearing-vw-drjjc1.jpg (JPEG Image, 346 × 540 pixels)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. “Monkey see, monkey do” Primates are imitative.

    A child adopted by a musical family is more likely to learn an instrument, a child taken by the Lord’s Resistance Army is more likely to be a killer, a Christian child selected for the Janissaries was 100% certain to be a fanatical Muslim or dead.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirme

    I don’t think anyone (except maybe Jayman?) thinks nurture makes NO difference – but only major nurture changes would make major behavioural changes. And presumably a bright, competent child taken by LRA would still be a bright, competent killer, while a dimwit would still be a dimwitted killer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. @MJMD
    They have every resource at their disposal if they can survive the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos that most of them were crowded into from the First World War on (the worldview of TNC is not entirely a product of THC), or the Africa-like deprivation of rural Southern counties forgotten since the Civil War if not before. There's a reason the black intelligentsia is overrepresented by fey literary types like James Baldwin and comic book nerds like TNC: they were the ones holed up inside, reading, while all the truly terrible stuff was happening out on the street corner.

    This is why I find the lazy attribution of longstanding black under-performance to some mysterious, hereditary, genetic inferiority, for which no real evidence can be provided (especially given the fundamental genetic heterogeneity of American "black" people, who are nearly all of mixed ancestry) so infuriating. You simply cannot convince me that you've controlled for all of the other variables accumulated over two centuries of grim US history.

    The children of upper class blacks generally have lower standardized test scores than the children of working class whites. Furthermore, the majority of blacks do not live in nightmarish ghettos or dilapidated rural areas. Black Americans have social and economic outcomes typical of other West African descended populations. There is also nothing particularly “tragic” about their history (as compared to everyone else’s.) For example, take lynching: up until the mid 20th century something like 4,000 blacks were lynched over a 70 year time period. Compare that casualty rate to what was going on in Europe at the time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Thomm

    between nature and nurture, nature is well north of 50%, assuming any non abusive environment.
     
    I say nature is a third or less. That is still substantial, but a lot less than half.

    As I said in the Comment #1, if 1800 white Americans or Britons had to sit to take a contemporary IQ test on the spot, the average IQ would come out to a very low number like 50, even if these people are biologically the same as their contemporary descendants.

    The science says otherwise. Multiple twin studies have shown that it is around 50%. Further, even 23&me cited a study claiming that it was up to 80% genetic by age 50 or so, meaning environment becomes less important with age.

    Even a genetic contribution of 30% could be very significant. A difference of 5-10 points between individuals is minor but the same difference between populations could be significant due to the Gaussian distribution of IQ. An average difference of 10 points between populations means that one population will have significantly more people in the genius column.

    Mexico and Japan is a example of that. Despite having similar population sizes, Japan has a much larger economy. Mexico had/has proximity to the US, oil wealth, a vast tourism industry, etc. while Japan has less land area and few natural resources. The fact that Japan has +15 IQ points on Mexico probably explains much of that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    “If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50.”

    And if I underwatered a house plant, its growth would be retarded. However, if I gave it copious amounts every day, is it reasonable for me to believe it will grow as large as an oak?

    England circa 1800 probably didn’t have the best environment for developing brains either.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. @Thomm

    between nature and nurture, nature is well north of 50%, assuming any non abusive environment.
     
    I say nature is a third or less. That is still substantial, but a lot less than half.

    As I said in the Comment #1, if 1800 white Americans or Britons had to sit to take a contemporary IQ test on the spot, the average IQ would come out to a very low number like 50, even if these people are biologically the same as their contemporary descendants.

    if 1800 white Americans or Britons had to sit to take a contemporary IQ test on the spot, the average IQ would come out to a very low number

    If you compared persons with similar educations, on tests of arithmetic and English language skills, you would find the 1800s persons to be more intelligent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. OT

    Chinese authorities are collecting DNA samples, fingerprints and other biometric data from every resident in a far western region, Human Rights Watch has said.

    Officials are also building a database of iris scans and blood types of everyone aged between 12 and 65 in Xinjiang, adding to controls in a place some experts have called an “open-air prison”.

    The region is home to over 11 million Uighurs, a Muslim Turkic minority, and is occasionally hit by bouts of violence.

    The data can be used for “surveillance of persons because of ethnicity, religion, opinion or other protected exercise of rights like free speech”, according to Human Rights Watch.

    Part of the collection is being done through government-provided medical checkups, and it is unclear if patients are aware the exam is also designed to transmit biometric data to the police.

    Although the checks are officially voluntary, one Uighur said local cadres “had demanded that they must participate in the physicals”. A story in a local newspaper encouraged officials to “work hard to convince them to participate”.

    Nearly 19 million people have participated in the medical exams, dubbed Physicals for All, in 2017, according to state news agency Xinhua. For people determined to be “focus personnel” – a euphemism for those the government views as dangerous – their data will be collected regardless of age.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/13/chinese-authorities-collecting-dna-residents-xinjiang

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. @Realist
    "If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50."

    Citation???

    I would imagine most could not read.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @Twinkie

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.
     
    You are quick to jump on something that confirms your bias, aren’t you?

    Naturally.

    This line of thought screams one thing to the Leftist: It takes a village to raise a child. And that sacrosanct writ direct from the god that is not Jehovah means that we must make parenting equal for all children, so all children can be equal in every way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. @MJMD
    They have every resource at their disposal if they can survive the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos that most of them were crowded into from the First World War on (the worldview of TNC is not entirely a product of THC), or the Africa-like deprivation of rural Southern counties forgotten since the Civil War if not before. There's a reason the black intelligentsia is overrepresented by fey literary types like James Baldwin and comic book nerds like TNC: they were the ones holed up inside, reading, while all the truly terrible stuff was happening out on the street corner.

    This is why I find the lazy attribution of longstanding black under-performance to some mysterious, hereditary, genetic inferiority, for which no real evidence can be provided (especially given the fundamental genetic heterogeneity of American "black" people, who are nearly all of mixed ancestry) so infuriating. You simply cannot convince me that you've controlled for all of the other variables accumulated over two centuries of grim US history.

    You do realize that there are millions of African Americans who do not live in the conditions you cite and still score substantially worse than their equally wealthy, white and Asian peers? The richest black cohorts do worse all but the lowest white cohorts. You also realize that there are millions of whites who live in awful conditions who, on average, also test higher than rich blacks?

    http://www.jbhe.com/latest/index012209_p.html

    Continuing this logic, why don’t we see more Nobels, Fields Medals and high PISA scores from the rich Arab world?

    Why has the black/white gap widened over the past 75 years despite the trillions we have spent on intervention?

