The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJames Thompson Archive
Country IQs and Their Consequences
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Cognitive capitalism sinc 800 BC

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

It is good that people are discussing IQ. Fred Reed’s post has drawn many comments, too many for me to answer individually. Here I outline the main heads of his argument as I see them, and some of the relevant research.

My summary of Reed’s post is:

Intelligence is important; intelligence research is important and can influence social policy; American blacks, the Irish, and Mexicans have similar IQs but different outcomes; IQ scores for some countries have been revised considerably, suggesting that intelligence measures are unreliable; Maya Indians had cultural achievements out of all proportion to the low IQs of the current inhabitants; current research shows European intelligence both falling and rising, the latter because of the Flynn Effect, and this suggests the measures are unreliable; the ancient Greek thinkers were very bright, and not dull as the Flynn Effect might imply; the IQ of India cannot be 81 because of India’s cultural achievements; there is no visible difference in intelligence between Mexicans and Americans, nor also with the inhabitants of Taiwan, Vietnam, or Thailand; and what mean IQ is thought necessary to run the infrastructure of modernity?

 

The first topic to cover is correlation. Correlations are best understood by looking at scatterplots. Any correlation which is less than unity will have discrepant data points scattered along the trend line. Some countries will be outliers for different reasons, all of them worth debating. For example, the usual link between IQ and GDP is altered by two main artefacts: oil and tourism. However, there are other reasons, and it is certainly worth following up all outliers, and putting forward testable hypotheses about why this is so. Of course, these hypotheses need to be tested on the whole data set. Even when the correlation is strong, say 0.8 there will still be discrepant cases (large residuals, in statistical jargon). http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-grand-sweep-of-history

A discrepant data point does not destroy a general correlation. If there are many discrepant results the correlation is lowered. If all results are discrepant there is no correlation to discuss. Individual instances do not refute general findings. A test of intelligence which is an excellent predictor of later success in life will not always identify the most successful individual. There will always be exceptions to be pointed to. Rindermann is a good person to read on the relevant research between country IQ and national achievements. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LCFQWcfhcjPz60xYifkjjaQ6cZeEasYKqMUdDoVnJxo/edit

 

The Flynn Effect co-exists with the Woodley Effect. Since roughly 1870 the Flynn Effect has been stronger, at an apparent 3 points per decade. The Woodley effect is weaker, at very roughly 1 point per decade. Think of Flynn as the soil fertilizer effect and Woodley as the plant genetics effect. The fertilizer effect seems to be fading away in rich countries, while continuing in poor countries, though not as fast as one would desire. The genetic effect seems to show a persistent gradual fall in underlying ability. Intelligence tests are good at identifying skills with high predictive value for life success, but less good at doing historical comparisons, unless one concentrates on specific subtests. IQ percentile ranks hold up very well over six decades. There is much research on this issue. Jim Flynn works with many of the new researchers on the topic, like Elijah Armstrong. It is a somewhat technical field, but very interesting.

http://www.unz.com/jthompson/105-years-of-flynn-effect-very-fluid

http://www.unz.com/jthompson/what-do-iq-researchers-really-think-about-the-flynn-effect

Country totals may appear to change, but that is to be expected if the initial samples were few and not properly representative. Well organized countries provide better data than less organized ones. As more data comes in the results should get to be more accurate. For that reason the whole Lynn database has been made public, and is being improved and extended. There is more work to be done, particularly adding in the cognitive estimates derived from maths and science examination results from international tests. http://www.unz.com/jthompson/world-politics-guide-2017

For the purposes of this discussion, it should be noted that the Lynn database for Mexico references only 3 studies, all of children, in the 6 to 13 year range, which you can see on the National IQ database, ranging from 80 to 88, for an overall mean IQ of 85. Adult data and more data would be better. However, a recent analysis of PISA, TIMSS and PIRLS data (1995 to 2012, N 93 nations) comes up with an IQ derived from those results of 88. The similarly derived IQ for the USA is 99.6. http://www.unz.com/jthompson/migrant-competence

Cognitive capitalism and high ability stem

Historical comparisons over several centuries are harder to carry out, but not impossible. Rindermann and I put in measures of historical cultural ancestors on two time spans: Nobels for the last century, and eminent scientists since 800 BC (the Ancient Greek effect) and showed that they both made a contribution to modern day economies. However, Greece is no longer the centre of the intellectual world, nor are the Mayas. Their accomplishments were real enough in their time. Their best thinkers are still rightly revered, but a nation’s current IQ is not always a good guide to the abilities of very distant ancestors. If populations move of their own volition or are displaced by new entrants, the general intellectual level can change. On the other hand, if selection on a settled population is hard enough then intellectual levels can rise in 8 to 16 generations. That is another interesting story.

The Indian mean IQ of 80 is based on 26 studies, so is well covered. Nevertheless, there is variability according to which province one measures, even more different than the States of the United States. The caste system creates differences. So does the rate of cousin marriage.

http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-heterogeneous-states-of-india

http://www.unz.com/jthompson/more-sex-cousin

http://www.unz.com/jthompson/inbreeding-two-tribes

 

Naturally, you can have some bright people from all countries: is it the proportions which differ. Any big deviations from what you would expect from the country bell curve calls into question the stated average for that country. http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-scrabble-for-africa

“No visible difference in intelligence between Mexicans and Americans, nor also with the inhabitants of Taiwan, Vietnam, or Thailand.” Cannot really comment on that, except to say that in social interaction it is not always either possible or desirable to make intelligence estimates. More relevant is to look at technical innovation rates, patents, science publications and the like. However, it would be a valid point if there were no differences in the achievements of those countries and the functioning of their societies. If there were no differences on the above measures, then the associations between mental ability and social outcomes would be weakened, and eventually disconfirmed. However, the general link between national IQs and economic outcomes holds up pretty well.

What mean IQ is thought necessary to run the infrastructure of modernity?

This interesting question has been much discussed. Smart fraction research suggests that the impact of the brightest persons in a national economy has a disproportionately positive effect on GDP. Rindermann and I have argued, following others, that the brightest 5% of every country make the greatest contribution by far, though of course many others of lower ability are required to implement the discoveries and strategies of the brightest. There have been two supportive replications.

http://www.unz.com/jthompson/is-smart-fraction-as-valuable-as

On this basis you might say that countries depend on those with IQs of 120 and above. These are the people who can follow “college format” education in which they read provided references and work out the implications for themselves, guided by tutor and test feedback. The USA can rely on 8% of their people to do such work, Mexico 2%. If countries can find such people, retain them, and deploy them properly, with a good pyramid of helpers below, then the country concerned has a good prospect of doing well. However, given global competition, countries need many people of IQ 130+ to really prosper, and such people tend to emigrate to the strongest economies, where they will earn most, so less able countries are often denuded of their brightest citizens. The USA can rely on 2% of their population to do such work, Mexico 0.3%.

However, a rule of thumb would be helpful in answering this, and the initial guesstimate was that a national IQ of 93 was required for a reasonable standard of living. I certainly agree that if the overall country data set shows no difference between countries of different intelligence levels, then the intelligence levels are called into question.

As economies globalize, the figure required for innovation and flourishing economies is probably being pushed upwards. At the same time, products are coming out which do many necessary things without requiring much intelligence from users. Mobile phones can perform functions which previously required high ability programing skills. Now, all users have to be able to do is point with their finger. Cars used to be complicated, and require careful maintenance. Now they are more reliable (though harder to service without computer guidance). Cash registers do everything based on pictograms, so a society can function to some extent on the problem solving of others. Good news all round.