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2017/02/01/race-gaps-in-sat-math-scores-are-as-big-as-ever/amp/

    If nurture is so powerful, is it that when twins raised apart are tested later in life that they show similar life outcomes, levels of intelligence, etc?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Twin_Family_Study

    On the flip side, why do Ashkenazi Jews represent 1/3 of all Nobel Prize winners, but their Asiatic Jewish cousins who also live in highly socialist Israel not show the same level of achievement?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_Nobel_laureates

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wilhelm Johnson
    You can increase results with good schools. If you take Sweden as an example;


    1. The policy documents that are supposed to regulate the schools are mostly filled with far-left normative guidelines about morality rather than knowledge. More so, it is simply impossible to understand these documents. It is like a slight retarded teenaged SJW had written them. The policy documents have some really insane crap such as teachers should not teach but instead let the kids search for the knowledge themselves through Google. The old cathodes teaching is more or less banned. Good schools and teachers regardless of what the Education boards tell them tend to do the opposite and are sometimes penalized for it. Government have started a war against conservative private schools. Apparently, kids there learn too much and that is “unfair” according to the liberal politicians, teachers unions and pedagogy professors.

    2. Once upon a time Swedish children focused on Mathematics, Swedish, English, Biology, Chemistry, Physics and Mechanics and had non-gradable PT-classes. However, the elites reduced the hours of these fields and introduced art, housecraft, music, history, religious studies, social science, cultural-geography, handcraft and physical education. Some of these fields are utterly are just an excuse for the government, unions and teachers (most of the far-left) to spree propaganda to the kids. A sane person would cut some of these fields instantly and physical education would turn into the old non-grade PT class. Recently, there have been a discussion if “Feminist studies” should be an obligatory field in Swedish Schools. It would replace biology.

    3. About a decade ago the Swedish government decided to cut special classes for kids with disabilities and temporary special classes for kids that constantly destroyed classes. In fact, government even cut most teachers focusing on kids with special needs. Instead regular teachers are supposed to hold classes that house kids that constantly start trouble or with severe dyslexia. Teachers receive little or no help. Because of this most kids see most lectures ruined.

    4. Swedish school books are filled with leftist propaganda. Most of them are impossible to understand even for adults as books are often written by leftist journalists. Did I mention that some schools do not even use books? They rely on the kids finding the knowledge themselves through Google. Kids nowadays do not even have home work because teachers, unions and politicians think it is “oppressive”.

    5. Standardized tests are not used and teachers and teachers unions do their best to keep them away from schools. In fact many teachers are keen on group assignments and oral presentations. Some teachers do have tests and it is common to give the answers before the test, let the kids discuss the questions before the tests or just let the kids have their books. Im not kidding with you. This is the norm in Swedish schools.

    6. Swedish teacher’s education is a total joke. A secondary school and high school teacher spend 1 to 1.5 years in these institutions and learn nothing and I mean absolutely nothing. Once upon a time Swedish school teachers were very educated by international standards. For example, a secondary school and high school teacher would spend years reading history. In the 1980s the socialist regime decided that one semester of for example history were enough to teach secondary school and that field would be learned at the teachers colleges. However, they did not touch high school so these future teachers were able to attend the university before they had so suffer through teachers college. The centre-right Swedish government made some slight changes in 2006 increasing these six months to a year for secondary school teachers.

    They also took away some rights for the teachers colleges and even closed a few teachers colleges. This caused uproar among teachers unions as they hate knowledge. Today, students in teaching programs have to read their subjects at the university. Still, a few fields at the university are still a mess as they are designed for teacher’s students. However, since a decade back students is able take regular courses instead with other students thus avoiding these pre-designed teachers courses. Hence, a student studying to become a teacher would just read history with history majors instead of taking courses in history designed for teacher’s students.

    If you want to avoid the insanity from the start you can just get all the university credits in what you want to teach in and jump into a teacher college for three semesters (1.5 years). To lure people into the profession government has offered all kinds of students to take up teaching with short program (one year) and designed programs such as engineering program that also gives you a degree in education - Just 1/3 of these students ever go into teaching. Of course: The unions, leftist politicians, teachers and others have fought about this development. These people hate to have educated people in schools.

    ....................

    I could go on and on about the failure of Swedish Schools are fail but these are just some of the reasons why Sweden go down in Pisa.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @Thomm

    between nature and nurture, nature is well north of 50%, assuming any non abusive environment.
     
    I say nature is a third or less. That is still substantial, but a lot less than half.

    As I said in the Comment #1, if 1800 white Americans or Britons had to sit to take a contemporary IQ test on the spot, the average IQ would come out to a very low number like 50, even if these people are biologically the same as their contemporary descendants.

    You are looking at this in an incomplete way. I am a white guy who has spent many years of my life trying to sprint faster. Despite learning from dedicated speed coaches, reading over half dozen books on the subject and sprinting/jumping/lifting for hours on end, I never broke a 4.8 40 years dash.

    Clearly, if I did not spend time training and ate myself into obesity, I would have done substantially worse. That’s the nature.

    At the same time, my potential was capped. I could never break that time barrier because I reached the peak of my potential. By contrast, many less-devoted friends and teammates were able to easily run 4.6 40s or better.

    The construction is that there is a cap to potential that is entirely genetic and exhibits itself more evidently once nature is controlled for. Clearly, many of the worst cognitive drains – nutrition, disease and access to education are controlled for in the United States during the Internet age. Blacks have access to more information than Einstein and mostly choose not to pursue much beyond WurlStar and ESPN.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Obviously, we need more Nice White Ladies to forgo having their own families so they can dedicate more time to raising the cognitive ability of Orangutan-Americans. That gap ain’t gonna close itself.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  37. @Realist
    "If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50."

    Citation???

    If it were a written test, then all those who were not truly literate would flunk. The literacy rate in 1800 even in England and Scotland was not nearly what it would be in 1850.

    If an oral test featured matters that were primarily part of higher literate culture (say, knowing who Aristotle and Augustine were), then very smart people would flunk if they had only sufficient learning to read, write, and cypher on what to us is a 4th grade level.

    That truth always drives Liberals into insane hopefulness regarding blacks and some other non-whites (once we spend another 100 trillion dollars teaching them all to read, they will produce hordes of perfectly moral geniuses) , while simultaneously damning whites in those ages of non-mass literacy for being too stupid to have learned to read.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. The article says that orangutans raised in captivity instead of their natural environment are more curious and less cautious. The article calls this the “captivity effect”.

    So the answer is lots and lots of cages, free kibble, little wooden boxes to play with, and lots of bright colors and patterns.

    And here I thought the problem was the “school to prison pipeline”. A nice, safe prison is not the problem, it is the solution.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. @Thomm
    This could explain why some ethnic groups from poor countries consistently do well in the US even into the 2nd and 3rd generation.

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature. If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50. This is simply because they are not in the habit of test-taking in a school-exam setting, and literacy was scarcer.

    But then why are US blacks still underperforming? They have every resource at their disposal.

    With Khoi-San hunter gatherers scoring 54 per Lynn, I doubt 1850 Englishmen would be scoring 50.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @MJMD
    They have every resource at their disposal if they can survive the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos that most of them were crowded into from the First World War on (the worldview of TNC is not entirely a product of THC), or the Africa-like deprivation of rural Southern counties forgotten since the Civil War if not before. There's a reason the black intelligentsia is overrepresented by fey literary types like James Baldwin and comic book nerds like TNC: they were the ones holed up inside, reading, while all the truly terrible stuff was happening out on the street corner.

    This is why I find the lazy attribution of longstanding black under-performance to some mysterious, hereditary, genetic inferiority, for which no real evidence can be provided (especially given the fundamental genetic heterogeneity of American "black" people, who are nearly all of mixed ancestry) so infuriating. You simply cannot convince me that you've controlled for all of the other variables accumulated over two centuries of grim US history.

    “the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos”

    Why is their milieu violent & predatory? Why were the actual Jewish ghettos not ‘violent & predatory’?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    It's because of the mind control waves and aggression-enhancing drugs sent into the black ghettos by Whitey!
    , @MBlanc46
    Of course you are aware that black American neighborhoods are violent and predatory because of white privilege and microaggressions.
    , @MJMD
    I actually suspect a lot of Jewish ghettos were violent and predatory, more so than is acknowledged today, but that this was mitigated by other factors in addition to what is probably high Jewish mean intelligence:

    1) a stronger Jewish literary and religious culture, obviously;

    2) historically greater levels of murderous anti-Jewish violence that strengthened solidarity within the ghetto. Slavery is of course a form of violence, but blacks were valuable to have around as a source of labour even after the Civil War, while Jews were seen by most Medieval peasants as a source only of heresy and debt.

    Despite incidents like the Rosewood massacre, black ghettos overall weren't subject to nearly so many incidents of murderous pogroms (even if you exclude WW2!).

    3) the absence of firearms, which would've made criminality riskier, less lethal, and more targeted.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Sid
    What Richard Herrnstein pointed out is that nature becomes more important as nurture becomes more equalized, or at least higher quality for people in general.

    If you gave English peasants from 1800 modern IQ tests, yes, I am sure they would score abysmally. But if you raised them from childhood in a modern environment with modern education and sufficient nutrition, then they would match the scores of modern ethnic Englishmen.

    In contrast, give the same nurture to Australian Aborigines, and they'll still score abysmally, even if they can score better after certain kinds of upbringings than under other ones.

    “they would match the scores of modern ethnic Englishmen.”

    Given dysgenic reproduction since around 1850, I bet the 1800s would score higher.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sid
    Good point!

    It'll be interesting if population genetics reaches a point in the future where scientists can estimate what average IQs might have been in the past.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. We wuz ‘tangs!

    Read More
    • LOL: Kylie
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  43. @Sid
    What Richard Herrnstein pointed out is that nature becomes more important as nurture becomes more equalized, or at least higher quality for people in general.

    If you gave English peasants from 1800 modern IQ tests, yes, I am sure they would score abysmally. But if you raised them from childhood in a modern environment with modern education and sufficient nutrition, then they would match the scores of modern ethnic Englishmen.

    In contrast, give the same nurture to Australian Aborigines, and they'll still score abysmally, even if they can score better after certain kinds of upbringings than under other ones.

    Exactly Nature sets the potential (i.e. limits), nurture determines the extent to which the potential is reached. This was commonly understood a hundred years ago. Not sure why so many modern people find it so difficult to grasp. (Probably has to do with political/social “philosophies” (ideologies) standing in the way of clear understanding.)

    And why should there be a fixed proportion of nature to nurture in the final result? Wouldn’t the proportion depend on the particular nature and the particular nuture?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. This is strange since captive-bred animals have smaller brains.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  45. In addition, a species thought to be incurious turned out to be quite curious in the right circumstances. So this was a matter of environmental influence, not genetic endowment. She said it was “striking” that the different environment could elicit curiosity in orangutans. “I think there is this dormant, inherited potential.”

    How exactly does evolution manage to select for a “dormant” trait in an animal species?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Toddy Cat
    “I think there is this dormant, inherited potential."

    To quote Noam Chomsky (!) on "dormant, inherited potential" in animals (in this case language), "This is as likely as humans finding a species of flightless bird that was physically capable of flying, but was only waiting for humans to come along and teach it to fly."

    Animals are amazing, and, as it turns out, have much richer interior lives than we had thought. But, given the current replication crisis in the sciences, I'll reserve judgement. This is just a bit too convenient.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    Basically a recessive gene that is beneficial in some circumstances but not others - for example, some salmon males are "jacks" that are smaller and avoid fighting other males to impregnate eggs on the sly. Its not a useful strategy if all males become jacks - but useful if most of them are not.

    Psychopathy could be a similar trait in humans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. In addition, a species thought to be incurious turned out to be quite curious in the right circumstances.

    Orangs in captivity have long been known for their skill at lockpicking. Just do a search if you don’t believe me.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. @D. K.

    In addition, a species thought to be incurious turned out to be quite curious in the right circumstances. So this was a matter of environmental influence, not genetic endowment. She said it was “striking” that the different environment could elicit curiosity in orangutans. “I think there is this dormant, inherited potential.”
     
    How exactly does evolution manage to select for a "dormant" trait in an animal species?

    “I think there is this dormant, inherited potential.”

    To quote Noam Chomsky (!) on “dormant, inherited potential” in animals (in this case language), “This is as likely as humans finding a species of flightless bird that was physically capable of flying, but was only waiting for humans to come along and teach it to fly.”

    Animals are amazing, and, as it turns out, have much richer interior lives than we had thought. But, given the current replication crisis in the sciences, I’ll reserve judgement. This is just a bit too convenient.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Clint Eastwood had it every which way right about orangutans.

    “Right turn, Clyde.”

    “Scrap the Caddy, Clyde.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  49. @DFH
    So, by race denialist logic, if only we could properly adjust the environment (e.g. eliminate speciesism against orangutans), then we could close the Orangutan-human achievement gap?

    LOL. Well said.

    A lot of human beings put a high value on curiosity, like parents who want to get their children into exclusive nursery schools.

    Orangutans in the wild take a different approach. These great apes that live mostly alone in the forests of Borneo and Sumatra, are quite cautious

    Implies a kind of a false dichotomy. Curiosity and caution aren’t really on different ends of the spectrum, as the article suggests. They’re both a manifestation of instinct, but also of critical thinking, at least in creatures with larger brains. Curiosity about a raging fire isn’t devoid of caution.

    Dr. Damerius said the research showed several things. It confirmed what is called the captivity effect, that time spent in a zoo or other safe environment promotes curiosity.

    Yes, a curiosity born out of boredom. The important question is, how does the “curiosity” displayed by apes raised in captivity enhance their lives as apes? From what I understand, poorly. Unless they’re domesticated, most animals raised in captivity don’t survive when re-introduced to the environment they evolved to. The idea that “we’re all just primates” sort of becomes a modern form of anthropomorphism, even among people who should know better.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. The fact remains that this ridiculous study was most likely funded through Federal research grants. The only thing it proves is that researchers are highly successful at maintaining a comfortable lifestyle provided by less educated taxpaying rubes.