Globalization may result in innovative countries being far richer than the countries which don’t innovate but just use the inventions, in the way that most of the world flies on wide body jets made in the USA and Europe. Skyscrapers were an innovation once, and are now commonplace. Nonetheless, the innovators will be the first to get the benefits of modernity, and are likely to retain most of the profits.

 
• Category: Science • Tags: IQ, Smart Fraction 
Hide 346 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. perhaps many of the smartest of India’s citizens have emigrated, & therefore results from India are a slight underestimate?

    btw, superb example: “Think of Flynn as the soil fertilizer effect and Woodley as the plant genetics effect.”

  2. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    A test of intelligence which is an excellent predictor of later success in life

    This is a very… one-sided, stereotypic definition of success.
    Of course, someone with a very high IQ can not, maybe, have a non-biased perspective on the totality of what can make life good (and it will be similar to what they and alike people have got in their own lives: this bias is evolutionary).

    I have been in contact with people of all trades, and have no doubt that the most relaxed and carefree are in the 80-95 IQ range.
    Provided their economic status is at subsistence level or slightly above that, they enjoy a life of the mind comparable to children’s, for all life; they also enjoy more leisure time, and family time.
    Their minds self-feed with all kinds of tale-like illusions: for them, everything good and great can come into their life, tomorrow or an hour after now, or next years: and this stands true hour after hour, day after day, year by year.

    They can “fall in love” for the 5th, 10th, 15th time, with the same hopes that it will be great & forever as the first time, in the face of whatever age they are by now.

    They are never alone: be it on the train, at the hospital, wherever, they’ll find conversation with people there interesting.
    Same goes for ordinary radio and tv programs, newspapers and all commercial media.
    The movie at the theater (and Netflix channels) is made for them, not for me or you.

    High IQ is not the only mental attribute capable of rendering life burdensome: high ability to undergo emotion, introspectiveness, neuroticism, all are big wrenches in the works of one’s life, bigger than high IQ.
    But without an high IQ, the rest of the company is left rather powerless.

    I think you should have included a link to your excellent one on the seven tribes of intellect (all the more given the abundance of links you embedded in the piece).

  3. “County IQs and Their Consequences” should read “Country IQs and Their Consequences”.

    Stimulating post. Thanks!

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  4. @Egregious Philbin

    Doubt it is a sufficient number to have an impact on the group averages.

  5. @godfree roberts

    My error. Thanks for pointing it out. Editor caught and corrected it.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  6. @Anonymous

    Thanks. Yes, I considered putting in The 7 Tribes of Intellect, but then felt there were too many links.
    I know it is not much of an answer to your observations to respond with a list of correlations, but Doug Detterman’s summary of the positive and negative correlations with intelligence shows that for most low ability people life is pretty hard.

  7. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    IQ seems to lead to soulless modernity, materialism, atomization, and ideological lunacy. Some of the craziest nations are high-IQ.

    They say East Asia has high IQ, but it’s committing demographic suicide.
    So is EU though at slower rate, but in some ways worse cuz of invasion by Muslims and Africans.

    IQ is like drugs. In wrong doses or used wrongly, and it leads to sterility and death of civilization.

    In the end, it is the culture of emotions that is the key to healthy civilization.
    The emotional culture in the advanced world is decadent, trivial, and gutless.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    , @MarkinLA
    , @Biff
  8. What l find fascinating is that there is a direct correlation between high IQ and substance abuse; which bolsters my premis that life-time achievements are also attained by single-mindedness (ambition), HABITS, and cunning.

  9. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    One of your Unz colleagues had a recent post about intellectual decline with age. It would seem a lot of that could be ameliorated by technology, if the elderly were comfortable using it. Smart phones or other devices reminding them when to take medicine, etc.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  10. TG says:

    With respect you are missing the main point.

    Yes IQ is important. In the real world Forest Gump will not be a brain surgeon. But as for mean IQ and entire nations…

    Probably asian IQ’s are – on average – a bit higher than european. But in the 19th and 20th centuries, genetically smarter Chinese lived in filth and misery and Americans progressed and became prosperous and strong. Because hundreds of millions of people mean IQ of 102 having seven kids each and starving to death in the mud do less well than a more modest number of people mean IQ of 100 with abundant food and resources. Duh.

    Einstein was way smarter than I am. If he was naked and starving in the middle of a desert, I dare say he would be less productive than I would be fat and happy and with lots of tools and materials.

    Yes IQ matters. But as for entire societies, there are other factors that can dwarf the effects of a few points average more or less…

    • Agree: jacques sheete
    • Replies: @Joe Wong
  11. Lot says:

    The Woodley effect is weaker, at very roughly 1 point per decade.

    Assuming we are only talking about white Western populations, I find a decline of 1IQ per decade since the 1880′s to be an absurdly high estimate.

    I don’t doubt there has been a decline, primarily from the very low and delayed fertility of the top 10% or so of females, but you really think it passes the smell test that between 1880 and 2017 it has been nearly one SD, nearly equal to the white-black gap?

    Is there any evidence that, for example, white children begin speaking and reading at later ages? You could say this is counteracted by the Flynn effect, but one of the causes of the Flynn effect is children are schooled and put in a stimulating environment compared to the past. This would be much less significant for very young children.

    I’m not sure even Woodley would agree with -1 per decade. You’d know better than me.

    Woodley’s 2012 paper noted that Vining (1995) estimated dysgenic fertility decreased genotypic IQ by about 0.5 points per generation. That sounds a lot more reasonable. Several other sources are in that 0.3 to 1 per generation ballpark, and very far from ~3 per generation.

    With great respect for Galton, I have some doubt his measures using the following device are truly comparable to other reaction time experiments.

    http://galton.org/essays/1880-1889/galton-1889-rba-reaction-time.pdf

    Woodley also concedes:

    Galton’s data reported by Johnson et al. (1985), i.e .21 for people tested within a year (N = 421) and .17 for people retested over any time interval (N = 1069), and the equivalent suggested coefficient of the Hick -style device employed in our reference study (.85; Deary et al., 2001).

    That is a very large difference between Galton’s method and modern methods that calls into doubt the quality of the data.

  12. trilobite says:

    you have not addressed the Irish IQ discrepancy.

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  13. countries depend on those with IQs of 120 and above. These are the people who can follow “college format” education in which they read provided references and work out the implications for themselves, guided by tutor and test feedback. The USA can rely on 8% of their people to do such work

    If 8% of the total population of the United States are able to perform this college-level work, then why are only 4% of the whites in the country capable of figuring out the “carpet” problem you mention in your Intelligent Brains article?

    OK, I admit that I am still shocked by this number, this 4%, ONLY FOUR PERCENT!!!, of whites who are capable of figuring out the price of carpeting for a room. So you’re telling me 96% of whites can’t do this simple problem, which is described like this: “only 4% of the white population is in the top category and can complete tasks like using a calculator to figure out the cost of carpeting a room. This requires determining the area, converting to square yards, and multiplying by the price.” (The Neuroscience of Intelligence, by Richard J. Haier, p. 24; and maybe ADULT LITERACY in America is the study Haier is referencing.)

    This is not rocket science, people.