    When the history of the end of the American republic is written, at least a chapter will be dedicated to the inefficient use of human capital and resources studying minutiae. It is fiddling while Rome burns. We are $20 trillion in debt yet somehow this junk science is considered “vital” research. It’s expensive to subsidize a million PhDs to study the modern equivalent of Astrology.

    Apparently, the researchers are in Switzerland…so carry on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  51. “in the wild take a different approach. These great apes that live mostly alone in the forests of Borneo and Sumatra, are quite cautious, as if they had heard the adage about the cat.

    But orangutans who spend a lot of time with human beings when they are young turn out to be much more inquisitive, and, apparently as a result, better at all sorts of cognitive tests. …”

    The ultimate congnitve test is surviving I guess. Anyone want to speculate on the prospects of the latter orangutans if they were released cold turkey in the wilds?

    Guess I should ruminate and polish my message. But a lot of behaviors and traits we have now are not of… universal utility? Change the rules, open the door of the hothouse and let winter in, then we see how useful it is.

    Maybe we’ll never again see the kind of world that was the rule prior to … the Industrial Revolution (you could pick any number of forking points)? But a social milieu like Russia post Gorbachev to Putin would be a rude awakening to most Americans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  52. There is pretty good evidence that nurture has certain effects, of course. This can be seen even from neural connections in scans in meta studies and some evidence of transfer effects. Doesn’t make blank statism true, though.

    The idea that either nature or nurture is 100% is silly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. @MJMD
    They have every resource at their disposal if they can survive the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos that most of them were crowded into from the First World War on (the worldview of TNC is not entirely a product of THC), or the Africa-like deprivation of rural Southern counties forgotten since the Civil War if not before. There's a reason the black intelligentsia is overrepresented by fey literary types like James Baldwin and comic book nerds like TNC: they were the ones holed up inside, reading, while all the truly terrible stuff was happening out on the street corner.

    This is why I find the lazy attribution of longstanding black under-performance to some mysterious, hereditary, genetic inferiority, for which no real evidence can be provided (especially given the fundamental genetic heterogeneity of American "black" people, who are nearly all of mixed ancestry) so infuriating. You simply cannot convince me that you've controlled for all of the other variables accumulated over two centuries of grim US history.

    They have every resource at their disposal if they can survive the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos

    But who creates that violent, predatory melieu environment in poor black ghettos?

    I have seen very poor parts of cities in other parts in Asia. They have very little violence. Poor white areas in the United States have far less violence than equally poor black areas. Why?

    Perhaps you will say that historic racism has so destroyed black communities and culture that even generations later blacks can’t pull themselves out of their violent ways. If so, what more can be done?

    For half a century (the original recipients will soon be becoming grandparents), whites have thrown hundreds of billions (trillions?) of dollars at the black community to pull them up to white standards. We have promoted utterly unqualified blacks to the middle class via government jobs and AA to provide examples to other blacks. The effort has failed.

    If blacks can’t create reasonable communities with massive outside aid, they are simply incapable of doing so. We have too many examples of other races/peoples creating decent societies without any aid to believe that white racism/colonialism so corrupts a people that they are doomed forever.

    The simple answer is that the various population groups around the world evolved to fit their various environments and cultures. This led to certain traits to be emphasized and others to be bred out. Some races have the traits to excel in a modern, technological society and some don’t.

    Of course, one could argue that whites are no longer well adapted to the current environment (welfare state, mass media, feminism) because our birthrate is so low and we’ve lost our will to defend our people while Africans are extremely well suited to take advantage of it.

    Times change. Traits that we extremely helpful in one era (non-kin altruism for whites from 1500 to 1965) become a negative in another (allowing non-whites to take over your societies for whites from 1965 to present).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @D. K.

    In addition, a species thought to be incurious turned out to be quite curious in the right circumstances. So this was a matter of environmental influence, not genetic endowment. She said it was “striking” that the different environment could elicit curiosity in orangutans. “I think there is this dormant, inherited potential.”
     
    How exactly does evolution manage to select for a "dormant" trait in an animal species?

    Basically a recessive gene that is beneficial in some circumstances but not others – for example, some salmon males are “jacks” that are smaller and avoid fighting other males to impregnate eggs on the sly. Its not a useful strategy if all males become jacks – but useful if most of them are not.

    Psychopathy could be a similar trait in humans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @Olorin
    Obviously it follows that if we pour trillions of dollars of GDP each year into nurturing orang-utans, they will be winning the Fields Medal in--what, do you think 50 years would do it? 100? 150?

    It’s only racism that’s kept them from winning so far, I’ll warrant!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @anonguy
    The unspoken corollary to this is that orangutans raised by humans fail miserably at orangutan intelligence tests compared to orangutans raised by orangutans.

    That is, cut the human raised orangutans loose in a Borneo jungle or wherever they come from, they will probably all be dead in a week.

    So what is the story here?

    That is, cut the human raised orangutans loose in a Borneo jungle or wherever they come from, they will probably all be dead in a week.

    Yeah, actually that’s an issue with this study. Are the human-raised orangutans actually smarter or infantile or naive? Who can say?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @Thomm

    between nature and nurture, nature is well north of 50%, assuming any non abusive environment.
     
    I say nature is a third or less. That is still substantial, but a lot less than half.

    As I said in the Comment #1, if 1800 white Americans or Britons had to sit to take a contemporary IQ test on the spot, the average IQ would come out to a very low number like 50, even if these people are biologically the same as their contemporary descendants.

    And I suppose Abraham Lincoln, who was raised in a log cabin, would have gotten a 50 on an IQ test, too. Writing the Gettysburg address and getting elected president was a complete fluke.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Simon in London
    "the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos"

    Why is their milieu violent & predatory? Why were the actual Jewish ghettos not 'violent & predatory'?

    It’s because of the mind control waves and aggression-enhancing drugs sent into the black ghettos by Whitey!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Dogs are more likely learn tricks with humans than with other dogs.

    Uh-duuuuuuuuuh

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  60. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. @Anon
    Raised in captivity or raised by humans? It's not surprising that healthier, better fed, disease-free animals would do better on cognitive tests, even though I find the assertion that one can measure animal intelligence in an absolute sense with current practices dubious at best.

    Crows in big cities, not raised by humans, also tend to be smarter than their country relatives. One way to test genes vs environment might be to take the progeny of city/country birds before hatching and switch their environment, let some time pass, collect them (radio tags), and then test them.

    “Crows in big cities, not raised by humans, also tend to be smarter than their country relatives.”

    I love crows! I’ve seen them at the top of the Sierras in wintertime. They’re at the beaches in summer. Every state in the US I’ve visited has them. I saw them in Europe. They rule the world no matter how smart the city birds are or how dumb the country crows are.

    Steve had the city rats as a topic a while back. God bless the rats who don’t look down on their country cousins. Crows and Rats! The real top of the food chain.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. In related news, Nobel Prize winner Jim Heckman has been pushing the idea that we should have the government take over the care of the young children of underclass blacks, starting from birth. It’s for our own good, he says. Every week or so, there’s another article like this one:

    Preschool pays off for decades

    http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/2017/12/11/preschool-pays-off-decades/

    “Researchers analyzed decades of information from two government- funded early childhood programs that served disadvantaged kids from birth to age five. One of these programs, ABC/Care offered cognitive, social emotional and physical development. Heckman said for every dollar spent on this program, there was a return of more than six dollars.”