    So here is another problem that I see right away: intelligent people (those who can figure out the carpet problem) cannot fathom what it is like to have such low intelligence. We cannot put ourselves in their “frame of mind”, let’s call it, and simply NOT SEE something that to us is evident, blatant, something that is just staring us right in the face and should be just as evident to “them”. So maybe this is one of the reasons it has been so easy to manipulate the masses…

  14. “Fred Reed’s post…”

    There should be a link to that post. I don’t know who Fred Reed is, or what/where he posted.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @James Thompson
  15. @James Thompson

    I am surprised some enterprising researcher hasn’t already studied county by county IQs as an explanatory variable for the election of Trump. There has to be some really good research money opportunities in that.

  16. Do you think being able to consider lots of alternatives** quickly is one of the usuaal advantages of having a high IQ. In practical terms it might mean that someone who is a bit lazy and disorganised can nonetheless protect the family fortune and generally get by and avoid serious trouble (if only just).

    That makes me wonder too whether a lot of creativity isn’t the result of being able to flip through lots of possibilities quickly. Of course there would be more to flip through usually in a high IQ mind and even perhaps more of a chance that systematic lateral thinking locates the pissibilities.

    ** forgive the solecism if you would object that there can be only two alternatives….[cf. Fowler]

  17. JackOH says:

    Much food for thought again, Prof. Thompson, and thanks to you and Ron Unz for publishing at UR.

    I may be in something of a minority here, but I believe intelligence is conceptually severable from its applications in the world, and its manifestation as wisdom or unwisdom, good governance or misgovernance, character or its lack, etc. Thanks again.

  18. annamaria says:
    @Anonymous

    To address your concern of a stressful life: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/02/02/how-stress-influences-heart-attack-stroke-risk.aspx
    Though it seems that the highly intelligent people put considerable efforts to alleviate the stress (that also includes a higher degree of negativity bias for the brightest)

  19. I have really enjoyed reading ol’ cantankerous Fred Reed these last several years, but his barking at IQ was sure to get him run over by the tandem axles of logic and hard facts. Reminds me of an old song sung by comedian Ray Stevens, “Fred, You Were a Good Dog.”

    ♫ Fred, you were a good dog,
    But you never knew when to chase ‘em or when to turn around and run,
    Yeah Fred, you were a good dog,
    But now you’re flat out on the freeway and drying in the sun. ♪

    :-)

  20. annamaria says:

    meanwhile at UC Berkeley, the freedom-lovers (encouraged by the faculty) demonstrate for freedom: “Riot breaks out at UC Berkeley amid protest of Breitbart editor’s speech” (see vandalism and physical abuse) https://www.rt.com/usa/376001-milo-yiannopoulos-berkeley-riot-protest/

    Take notice that the freedom-loving faculty and students at UC Berkeley are totally quiet about John Yoo, the violator of the human rights and of the US Constitution: https://www.law.berkeley.edu/our-faculty/faculty-profiles/john-yoo/
    “Berkeley administrators have spoken publicly and repeatedly about the importance of Professor Yoo’s academic freedom and First Amendment rights.” Christopher Edley, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law

    • Replies: @JerseyJeffersonian
  21. My summary of Reed’s post is:…

    My summary of Reed’s post(s) is…Bla bla bla.

    This has to be satire.

    Fred Reed’s views on intelligence are mostly unintelligent. as well as ignorant. Fred is an authority on nothing and I suspect that a huge part of the reason is that to be an authority takes discipline and I detect little to none in any of his views.

    By even mentioning his name in association with your subject, you discredit yourself and it’s not even funny or good satire.

    Have a nice day.

    • Replies: @Sunbeam
    , @Daniel Chieh
  22. 1. Given global competition, a country *doesn’t* need 120+ IQ people. It can import them, or they can stay in their home country and give orders to the IQ80 people. Either way, the country with IA80 will benefit (both will), because its people will be more productive and various 120+countries will compete to provide IQ services to them.

    2. India is a very big country. There will be lots of geniuses there even if average IQ is low.
    Quaere: What about Nigeria? It is not big on the same scale, but it must have a lot of very smart people. Are they all engaged in con games, at home and abroad? The culture routes very few to research and academia, unlike India.

    3. One might compare temperature records and IQ records. They are very good at comparing places or people at a single point in time. They are not designed for comparing places and people over a 50-year period, and are not so good at that. IQ, of course, is constantly renormed, so the basic scores always average 100— probably normed in every country too— and you have to go back to raw scores to find the Flynn Effect.

    4. There is no reason whatsoever to think the Flynn Effect is eternal.

    • Replies: @res
    , @CanSpeccy
  23. dearieme says:
    @Fin of a Cobra

    Perhaps a clever man with the flu might understand the perpetually muddled better.

    There’s a topic for a research grant: IQ-testing of flu victims.

    • Replies: @res
  24. Does the Flynn effect apply to individual people over time? Would someone who tested, say, IQ 100 in their twenties be ~115 in their seventies?

    Also why are there so seemingly few IQ tests for some countries? Are the tests that are carried out done by foreign (read Western) researchers or by native ones?

  25. Sunbeam says:
    @jacques sheete

    You know…

    There ought to be a registration system for this site. To post.

    But the registration process requires an IQ test, and the results will be posted with your handle. Yeah, requiring age data means someone can game the system, so don’t even ask for that. Just assume everyone is 30 or something.

    Heck I’d like to see it done for the bloggers as well. Be kind of interesting to see Fred and James Thompson’s IQ side by side. We’d also have to live with the fact that some of the authors’ initial language wasn’t English. Maybe that doesn’t matter if you are a strong “Jayman.”

    Of course most of us kind of read between the lines as it were, based on the content posted.

    But I have a need to know. IQ it all that matters right? Kinda need to know who to filter out and who to pay attention to.

  26. Most northern-western european countries have less ”smart fraction” than east asian countries but they have better quality of life and standard living, little doubt about creativity.

    Japan have better quality of life than Hong Kong.

    What matter, firstly, is not have that ”higher IQ ones” but a good proportion of

    - more rational

    - avg IQ people.

    THE SAME thing all the time

    IQ-echoes…

    This post seems little excessive because more than one commenter, myself included, already refuted the poorly understood points made by Freed.

    Mister Thompson prove my points about IQ-researchers….

    • Replies: @Sunbeam
  27. utu says:
    @Chet Flaker

    “There should be a link to that post. I don’t know who Fred Reed is, or what/where he posted.”

    Good point. It looks like Thompson doesn’t want you to read Fred Reed’s article. He just wants you to know that it was wrong. The Soviet Pravda used to review foreign books or movies that were forbidden for people to read or see.

  28. Yak-15 says:
    @The Alarmist

    Well because it would involve pointing out that many democrat strongholds – minority places – are really dumb. This would fly in the face of leftist idealism about their superior IQ. Perhaps more smart whites are liberal, perhaps not. But we can probably assert than more dumb whites are conservative than liberal. Leftists believe that most conservatives are dumb but would have a great deal of difficulty understanding that their NAMs are a grade dumber than the dumbest whites.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Daniel Chieh
  29. @Fin of a Cobra

    So maybe this is one of the reasons it has been so easy to manipulate the masses…

    It’s easy manipulate ”the masses” not because their cognitive intelligence but because the flaws of their psychological intelligence (intrapersonal, interpersonal). Because it most human societies are populated by quasi-natural social problems:

    people who have little self-knowledge to know their own limits and this deficit is even troublesome when cognitive ”intelligence” is higher because the reaching/impact of, vaguely speaking, smart people, have in human societies.

    People with little interpersonal/emotional ”intelligence” [sub-system] can’t understand other minds if not those who are similar to them. Most people because their superficial skills on their own self and other-self understanding just can’t understand one of the most influential human sub-groups: psychopaths. They can’t anticipate to the psychopath movements, they are just like trained dogs to the human owners, the relationship is strongly assymetric and unfavorable for them.