    “Professor Heckman said there is a two-generation impact from high-quality childhood education. Mothers are able to continue their education and enter the workforce due to the availability of child care.”

    Heckman thinks underclass black mothers are so spectacularly inept at taking care of their babies that it’s worth paying a lot of money to have someone else take care of those babies. Of course it would be impossible to have the government only take care of underclass black infants and not poor white and poor Hispanic infants, and presumably there’s not such a big pay off from having the government raise those kids, but the Heckman propaganda is that the mothers of all “disadvantaged” babies should have the option of letting the government raise their kids. And then it would probably not be politically possible to not give free childcare to mothers who are not “disadvantaged”. A trillion here, a trillion there, and soon you’re talking about a lot of money.

    One potential problem that occurs to me is that lessening the burden of childcare on women who should not be having children is that it would encourage such women to have even more children. And maybe mothers who won’t finish their education if the government does not provide childcare should have waited until they’d finished their education before having babies.

    Of course a much better and cheaper way to improve the quality of people living in the USA would be to kick out the illegals and to stop letting in low-quality people, especially people of the sort that Heckman thinks can’t raise their own children properly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. To me what’s interesting is that Leftists subconsciously equate apes to black people, which is why these types of studies get so much attention. I remember back in the day, there were innumerable reports about a gorilla which had supposedly been taught sign language.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  64. This ‘nature’ calls for better ‘nurture’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  65. I’d sure like to see a video of the IQ “test” being administered to the jungle Orangutans.
    It’s curiously not even described, even though it’s the operating premise of the article.
    It’s as if the author of the article either believes the reader is stupid, or perhaps the author is an idiot, or both, which begs the question, why the editor’s bother allowing this sad thing to be produced?
    It just makes their publication look bad, as to be a subject of ridicule, so what’s the point? I mean… WHY?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  66. Apoptosis: noun, the death of cells that occurs as a normal and controlled part of an organism’s growth or development.

    Humans lose a very large percentage of brain cells in the first few years of life. Most of the cells that are lost are those that are not used in the environment in which they are reared.

    Potentials that are not used are weakened or discarded, potentials that are used are strengthened.

    And we are surprised that orangutans are not different … why?

    Read More
    • Agree: Bernardista
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  67. [W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending
    with Orangutans unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution
    was made only for a moral and religious Orangutan. It is wholly inadequate to the
    government of any other.

    Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams,
    Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  68. @Thomm
    This could explain why some ethnic groups from poor countries consistently do well in the US even into the 2nd and 3rd generation.

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature. If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50. This is simply because they are not in the habit of test-taking in a school-exam setting, and literacy was scarcer.

    But then why are US blacks still underperforming? They have every resource at their disposal.

    If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50.

    ahahhahaahahah oh my god. I guess this what illiteracy sounds like.

    If you had ever read any 18th or 19th piece of literature or play for public consumption you’d have known that both the narrative and the use of language is much more sophisticated than what we are used to. They were written for a very intelligent general public.

    50 is absolutely laughable. How do you even arrive at something like that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomm
    Dude, there was still substantial illiteracy everywhere (including Britain and the US) in 1800. That was partly due to many children not even being in school at all (and hence not accustomed to test-taking, so certainly not in a position to do well in a modern IQ test if they were told to take one on the spot by testers from 2017).

    It seems you and a couple of others thinks that Britain had full literacy even in the Middle Ages.

    The literature you mention was still c0nsumed only by the top 10% of the population.

    I know WNs don't know how to read graphs and charts, but I will still post a chart of literacy in England over the period in question :

    https://ourworldindata.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/literacy-in-england-1580-1920-clark-2008.png

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Did the orangutan success vary with the ethnic background of the humans?

    Does this mean that we are headed for Planet of the Apes?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  70. @Father O'Hara
    Oh no. From the WaPo. "Orangutan:Why I Will Not Allow My Children To Play With Whites."

    I normally do not use the barbarism “LOL”, but I did laugh out loud, so LOL!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @Sid
    What Richard Herrnstein pointed out is that nature becomes more important as nurture becomes more equalized, or at least higher quality for people in general.

    If you gave English peasants from 1800 modern IQ tests, yes, I am sure they would score abysmally. But if you raised them from childhood in a modern environment with modern education and sufficient nutrition, then they would match the scores of modern ethnic Englishmen.

    In contrast, give the same nurture to Australian Aborigines, and they'll still score abysmally, even if they can score better after certain kinds of upbringings than under other ones.

    “If you gave English peasants from 1800 modern IQ tests, yes, I am sure they would score abysmally. But if you raised them from childhood in a modern environment with modern education and sufficient nutrition, then they would match the scores of modern ethnic Englishmen.”

    They COULD match. And who is to say that these English peasants are likely to be motivated by our current educational system. Would not courses in agriculture be more up their alley?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Simon in London
    "the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos"

    Why is their milieu violent & predatory? Why were the actual Jewish ghettos not 'violent & predatory'?

    Of course you are aware that black American neighborhoods are violent and predatory because of white privilege and microaggressions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. I’ve been wondering if children from divorced families have lower curiosity all things controlled.

    I think if your parents divorce it lops off your ability to judge and seek answers. You don’t want to seek answers anymore because what you may find is so personally hurtful.

    Fascinating study!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  74. @Simon in London
    "the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos"

    Why is their milieu violent & predatory? Why were the actual Jewish ghettos not 'violent & predatory'?

    I actually suspect a lot of Jewish ghettos were violent and predatory, more so than is acknowledged today, but that this was mitigated by other factors in addition to what is probably high Jewish mean intelligence:

    1) a stronger Jewish literary and religious culture, obviously;

    2) historically greater levels of murderous anti-Jewish violence that strengthened solidarity within the ghetto. Slavery is of course a form of violence, but blacks were valuable to have around as a source of labour even after the Civil War, while Jews were seen by most Medieval peasants as a source only of heresy and debt.

    Despite incidents like the Rosewood massacre, black ghettos overall weren’t subject to nearly so many incidents of murderous pogroms (even if you exclude WW2!).

    3) the absence of firearms, which would’ve made criminality riskier, less lethal, and more targeted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Samuel Skinner
    By the standards of modern African-American communities, Jewish ghettos were not violent and predatory; we know this because African American communities in the 1950s were not violent and predatory compared to their modern versions.

    Slavery is of course a form of violence,
     
    Slavery is a form of coercion. Coercion is not violence, otherwise a massive portion of human interaction would count as violence.

    while Jews were seen by most Medieval peasants as a source only of heresy and debt.
     
    Peasants would not be borrowing money from Jews. They would be selling to Jews. Anti-Jewish violence by peasants occurs where Jews are tax collectors; otherwise there is little interaction.

    the absence of firearms, which would’ve made criminality riskier, less lethal, and more targeted.
     