  30. @Yak-15

    IQ don’t analyse instintive skills, in this terms, conservatives are usually smarter than [white] libs and/or [white] libs are, disproportionately, hopeless ”men without nature”.

    Libs, on avg, are like trained and domesticated dogs, they can learn new tricks, better than cons, because cons are more instinctive, and more instinctive species usually have less mental plasticity to learn other things than what already is biologically programmed for them.

    Libs are more superficially empathetic but also more prone to be obedient to the[ir] authority, as well cons.

    Pretend to be dead to win the biscuit = dog tricks

    Literacy, numeracy === to work [for someone become rich] … and psychological conditioning/ ideological indoctrination = human tricks*

    Libs are like poodles/ house dog and cons are like ”dog-hunters”.

    Libs are, on avg, smarter than cons, because they can have a better vocabulary… cognitively smart…

    but they can’t understand what’s going on in their own sorround, instinctively dumb.

  31. @Chet Flaker

    Sorry. Assumed from the many comments that unz.com readers would know about his post.

    http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/

  32. @Anonymous

    People who have suffered brain damage that that they are without long-term memories are reported to be extraordinarily happy, but I’m not sure that its a good measure for success or any degree of meaningful living.

  33. @Anon

    We had one of the most insanely stable and psychologically healthy systems with Confucianism before, one which basically had maximized the notion of a “social grammar” where everyone could find their role and everything was consistent.

    You blew it up. You guys blew it all up.

    Welcome to the ashes of human civilization and the relics of tradition.

    • Agree: AaronB
    • Replies: @attilathehen
  34. @Lot

    The estimates are variable, so I went for a median round figure.
    Simple reaction times 1884- 2004 range from 0.57–1.21 drops per decade, other measures mostly higher. Sorry, cannot paste up the relevant table in this comments box, so it has come out in a jumble.

    Table 1
    Secular trends in various indicators that are consistent with declining g (Woodley effects) – all discovered or more precisely estimated after Woodley and Figueredo (2013).
    Paper(s) finding secular declines in g
    Trait(s) indicating a
    Woodley effect
    Estimated decline in g
    per decade scaled in IQ
    points Countries from which data were collected
    Time period to
    which data
    pertain
    Woodley, te Nijenhuis and Murphy (2013,
    2014a), Woodley of Menie, te Nijenhuis and
    Murphy (2015b)
    Simple visual and
    auditory reaction time
    (increasing)
    0.57–1.21 Canada, Finland, UK, USA, and Australia (different
    permutations of countries were used in different
    studies)
    1884–2004
    Woodley, Madison and Charlton (2014c) 1.8 (females)
    0 (males)
    UK 1930–1970
    Madison et al. (2016) Not estimated Sweden 1959–1985
    Pietschnig and Gittler (2015) Three-dimensional
    rotation ability
    (decreasing)
    4.8 Austria and Germany 1977–2014
    Woodley of Menie and Fernandes (2015) Working memory
    capacity (decreasing)
    0.16 USA 1923–2008
    Woodley of Menie and Fernandes (2016a) Color acuity (decreasing) 3.5 (full sample) 5.8
    (subset aged in their
    20s)
    Belgium, Finland, UK, USA 1982–2002
    Woodley of Menie, Fernandes, Figueredo and
    Meisenberg (2015)
    g-loaded vocabulary
    usage (decreasing)
    Not estimated N/A (English-language texts from Google Ngram
    Viewer)
    1850–2005
    Woodley of Menie and Fernandes (2016b) Fluctuating asymmetry
    (increasing)
    0.16 USA 1824–1984

  35. @jacques sheete

    I do think that Fred has high verbal intelligence: his work is usually cogent, entertaining and well presented. I don’t agree with either his premises or his conclusion, but its a fun journey getting to and fro.

  36. @Yak-15

    They are pretty aware, they just are good at practicing mindkilling, as AK notes.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/berkeleys-anti-free-speech-movement/#comment-1750583

    The human mind uses mostly heuristic analysis, so the very same data can provide vastly different results viewed from an ideological lens. For liberals, the exceptions – which exist – prove that all rules are invalid. For conservatives, the exceptions – which exist – prove that the rule is indeed generally valid.

    We seem really bad at integrating reality, which is something like: norms exist with some room for exceptions. But I’m biased toward the Right, so what do I know.

  37. Joe Wong says:
    @Egregious Philbin

    “IQ tests good at predicting life success,” that’s why India has Caste System and the Occidental societies have glass ceilings to make sure the status quote social order and the privileged are well protected and will not be declined, decayed or degraded through the natural selection process due to their undesirable IQ quality.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  38. Sunbeam says:
    @Santoculto

    “Most northern-western european countries have less ”smart fraction” than east asian countries but they have better quality of life and standard living, little doubt about creativity. ”

    I see creativity continually brought up when discussing Asians. What exactly is the basis for this? They seem plenty creative to me.

    There are a long list of firsts that were done in China (and you can find lists with a casual google).

    Quite often now when I see some news article about technology or an invention I see an Asian name.

    Personally, for a number of reasons, I’d make it a whole hell of a lot harder for Chinese to immigrate to or enter this country.

    But not creative? What does that even mean, they don’t become interior decorators at the rate other ethnicities do?

    Will say they seem to suck at music (despite all those classical musicians). Maybe a matter of taste but K-Pop and the Japanese pop acts just don’t have the “It” factor of some of the big Western European acts of days gone by (Fleetwood Mac, Beatles, heck even Abba).

    From what I hear though, K-Pop is bigger in places like Latin America now than American music, so what do I know maybe.

  39. joe webb says:

    lets talk about stupidity. Any low average bell curve has a right tail of a few smarties. As long as an authoritarian regime can control the dummies, the few smart ones can build a building, a pyramid, etc.

    Thus, the argument advanced in the article right at its git-go is wrong.

    the rest of it I did not bother to read cuz it got off so stupidly.

    JW

    • Replies: @res
    , @EH
  40. @Sunbeam

    All the time the crucial difference between western and eastern in this aspect is BIG versus LITTLE C’s.

    Greater innovators has been disproportionately of european extraction, those ”with’ BIG C.

    Yes, i believe japaneses, on avg, for example, seems very creative but we are talking about outliers.

    About pop culture in East Asia.

    First, this culture mimic western pop culture;

    Second, seems there are less diversity of musical styles among east asian artists (i can be wrong);

    Third, what Thompson said. Mayan”s” were very creative, were… and now*

    Fourth, it’s not just lack of diversity of styles and originality (invent new styles) but also lack of greater quality, i mean, even the best of pop-artists has been on the european or african extraction.

    This days japanese people are the most inovative in the east asia while many times chinese were more inovative.

    What differentiate older China than current China**

    Seems, little. So environmental differences cannot explain totally why we are not seeing a plenty of BIG-C’hinese inovators than in the past. In the true we have a even favorable environment in China to capture potential geniuses.

    From what I hear though, K-Pop is bigger in places like Latin America

    I no have notice about it here in Brazil, maybe in andinian or more-amerindian nations.

  41. res says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    That makes me wonder too whether a lot of creativity isn’t the result of being able to flip through lots of possibilities quickly. Of course there would be more to flip through usually in a high IQ mind and even perhaps more of a chance that systematic lateral thinking locates the pissibilities.

    Agreed about this. I think of it as two necessary components (which I think map pretty directly into what you said):
    - Idea generation ability. Especially an ability to generate ideas that are both novel and practical (in my experiences with group brainstorming sessions there seems to be a strong trade-off between those).
    - Idea evaluation and pruning ability.

    I think for a skilled creative artist these might very well happen transparently and great creative ideas just pop out from intuition. It would be interesting to hear what accomplished creative artists think (there must be a literature on this). Most of my creativity literature exposure has come from Dean Simonton and Hans Eysenck, so other pointers welcomed.

    P.S. Thanks for the **. Just picked up my copy of Fowler to find that was yet another word I’ve been using in a sloppy fashion.

  42. res says:
    @Eric Rasmusen

    1. Given global competition, a country *doesn’t* need 120+ IQ people. It can import them, or they can stay in their home country and give orders to the IQ80 people.

    Because importing or outsourcing a ruling (even if only from behind the curtain) class has worked out so well throughout history for the natives. Perhaps you could offer your thoughts on colonialism?

    I tend to agree with your other points.

    • Replies: @gda
    , @Saldim
  43. res says:
    @dearieme

    There’s a topic for a research grant: IQ-testing of flu victims.

    I don’t know if it is possible to get enough resolution from the tests, but I think it would be interesting to better characterize IQ variation on small time scales (hour, day, week, month) to assess short term environmental impacts and their causes. I see substantial variability in my own thinking (e.g. sickness, fasting vs post-prandial, time of day, current level of fitness, tiredness, etc.) but don’t really know how typical this is.

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  44. Joe Wong says:
    @TG

    Chinese was only one of the victims in the hands of the Occidental people barbarism, Romans, Indian, Muslim, indigenous people of Americas, Australia, Africa, South East Asia, Islands of Pacific Ocean, etc. are all victims of the Occidental people barbarism, most of them are still suffering from the Occidental people barbarism and never have a chance to get out of the sufferings imposed on them thru organized barbaric violence by the psychopathic aliens from faraway Occidental land uninvited, unwanted and unwarranted.

    The Occidental people are not only war criminals, criminals of crimes against humanity and crimes against peace, they are also hypocrites trying to white wash and gloss over their crimes on the moral high ground and by not mentioning their ugly past, they thrive on sucking other people’s blood and suffocate other higher IQ people from progress.

  45. @Sunbeam

    I think there are some studies that show that we are just generally less curious. Historically too, it should be notable that most of our inventions were always executed for a pragmatic and practical purpose, with relatively few contributions for purely abstract or ideological ends.

    Has its upsides and downsides. Clearly more downsides, because as mentioned above, they blew us all up.

    • Replies: @res
  46. res says:
    @joe webb

    Any low average bell curve has a right tail of a few smarties. As long as an authoritarian regime can control the dummies, the few smart ones can build a building, a pyramid, etc.

    Any modern society requires a substantial body of competent people to maintain it. Yes, the smart fraction can design and build things (or hire even smarter people from elsewhere to do so). But what happens when the 70-85 IQ core is unable to maintain the transportation infrastructure, water and sanitation systems, and power grid? Or even worse, decides the best use for a power grid is as a source of copper to steal.

  47. res says:

    Dr. Thompson, one topic that came up in comments to Fred Reed’s post was whether or not the composition and size of g might vary depending on the reference population used. My thinking was that differing verbal/spatial/math splits (e.g. between Jews, Asians, and Whites) might result in differences in the factors found both in composition and in importance (I would expect g to remain, but would it remain the exact same thing with the exact same explanatory power?). Has anyone taken a test like the WAIS and done a complete renorming (including a new factor analysis) with a different population? (this sounds like something the Chinese might do)

    A related question is I was wondering if g might similarly differ between more diverse and more homogeneous reference populations? My speculation would be that the other factors would become more important as the population became more diverse genetically (but the opposite appears to be the case if we segment by something like educational achievement, right?).

    If you have any thoughts or pointers I would appreciate hearing about them.

    P.S. I think Table 8.3 here offers a hint this might be true:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=1RXSBwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA184&ots=GJZ_w2y6T0&pg=PA184#v=onepage

    I was amazed that g accounted for 70% of the variance explained in one of the subgroups.

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  48. @trilobite

    True. It thought it would be too long for the brief replies I intended, so it fell by the wayside. It was the finding of low Irish IQ which launched Richard Lynn onto the study of intelligence, particularly country intelligence.
    9 studies in the database, mostly children (with some big samples) and one on adults. IQ 93 for mean and median, range 88 to 97.

    • Replies: @Rudolph
  49. @Fin of a Cobra

    8% is an overall figure for what is roughly encompassed by those able to benefit from college type education. 4% is the result of a specific mathematical problem.

  50. @The Alarmist

    Many State level analyses have been done, including on political preferences.

  51. res says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    I think there are some studies that show that we are just generally less curious.

    I’ve always associated that with “the nail that sticks out gets hammered down” (but don’t really know how much that extends beyond Japan). I don’t have any idea about the direction of causality though.

    The Confucian desire for a stable society also seems relevant.

    What do you think about these observations?

    P.S. Sunbeam does make an excellent point about Chinese firsts. Some of those counter your pragmatic point IMHO (e.g. gunpowder discovered but not used pragmatically) so whatever is going on seems complicated to me.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  52. @Wizard of Oz

    cf Fowler: Lots of options, only one alternative. However, usage has changed, so Fowler is no longer in charge.

  53. @Wizard of Oz

    Yes. Might be speed of cycling as alternative options are considered and rejected until one is a good fit. One aspect of the processing speed argument for general intelligence.

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/10-fast-questions-about-processing

    • Replies: @res
    , @Wizard of Oz
  54. @Joe Wong

    I think I could probably code a forum bot to spam exactly like you do. Bot Wong?

  55. res says:
    @James Thompson

    Agreed about the importance of processing speed. Do you think working memory ties in here as well? It seems to me that both the number of options one can consider simultaneously and the number of criteria that one can use to evaluate options are relevant.

    • Replies: @iffen
  56. @Joe Wong

    I’m”western” individual and I’m not barbaric or guilty by anything I don’t participate directly.

    Western, do you are including Jews or they are other holly victim group??

  57. @Joe Wong

    The best guinea pigs are winners ^_~

  58. @res

    Well, in the case of gunpowder, I believe it was kind of a historical fluke that did us in. Until the advent of the multi-shot rifle, bow-armed horsemen – even Native American plains warriors – were able to compete successfully against firearms. In China’s case, Ming musketeers ultimately proved incapable of defeating a much more organized, larger Manchu force armed with compound bows.

    When the Manchu took over and became the Qing Dynasty, they seem to have mostly ended any interest in improving firearms. Understandable in a way; they were horsemen, they had a tradition of horsemen, and firearms spooked horses and basically weren’t very compatible with their combat doctrine.

    Had the Ming avoided institutional collapse, China would have most likely done much better at firearms and probably would have at least remained competitive rather than be surpassed by European adoption. It wasn’t like the Ming were unaware of worldwide developments, they wrote about them and expressed concern, and even developed the infantry drill independently of Prussia.

    • Replies: @res
  59. @res

    There are two minimal requirements for g calculations: that there be a very broad range of people, and a broad range of tasks.
    Samples which are restricted in range (university students for example) will appear to have less g. Such samples are often used when the researcher would like to show that something other than general intelligence is an important factor.
    The need for a range of tasks is perhaps less crucial, but it helps extract a general factor.
    By the way, there are ways of apparently getting rid of the general factor by forcing the smaller factors into a more prominent position. If in doubt, to counter these approaches, look at Principal Compenents analysis for a simple general factor.
    A more demanding criterion is that the test items should behave in the same way with different samples and different historical cohorts. Confirmatory factor analyses are required.
    Factor structures do alter somewhat in different populations, but give large sample sizes these effects are generally small.
    General factors can also be found in some animals. Rosalind Arden covers this work.