    There are about 11k gun homicides and 84k gun injuries in the US per year. I'm not sure how much less lethal you can get.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @Thomm
    On the contrary, you are quick to attack something that conflicts with your bias, and then accuse the other person of what you are doing.

    Projection is another trait frequently displayed by blacks and WN wiggers (potayto, potahto).

    You also did not rebut Steve's main article.

    Projection is another trait frequently displayed by blacks and WN wiggers (potayto, potahto).

    I guess you don’t know that I am ethnically East Asian.

    Nurture over nature? Try this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289617301757

    When you understand the article, let me know.

    On the contrary, you are quick to attack something that conflicts with your bias, and then accuse the other person of what you are doing.

    Except I am neither a pure hereditarian nor a pure environmentarian. You wouldn’t know my bias, because you seem to lack basic reading comprehension skills. Much like Mr. Sailer on most things I believe in nature + nurture. In my view, the two are not opposing forces, but usually mutually-reinforcing and auto-catalytic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. No doubt orang-utangs get more mental stimulation when raised with humans, but even so it is remarkable how few primates use any kind of tools creatively compared to humans.

    Gorillas have been known to use a stick to extract yummy ants from an anthill, and presumably have copied this tool-using behavior from each other, but my daughter at age 15 months was observed from the sofa by an anthropologist dragging a wooden stool into the kitchen, climbing on top of it, and extracting ice-cream from the top part of the refrigerator without, as far as is known, seeing anyone else perform the same trick, which almost no animal could ever create, even as an adult.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  77. @Thomm
    This could explain why some ethnic groups from poor countries consistently do well in the US even into the 2nd and 3rd generation.

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature. If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50. This is simply because they are not in the habit of test-taking in a school-exam setting, and literacy was scarcer.

    But then why are US blacks still underperforming? They have every resource at their disposal.

    Wrong

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thomm

    Wrong
     
    If that is the extent of your rebuttal and supporting evidence, then you are merely protested at the visceral level that your fragile worldview has collapsed in a heap.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @DFH
    So, by race denialist logic, if only we could properly adjust the environment (e.g. eliminate speciesism against orangutans), then we could close the Orangutan-human achievement gap?

    and we could get there faster by cucking human females with Orangutans

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @MJMD
    I actually suspect a lot of Jewish ghettos were violent and predatory, more so than is acknowledged today, but that this was mitigated by other factors in addition to what is probably high Jewish mean intelligence:

    1) a stronger Jewish literary and religious culture, obviously;

    2) historically greater levels of murderous anti-Jewish violence that strengthened solidarity within the ghetto. Slavery is of course a form of violence, but blacks were valuable to have around as a source of labour even after the Civil War, while Jews were seen by most Medieval peasants as a source only of heresy and debt.

    Despite incidents like the Rosewood massacre, black ghettos overall weren't subject to nearly so many incidents of murderous pogroms (even if you exclude WW2!).

    3) the absence of firearms, which would've made criminality riskier, less lethal, and more targeted.

    By the standards of modern African-American communities, Jewish ghettos were not violent and predatory; we know this because African American communities in the 1950s were not violent and predatory compared to their modern versions.

    Slavery is of course a form of violence,

    Slavery is a form of coercion. Coercion is not violence, otherwise a massive portion of human interaction would count as violence.

    while Jews were seen by most Medieval peasants as a source only of heresy and debt.

    Peasants would not be borrowing money from Jews. They would be selling to Jews. Anti-Jewish violence by peasants occurs where Jews are tax collectors; otherwise there is little interaction.

    the absence of firearms, which would’ve made criminality riskier, less lethal, and more targeted.

    There are about 11k gun homicides and 84k gun injuries in the US per year. I’m not sure how much less lethal you can get.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Simon in London
    "they would match the scores of modern ethnic Englishmen."

    Given dysgenic reproduction since around 1850, I bet the 1800s would score higher.

    Good point!

    It’ll be interesting if population genetics reaches a point in the future where scientists can estimate what average IQs might have been in the past.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Judging by the overwhelming majority of the comments here (and elsewhere) I’d say human intelligence is an oxymoron and that goes double for those who strut around all satisfied with their own ( obviously mostly inflated) intellectual prowess.

    Good grief.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Simon in London
    Projection!! :p
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Black slum kids raised by whites do a little better on IQ tests. So do orangutans. Yet both have their biologically-determined limits.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  83. @jacques sheete
    Judging by the overwhelming majority of the comments here (and elsewhere) I’d say human intelligence is an oxymoron and that goes double for those who strut around all satisfied with their own ( obviously mostly inflated) intellectual prowess.

    Good grief.

    Projection!! :p

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @Anon
    Raised in captivity or raised by humans? It's not surprising that healthier, better fed, disease-free animals would do better on cognitive tests, even though I find the assertion that one can measure animal intelligence in an absolute sense with current practices dubious at best.

    Crows in big cities, not raised by humans, also tend to be smarter than their country relatives. One way to test genes vs environment might be to take the progeny of city/country birds before hatching and switch their environment, let some time pass, collect them (radio tags), and then test them.

    Anon, in Massachusetts, not so long ago, they found large numbers of dead crows along I-95. They commissioned a study and found that the crows had been killed while feeding along the highway by passing trucks. Further study showed that while the Boston area crows could shout-out “Caw,” they couldn’t shout “truck.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    In Boston, even the crows say cahh.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @Olorin
    Obviously it follows that if we pour trillions of dollars of GDP each year into nurturing orang-utans, they will be winning the Fields Medal in--what, do you think 50 years would do it? 100? 150?

    Olorin, if you placed 1000 orangutans at keyboards would they eventually surpass the writings of Ta nehisi Coates?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @MJMD
    They have every resource at their disposal if they can survive the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos that most of them were crowded into from the First World War on (the worldview of TNC is not entirely a product of THC), or the Africa-like deprivation of rural Southern counties forgotten since the Civil War if not before. There's a reason the black intelligentsia is overrepresented by fey literary types like James Baldwin and comic book nerds like TNC: they were the ones holed up inside, reading, while all the truly terrible stuff was happening out on the street corner.

    This is why I find the lazy attribution of longstanding black under-performance to some mysterious, hereditary, genetic inferiority, for which no real evidence can be provided (especially given the fundamental genetic heterogeneity of American "black" people, who are nearly all of mixed ancestry) so infuriating. You simply cannot convince me that you've controlled for all of the other variables accumulated over two centuries of grim US history.

    Blacks occupy the same socio economic position vis a vis other races, wherever they settle. France, the UK, Holland also have blacks at the socio economic bottom, and at the top of all the negative social indices, crime, employment, academic lack of achievement, STDs. The reason is clearly genetic, that is to say, lower average intelligence.