    • Replies: @res
  60. @Daniel Chieh

    If you allowed yourselves to be blown up, it doesn’t say much for your race and culture. There is a solution. Start “Easternizing.” No more Western technology, industry and you can have your low IQ, backwards rice paddy country back. Always complaining about the West – that brought the world true civilization. Do something about it. And get out of our countries. And change your name, Daniel is not Asian.

    • Replies: @Sunbeam
    , @Daniel Chieh
    , @Anon
  61. pyrrhus says:
    @Egregious Philbin

    India’s population is extremely bi-modal, with the top two castes of Hindus (roughly speaking, the rulers and the priests) having high IQ’s that have been maintained by assertive mating, and the religious subgroup the Jains, who have an even higher proportion of doctors and other professionals in the US. The remaining population of India seems to have an average IQ of about 80. The truth of this is reinforced by the success of these 3 groups in the US, with Hindus having even higher average income than Jews, and Jains being prominent in all professions.

  62. res says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Thanks for the interesting and educational response.

    Two further thoughts. What about cannons? In the west cannons revolutionized the role of fortifications in warfare. Similarly, did the Chinese have effective armor? My impression was a big driver of firearm uptake in the west was its effectiveness against heavy armor.

    P.S. I wonder if Twinkie is reading this. He would probably have a lot to say here.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  63. MarkinLA says:
    @Anon

    They say East Asia has high IQ, but it’s committing demographic suicide.

    ???? This reminds me of the fools who want Japan to start taking in immigrants talking about Japan’s death spiral. They are losing 250,000 people a year. In a country of 110 million this means in about 400 years Japan will have 10 million at that rate. I think there is plenty of time to fix the problem – if it is a problem.

    Some depopulation may be just what these countries need.

    • Replies: @Malla
  64. res says:
    @James Thompson

    Thanks for your response! The PCA comment succinctly captures thousands of words of comments in the Fred Reed post. My big takeaway from that was (emphasis mine):

    Because the rotations are always performed in a subspace (the so-called factor space), the new axes will always explain less variance than the original factors (which are computed to be optimal), but obviously the part of variance explained by the total subspace after rotation is the same as it was before rotation (only the partition of the variance has changed).

    From https://www.utdallas.edu/~herve/Abdi-rotations-pretty.pdf which utu kindly referenced.

    Expressed in other words, rotations let you underestimate g (the first factor), but never overestimate it.

    A more demanding criterion is that the test items should behave in the same way with different samples and different historical cohorts.

    Can you recommend any papers which cover this and give results for a variety of samples?

    Factor structures do alter somewhat in different populations, but give large sample sizes these effects are generally small.

    Good to know this has been tested. Can you recommend any papers exploring this? Or suggest search terms etc.? I apologize if I am being overly demanding of your time and expertise.

    Thanks also for the Rosalind Arden pointer. This paper (focused on dogs) looks like a good introduction to her work for anyone else who want to look: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0963721416667718

    P.S. Here are some recent papers discussing Chinese intelligence test standardization, but I did not see anything comparing the resulting factors to those from other groups:

    http://www.sciencedomain.org/download/NDAzMUBAcGY.pdf

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613000901

    This book looks like it discusses somewhat related issues.

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  65. Sunbeam says:
    @attilathehen

    Geez.

    I’m not here to make some kind of histrionic defense of Asians.

    But come on. They don’t really need us for squat anymore. If aliens beamed the population of the US and Europe away to Alpha Centauri the Asian countries would still continue developing. Regardless of whether our markets are there or not. Really doesn’t matter anymore. Sure there would be a blip on the economic graphs, but ten years later no one would remember the short downturn.

    Unless you are saying they need to roll back to how things were done circa 1950 or so. Just cause.

    What I’m saying is that the West doesn’t own “technology.” Asia is doing just fine on its own from that standpoint.

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  66. @attilathehen

    I think you missed the reference to Planet of the Apes.

    The point is simply that while some systems maximize certain parameters of humanity, they are still vulnerable in other ways. I’m not particularly trying to praise anything, and indeed, I noted that the “blowing up” is part of the fact that it had weaknesses.

    I do have some belief that if the rate of scientific innovation is indeed slackening, then Eastern systems may need become more effective again. I believe its basically stable and provides for more human satisfaction, but less capable of handling disruption. If disruptions are minimized, then its qualities can show itself again.

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  67. iffen says:
    @res

    It seems to me that both the number of options

    It seems that it would be of importance to be able to quickly recognize non-viable options. I read something recently about the importance of the ability to quickly disregard non-causal factors.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  68. @res

    Chinese fortifications were of a level beyond anything in Europe and are largely credited for the slow development of cannons – late 19th century European cannons had difficulty penetrating Chinese city walls; essentially Chinese walls were built a bit like how modern body armor is, with a hard exterior encasing a softer clay interior that would distribute force. Its been typified that it might be an example of Chinese siege mentality, and were praised by some European observers, who might have been bewildered by the insanity of building walls within walls, such as around the market district.

    As such, Chinese cannons effectively treated walls as largely invincible and development carried along lines of “shotgun” or “shrapnel” to cause harm to soft elements of an army, aka troop-killing.

    That was actually pretty effective though ultimately bombarding huge tracts of land with endless barrages of artillery to drive away horsemen appears to have been more expensive than we thought. WW1 comparisons are appropriate, artillery is largely cost-ineffective despite impressive appearance. I suspect part of the failure of the Ming was the high cost of endless defensive war, as there are receipts showing something like a hundred cannons being delivered to the Great Wall annually.

    As for armor, the Chinese were fighting against nomads without armor, so armor penetration was not a particular concern. Due to early adoption of crossbows, armor had already often become more of a hindrance and mobility coupled with light bear weights was emphasized, and I don’t believe we ever really built much more than chainmail on a field level.

  69. @res

    Here is my take on the over-factoring of the Wechsler tests

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-wechsler-factor-factory

    Jelte Wicherts has majored on confirmatory factor analysis and measurement invariance.
    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/correlated-vectors This an example, no more, but search for his work generally.

    I sit through the factor analysis symposia at ISIR meetings, but rarely post about these papers, because they are generally very technical, and in my view don’t change the general picture very much.

  70. KingPablo says:
    @Fin of a Cobra

    I was also in disbelief of the 4% carpet problem. I’m always able to fall back on the flip side hypothesis of the Dunning-Kruger effect in that something I perceive as easy is obviously easy for everyone else. It isn’t, as all these tests and measurements suggest. It’s simply a case of cognitive bias.

    I also self select into groups where I’m challenged intellectually and not spoon fed baloney. Hence being here and not watching TV.

  71. @Daniel Chieh

    Asians can only copy. And only the Japanese have been able to copy themselves into a modern, democratic country. But again, THEY COPIED!!! We do not need or want Asians in the West. Without us, you are gone. Without you, we are fine.

    • Troll: utu
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  72. @Sunbeam

    Asians can only copy, they do not invent. Without Asians, the West is fine. Without the West, Asia is gone. There are 3 races: Caucasian, Asian, black. The bottom 2 don’t count.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Saldim
  73. @attilathehen

    You, sir, are proof that denial of reality is not something that is merely exclusive to the Left. It is unfortunate that we have not yet been able to copy a perfect model of SJWtopia has the West has managed. Truly, I weep about it every day as I mourn the lack of feminist snowplowing in the street.

    Have a nice life. Stay frantic.

  74. @attilathehen

    There are 3 races: Caucasian, Asian, black. The bottom 2 don’t count.

    Higher levels of deplorability!!

    So jews and ”arabs” is ok for you…

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  75. @Lot

    A decline in heritable g of approximately one IQ point per decade would seem to be realistic. Don’t forget, we now have direct estimates of the strength of genetic selection on cognitive ability, and more recently we now have the first indication that modern genomes are less enriched for cognitive genetic variants than those from several decades ago (Kong et al., 2017). The Kong et al. paper actually attempts to estimate the degree to which IQ should decline based on the strength of genetic selection in the population of Iceland:

    However, under the assumptions that POLYFULL accounts for 30% of the variance of EDU, and the part of POLYFULL that is not captured by POLYEDU behaves in a similar fashion in its impact on both reproduction and IQ, by extrapolation, the decline of POLYFULL would lead to a decline of 0.038 x (30/3.74) = 0.30 IQ points per decade.” (p.4).

    Their choice of additive heritability estimate (what they call POLYFULL) for the target phenotype is too low however (30%). The additive heritability of IQ is actually around 80% in adults (Bouchard Jr., 2004), and when g (which is the variance component of IQ on which selection operates; Woodley & Meisenberg, 2013) is modeled as a latent variable, its additive heritability is higher still (86%; Pannizon et al., 2014). Replacing 30% with 86% in Kong et al.’s equation therefore yields a ‘genetic g‘ decline of 0.87 IQ points per decade.

    Beauchamp (2016) has also estimated the decline that would be expected on the basis of selection against cognitive genetic variants in the US. He scales his decline estimate in terms of ‘lost’ time spent in education, yielding -1.5 months per generation. To recover the decline in g (again assuming that g is the target of selection) we simply divide 1.5 by the standard deviation in educational attainment, which according to the OECD is 36.6 months. This must then be divided by the (linkage pruned) shared genetic variance between g and educational attainment, which according to Okbay et al. (2016) is approximately 0.6. This is then multiplied by 15 (the standard deviation of IQ), yielding a decline of 1.02 points per generation, or 0.37 points per decade, assuming a (standard) generation length of 2.8 decades. Beauchamp’s estimate suffers from precisely the same problem as Kong et al’s however, namely a low-ball estimate of the heritability of the target phenotype (Beauchamp uses a value of 40%). We can correct the decadal decline estimate for this low-ball estimate by simply computing a disattenuation coefficient (u), which is the quotient of 0.40 and 0.86, or 0.47. By dividing 0.37 by the u-value we get a decadal ‘genetic g’ decline of 0.79 IQ points per decade.

    So ‘genetic g’ is declining by approximately 0.8 to 0.9 points per decade in two Western countries. The phenotypic indicators that may be tracking this decline in g (these being the so-called “Woodley Effects”) paint a somewhat different picture however. A review of these was conducted recently by Sarraf (2017, Table 1, p.3), who lists g decline estimates from various cross-temporal meta-analytic studies employing a range of indicators. The unweighted average of decline estimates across indicators is 1.65 IQ points per decade (after excluding repeated measures). The ‘genetic g’ decline is therefore only 50.3% of the apparent phenotypic g decline. There exists considerable heterogeneity among the decline estimates however, with the g decline associated with slowing simple visual reaction time averaging out at 0.97 IQ points per decade across four studies, the decline estimated using working memory being considerably smaller (0.16 IQ points per decade) and the decline estimated using perceptual acuity and 3D rotation ability being considerably larger (3.5 and 4.8 IQ points per decade respectively). Some phenotypic measures may therefore be better at picking up the ‘true’ genetic trend than others (such as reaction times). Working memory on the other hand appears to be relatively insensitive to the ‘genetic g‘ decline, whereas the visual processing measures seem to be picking up the effects of some additional suppressing factor beyond declining ‘genetic g‘.

    References

    Beauchamp, J.P. (2016). Genetic evidence for natural selection in humans in the contemporary United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 113, 7774–7779.

    Bouchard Jr, T.J. (2004). Genetic influence on human psychological traits – a survey.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 148-151.

    Kong, A., Frigge, M.L., Thorleifsson, G., et al. (2017). Selection against variants in the genome associated with educational attainment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, DOI:10.1073/pnas.1612113114

    Okbay, A., Beauchamp, J.P., Fontana, M.A., et al. (2016). Genomewide association study identifies 74 loci associated with educational attainment. Nature, 533, 539–542.

    Panizzon, M. S., Vuoksimaa, E., Spoon, K. M., et al. (2014). Genetic and environmental influences on general cognitive ability: Is g a valid latent construct? Intelligence, 43, 65–76.

    Sarraf, M. (2017). Review of historical variability in heritable general intelligence: Its evolutionary origins and socio-cultural consequences. Personality and Individual Differences. DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2016.12.028

    Woodley, M.A., & Meisenberg, G. (2013). A Jensen effect on dysgenic fertility: An
    analysis involving the national longitudinal survey of youth. Personality and
    Individual Differences, 55
    , 279–282.

  76. Rudolph says:
    @James Thompson

    Isn’t the Irish avg IQ obviously ~100 ?

    Sure, just saying “obviously” is not remotely scientific, but hey.

  77. Individuals with high IQ’s do NOT always excel or succeed in life. Ask 200 IQ Chris Langan. Nor does high intelligence indicate superior genetics. Nikola Tesla, Isaac Newton types were celebates who never succeeded in passing on their genes thus providing evidence against the notion of only the strong (or superior) endure. There is a concomitant relationship between IQ and intellect. I think practical intellect is more relevant to success than raw IQ.

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  78. @Daniel Chieh

    谢先生,

    I am continually amazed at the persistence of that claim. It can only be said by someone who has no knowledge of the Hong Kong movie industry, or has had no close experience with Asians.

    However, I will not appeal to claims of Chinese priority in the discovery of Gunpowder, because I consider that claim highly suspect.

  79. @Santoculto

    No, Jews and “Arabs” except for Lebanese, Syrian , Iraqi Christians are too mixed and do not qualify as Caucasians. Jews have high intermarriage rates with Asians/blacks. Here is a youtube that shows this. Ignore the title. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY0FOPa-j-E And Jews are anti-European, anti-Christian. I look at Jews from 2 perspectives: religious and evolutionary. If I look at them from a Christian perspective they are under a Deicidal curse. From an evolutionary, they are biologically degenerate because of their miscegenation. Arabs before Islam were a Caucasian race. Northern Africa before Islam was Caucasian. St. Augustine of Hippo, Hannibal are examples of these peoples. When Islam conquered Northern Africa and instituted polygamy and the slave trade, these peoples were miscegenated and destroyed. North African IQ is about 85 today. World history can be summed up in 2 words: IQ. Only Caucasians have the IQs needed to produce functioning civilizations.

  80. @Peripatetic commenter

    Are you Asian? Are you married to an Asian? Are you Jewish?

  81. @Intellect not IQ

    An IQ of 90+ is needed to maintain a civilization and produce greatness. The West is the only one with this criteria.

  82. @Peripatetic commenter

    谢谢.

    Interesting – what is the other source of gunpowder discovery that you would propose? Arabic?

    The Hen should also ask if you are gay, pagan, or black, sir.

    • Replies: @Peripatetic commenter
  83. @Michael A. Woodley of Menie

    Many thanks for these explanations and references. I had copied Sharraf’s table, and assume I can now post it up as published.

  84. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Michael A. Woodley of Menie

    Sir, I saw your video interview with Molyneaux on YouTube and you really are that kind of enthusiastic scholar that has been remarkably lacking as atheism advances (like you said in the video) and the goal of scholarship no longer is transcendental, above the scholar’s life interests.

    Things like that video are important contributions, as well as more technical dissertation as your comment here.

  85. @annamaria

    Yeah, funny that, eh? Maybe this is because Yoo is credentialed, and therefore he gets a pass on being judged despite the horrible real-world results of his soulless intellectualizing, or should we say, his rationalization and normalization of the indefensible impulses and actions of the powerful? Yes, credentialed, and therefore one of those entitled to exemption from moral censure.

  86. @Joe Wong

    You are trolling of course so there’s mo need for precision or completeness but you have forgotten to mention that the most destructive criminals in terms of numbers of victims and destruction of inherited culture were the victims of Occidental ideas. Mao’s Cultural Revolution was a nice segue to his Great Leap Forward and Ho Chi Minh was only less destructive to Vietnamese culture and religion than Pol Pot would have been if destroying Cambodia hadn’t preoccupied him. Oh the power of those Occidental ideas in the wrong hands even many years after Marx and Lenin died. If only they hadn’t chasedthe Dalai Llama out of his country. What a pity the culture wasn’t capable of learning from others’ mistakes.

    • Replies: @Saldim
  87. Biff says:
    @Anon

    They say East Asia has high IQ, but it’s committing demographic suicide.

    How?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Anon
  88. @Daniel Chieh

    I, attilathehen, am a Caucasian Christian woman who belongs in the West. Just go back to China and we will take care of snow plowing problems in Sweden. These are not your problems.

  89. @iffen

    You bring to mind the decisive leaders who cut off actually viable options too quickly and fail to allow subtle exploration of nuance and complexity. Sometimes that would be caused more by ego than IQ (anyone reminded of the Donald?).

    • Replies: @iffen
  90. Lot says:
    @Michael A. Woodley of Menie

    Thank you for the detailed response. I just read a few of your articles on this topic (not all are available online). I remain unconvinced the magnitude of the decline in genetype IQ is as large as your estimate however. Part of the reason is the “common sense” cross check I mentioned in the prior post.

    It also looks like “educational attainment” is much more negatively selected against than IQ itself.

    Table 1 in your 2015 Personality and Individual Difference article shows Ability–fertility correlations are for both sexes strongest for Educational Level, -.17 and -.12 for the two sexes, while digit span backwards is only -.06 and -0.01.

    This suggests that the genome studies, which look at education level because that is simply that data that exists given the lack of controlled same-age IQ tests for large populations that have been sequenced, would overestimate the decline in genotype IQ.

    I noticed that your 2015 article suggests the selection effect for IQ causing a decline −.262 points per decade, but “increasing to −1.072 points when the additive effect of mutation accumulation is considered.”

    I read the Arslan article you cited for mutational accumulation/parental age effect, which is responsible for the bulk of the decline in genotype IQ, here

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0090097

    The conclusion of it is “Controlling for parental trait level, we were unable to show significant effects of paternal age, a proxy for new genetic mutations, on offspring IQ, head circumference, or personality traits.”

    I think you are correct that increasing parental age in the West is leading to a higher mutational load and decreasing genotype IQ, however I did not see any basis for the large estimate in your article.

  91. gda says:
    @res

    I’m reminded of the skit from “Monty Python’s Life of Brian”:
    “..All right… all right… but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order… what have the Romans done for us?”

    Perhaps we might add to that list, peace (pax Brittanica), trade, the English language, a middle class, technology, sport, and last (but by no means least) the Abolition of Slavery.

    But seriously, growing up in the West Indies, I would generally have to say that overall, and based on the English system, which is the only one I have actual first-hand knowledge of, colonialism there was a very much a net positive. And having met many who were peripherally involved in the English colonial experience in Africa, it was the same there.

    As Niall Ferguson observes:
    “Nobody, least of all me, claims that British imperial rule was perfect……. But most sub-Saharan governments since independence have managed to treat their populations significantly worse than the British did. For all its imperfections, the Colonial Civil Service was not corrupt. When money was sent to build railways or schools, British officials did not simply pocket it.”

  92. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Dave Pinsen

    One of your Unz colleagues had a recent post about intellectual decline with age. It would seem a lot of that could be ameliorated by technology

    Absolutely. As memory fades, Google fills the breech!

  93. utu says:
    @Michael A. Woodley of Menie

    “Their choice of additive heritability estimate (what they call POLYFULL) for the target phenotype is too low however (30%). The additive heritability of IQ is actually around 80% in adults (Bouchard Jr., 2004)”

    Isn’t it something that the science that seems to speak with great confidence about, say “decadal ‘genetic g’ decline of 0.79 IQ” (NOTE TWO SIGNIFICANT DIGITS) can diverge by factor of almost three on the estimate of heritability?

    • Replies: @Christof Friedrich
  94. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz

    Creativity has virtually nothing to do with IQ. Probably not even dependent on the same part of the brain or even the same side of the brain. Haven’t you noticed when doing a crossword puzzle that thinking hard about the clues achieves nothing, whereas glancing over them while eating a jam waffle or some such thing can yield instant solutions. Best of all, I find, is to doze off, then solve the damn thing in the minute or two during which full consciousness returns. Obviously there is something unrelated to IQ-test-intelligence involved here and its probably involves the same faculty that yields, for the most creative, new theories about falling apples or curved space.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Santoculto
  95. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Eric Rasmusen

    India is a very big country. There will be lots of geniuses there even if average IQ is low.

    Exactly. Most people in most countries spend most of their time doing dumb work that requires an IQ of, optimally, around 90 to 110, which is presumably why the average intelligence of most populations is within that range. Elites account for a negligible fraction of one percent of the population, so every population, whatever its mean IQ, can have an elite of high IQ. More important than the intelligence of the elite are the institutions and ideologies which provide the framework for elite action.

    And at 92. above, it should be “breach” not “breech!”

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  96. The normal Bushman’s IQ is 60. He does not appear retarded because he is not retarded. A Caucasian with an IQ of 60 is not only severely retarded, he appears severely retarded. IQ measures many important things very well, but normal is not generally one of them. A normal African cannot keep a high functioning civilization. A normal Caucasian might do so, and sometimes does.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @Wizard of Oz
  97. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    if selection on a settled population is hard enough then intellectual levels can rise in 8 to 16 generations

    Eight to 16 generations? That is a bizarre statement. Kill everyone with an IQ below, or above, say, 100 and you’d have an effect on mean IQ immediately that will be manifest in the next generation as well. The effect of selection is incremental with every single generation.

    In the past, intellectual degeneration was prevented by the fact that mortality was higher among the poor than the rich, the latter being, on the whole, smarter than the former. Thus the reproductive deficit of the poorer and dumber was made up for (in a static population) by the reproductive excess of the richer and (generally) brighter. Thus there was continuous positive selection for economic success and, hence, intelligence.

    Now we have reversed the effect of selection by (among other idiotic mechanisms) paying feckless people to raise kids on welfare while promoting girls’ education, i.e., while reducing the effective reproductive life of intelligent females. In other words, liberalism and feminism are self-limiting social diseases that