    Blacks in the UK were never enslaved but they are at the bottom of all the positive social indices and at the top of all the negative ones. It appears to be the same the world over and the genetic lower IQ explanation is the only one that make sense, obviously. The low IQ explanation was recognised in earlier times, and the only reason people pretend to believe otherwise today is emotional/ideological. Race denialism is a really strange irrational phenomena but I suppose is explained in a similar fashion to religious belief. But race denialism is doing untold harm to the Western world, as one would expect since it is a systematic endorsement by society at large of a web of false beliefs about the world. If one pretends to believe P and P is in fact false then no good can come of it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @Difference Maker
    Wrong

    Wrong

    If that is the extent of your rebuttal and supporting evidence, then you are merely protested at the visceral level that your fragile worldview has collapsed in a heap.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. So I wonder if, under the current social weather conditions, our Black Football Millionaires Behaving Badly Towards Women will be affected long-term. Malik McDowell was doing stuff Black Folks tend to do, but then went on a tirade against a female police officer, or as he prefers to refer to them: Bitches

    Does he get to have his career erased, or is he going to be enjoying the protection of “The Orangutan Amendment”? The part that describes Orangutan’s as not like us, so shouldn’t be held under the same scrutiny as normal people under pressure to conform to modern civilization? That it would be akin to arresting a dog that had been left in a car, for finding a way to honk the horn over an extended period, thus disturbing the peace under conditions not including an Orangutan.

    Here’s the video of his arrest, with his friends around him, begging him to stop, to no effect:

    https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d4c_1513198274

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  89. Compare blacks in NYC – to blacks in Mississippi, and tell me that nurture does not matter — please.

    They are genetically the same – but their worldly awareness is much greater in NYC. It is all environment and nurture.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  90. @kihowi

    If you had a time machine and took a modern test back to 1800 England or the US, and randomly tested average people, most would barely score 50.
     
    ahahhahaahahah oh my god. I guess this what illiteracy sounds like.

    If you had ever read any 18th or 19th piece of literature or play for public consumption you'd have known that both the narrative and the use of language is much more sophisticated than what we are used to. They were written for a very intelligent general public.

    50 is absolutely laughable. How do you even arrive at something like that?

    Dude, there was still substantial illiteracy everywhere (including Britain and the US) in 1800. That was partly due to many children not even being in school at all (and hence not accustomed to test-taking, so certainly not in a position to do well in a modern IQ test if they were told to take one on the spot by testers from 2017).

    It seems you and a couple of others thinks that Britain had full literacy even in the Middle Ages.

    The literature you mention was still c0nsumed only by the top 10% of the population.

    I know WNs don’t know how to read graphs and charts, but I will still post a chart of literacy in England over the period in question :

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Yak-15
    You do realize that there are millions of African Americans who do not live in the conditions you cite and still score substantially worse than their equally wealthy, white and Asian peers? The richest black cohorts do worse all but the lowest white cohorts. You also realize that there are millions of whites who live in awful conditions who, on average, also test higher than rich blacks?

    http://www.jbhe.com/latest/index012209_p.html

    Continuing this logic, why don’t we see more Nobels, Fields Medals and high PISA scores from the rich Arab world?

    https://amp-businessinsider-com.cdn.ampproject.org/i/s/amp.businessinsider.com/images/58471001ba6eb6d3008b7bf9-750-1038.png

    Why has the black/white gap widened over the past 75 years despite the trillions we have spent on intervention?

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2017/02/01/race-gaps-in-sat-math-scores-are-as-big-as-ever/amp/

    If nurture is so powerful, is it that when twins raised apart are tested later in life that they show similar life outcomes, levels of intelligence, etc?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Twin_Family_Study

    On the flip side, why do Ashkenazi Jews represent 1/3 of all Nobel Prize winners, but their Asiatic Jewish cousins who also live in highly socialist Israel not show the same level of achievement?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_Nobel_laureates

    You can increase results with good schools. If you take Sweden as an example;

    1. The policy documents that are supposed to regulate the schools are mostly filled with far-left normative guidelines about morality rather than knowledge. More so, it is simply impossible to understand these documents. It is like a slight retarded teenaged SJW had written them. The policy documents have some really insane crap such as teachers should not teach but instead let the kids search for the knowledge themselves through Google. The old cathodes teaching is more or less banned. Good schools and teachers regardless of what the Education boards tell them tend to do the opposite and are sometimes penalized for it. Government have started a war against conservative private schools. Apparently, kids there learn too much and that is “unfair” according to the liberal politicians, teachers unions and pedagogy professors.

    2. Once upon a time Swedish children focused on Mathematics, Swedish, English, Biology, Chemistry, Physics and Mechanics and had non-gradable PT-classes. However, the elites reduced the hours of these fields and introduced art, housecraft, music, history, religious studies, social science, cultural-geography, handcraft and physical education. Some of these fields are utterly are just an excuse for the government, unions and teachers (most of the far-left) to spree propaganda to the kids. A sane person would cut some of these fields instantly and physical education would turn into the old non-grade PT class. Recently, there have been a discussion if “Feminist studies” should be an obligatory field in Swedish Schools. It would replace biology.

    3. About a decade ago the Swedish government decided to cut special classes for kids with disabilities and temporary special classes for kids that constantly destroyed classes. In fact, government even cut most teachers focusing on kids with special needs. Instead regular teachers are supposed to hold classes that house kids that constantly start trouble or with severe dyslexia. Teachers receive little or no help. Because of this most kids see most lectures ruined.

    4. Swedish school books are filled with leftist propaganda. Most of them are impossible to understand even for adults as books are often written by leftist journalists. Did I mention that some schools do not even use books? They rely on the kids finding the knowledge themselves through Google. Kids nowadays do not even have home work because teachers, unions and politicians think it is “oppressive”.

    5. Standardized tests are not used and teachers and teachers unions do their best to keep them away from schools. In fact many teachers are keen on group assignments and oral presentations. Some teachers do have tests and it is common to give the answers before the test, let the kids discuss the questions before the tests or just let the kids have their books. Im not kidding with you. This is the norm in Swedish schools.

    6. Swedish teacher’s education is a total joke. A secondary school and high school teacher spend 1 to 1.5 years in these institutions and learn nothing and I mean absolutely nothing. Once upon a time Swedish school teachers were very educated by international standards. For example, a secondary school and high school teacher would spend years reading history. In the 1980s the socialist regime decided that one semester of for example history were enough to teach secondary school and that field would be learned at the teachers colleges. However, they did not touch high school so these future teachers were able to attend the university before they had so suffer through teachers college. The centre-right Swedish government made some slight changes in 2006 increasing these six months to a year for secondary school teachers.

    They also took away some rights for the teachers colleges and even closed a few teachers colleges. This caused uproar among teachers unions as they hate knowledge. Today, students in teaching programs have to read their subjects at the university. Still, a few fields at the university are still a mess as they are designed for teacher’s students. However, since a decade back students is able take regular courses instead with other students thus avoiding these pre-designed teachers courses. Hence, a student studying to become a teacher would just read history with history majors instead of taking courses in history designed for teacher’s students.

    If you want to avoid the insanity from the start you can just get all the university credits in what you want to teach in and jump into a teacher college for three semesters (1.5 years). To lure people into the profession government has offered all kinds of students to take up teaching with short program (one year) and designed programs such as engineering program that also gives you a degree in education – Just 1/3 of these students ever go into teaching. Of course: The unions, leftist politicians, teachers and others have fought about this development. These people hate to have educated people in schools.

    ………………..

    I could go on and on about the failure of Swedish Schools are fail but these are just some of the reasons why Sweden go down in Pisa.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Srz

    I could go on and on about the failure of Swedish Schools are fail but these are just some of the reasons why Sweden go down in Pisa.
     
    Can you explain the Volvo?

    Can anyone?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @MJMD
    They have every resource at their disposal if they can survive the violent, predatory melieu that predominates in the poor, low social capital urban ghettos that most of them were crowded into from the First World War on (the worldview of TNC is not entirely a product of THC), or the Africa-like deprivation of rural Southern counties forgotten since the Civil War if not before. There's a reason the black intelligentsia is overrepresented by fey literary types like James Baldwin and comic book nerds like TNC: they were the ones holed up inside, reading, while all the truly terrible stuff was happening out on the street corner.

    This is why I find the lazy attribution of longstanding black under-performance to some mysterious, hereditary, genetic inferiority, for which no real evidence can be provided (especially given the fundamental genetic heterogeneity of American "black" people, who are nearly all of mixed ancestry) so infuriating. You simply cannot convince me that you've controlled for all of the other variables accumulated over two centuries of grim US history.

    There’s a reason the black intelligentsia is overrepresented by fey literary types like James Baldwin and comic book nerds like TNC

    Don’t those types make up the intelligentsia of every race?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Wilhelm Johnson
    You can increase results with good schools. If you take Sweden as an example;


    1. The policy documents that are supposed to regulate the schools are mostly filled with far-left normative guidelines about morality rather than knowledge. More so, it is simply impossible to understand these documents. It is like a slight retarded teenaged SJW had written them. The policy documents have some really insane crap such as teachers should not teach but instead let the kids search for the knowledge themselves through Google. The old cathodes teaching is more or less banned. Good schools and teachers regardless of what the Education boards tell them tend to do the opposite and are sometimes penalized for it. Government have started a war against conservative private schools. Apparently, kids there learn too much and that is “unfair” according to the liberal politicians, teachers unions and pedagogy professors.

    2. Once upon a time Swedish children focused on Mathematics, Swedish, English, Biology, Chemistry, Physics and Mechanics and had non-gradable PT-classes. However, the elites reduced the hours of these fields and introduced art, housecraft, music, history, religious studies, social science, cultural-geography, handcraft and physical education. Some of these fields are utterly are just an excuse for the government, unions and teachers (most of the far-left) to spree propaganda to the kids. A sane person would cut some of these fields instantly and physical education would turn into the old non-grade PT class. Recently, there have been a discussion if “Feminist studies” should be an obligatory field in Swedish Schools. It would replace biology.

    3. About a decade ago the Swedish government decided to cut special classes for kids with disabilities and temporary special classes for kids that constantly destroyed classes. In fact, government even cut most teachers focusing on kids with special needs. Instead regular teachers are supposed to hold classes that house kids that constantly start trouble or with severe dyslexia. Teachers receive little or no help. Because of this most kids see most lectures ruined.

    4. Swedish school books are filled with leftist propaganda. Most of them are impossible to understand even for adults as books are often written by leftist journalists. Did I mention that some schools do not even use books? They rely on the kids finding the knowledge themselves through Google. Kids nowadays do not even have home work because teachers, unions and politicians think it is “oppressive”.

    5. Standardized tests are not used and teachers and teachers unions do their best to keep them away from schools. In fact many teachers are keen on group assignments and oral presentations. Some teachers do have tests and it is common to give the answers before the test, let the kids discuss the questions before the tests or just let the kids have their books. Im not kidding with you. This is the norm in Swedish schools.

    6. Swedish teacher’s education is a total joke. A secondary school and high school teacher spend 1 to 1.5 years in these institutions and learn nothing and I mean absolutely nothing. Once upon a time Swedish school teachers were very educated by international standards. For example, a secondary school and high school teacher would spend years reading history. In the 1980s the socialist regime decided that one semester of for example history were enough to teach secondary school and that field would be learned at the teachers colleges. However, they did not touch high school so these future teachers were able to attend the university before they had so suffer through teachers college. The centre-right Swedish government made some slight changes in 2006 increasing these six months to a year for secondary school teachers.

    They also took away some rights for the teachers colleges and even closed a few teachers colleges. This caused uproar among teachers unions as they hate knowledge. Today, students in teaching programs have to read their subjects at the university. Still, a few fields at the university are still a mess as they are designed for teacher’s students. However, since a decade back students is able take regular courses instead with other students thus avoiding these pre-designed teachers courses. Hence, a student studying to become a teacher would just read history with history majors instead of taking courses in history designed for teacher’s students.

    If you want to avoid the insanity from the start you can just get all the university credits in what you want to teach in and jump into a teacher college for three semesters (1.5 years). To lure people into the profession government has offered all kinds of students to take up teaching with short program (one year) and designed programs such as engineering program that also gives you a degree in education - Just 1/3 of these students ever go into teaching. Of course: The unions, leftist politicians, teachers and others have fought about this development. These people hate to have educated people in schools.

    ....................

    I could go on and on about the failure of Swedish Schools are fail but these are just some of the reasons why Sweden go down in Pisa.

    I could go on and on about the failure of Swedish Schools are fail but these are just some of the reasons why Sweden go down in Pisa.

    Can you explain the Volvo?

    Can anyone?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Thomm
    On the contrary, you are quick to attack something that conflicts with your bias, and then accuse the other person of what you are doing.

    Projection is another trait frequently displayed by blacks and WN wiggers (potayto, potahto).

    You also did not rebut Steve's main article.

    Projection is another trait frequently displayed by blacks and WN wiggers (potayto, potahto).

    FYI, “potayto, potahto” was just part of a whimsical line in a show tune. You will never hear anyone say “potahto” anywhere in the English-speaking world, except as part of that song. Tomahto, yes. Potahto, no.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. In addition, a species thought to be incurious turned out to be quite curious in the right circumstances. So this was a matter of environmental influence, not genetic endowment.

    LOL at this stupid either/or thing.

    Someone needs to read Ridley’s Nature via Nurture.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. @radio

    Nurture is a much bigger factor than nature.
     
    Science says it most certainly is not.

    What the hell's wrong with you?

    Thommy Boy can’t post on any thread without using the patently ridiculous expression “WN wiggers”. All the idiocy that follows should be expected.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @Buffalo Joe
    Anon, in Massachusetts, not so long ago, they found large numbers of dead crows along I-95. They commissioned a study and found that the crows had been killed while feeding along the highway by passing trucks. Further study showed that while the Boston area crows could shout-out "Caw," they couldn't shout "truck."

    In Boston, even the crows say cahh.

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

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored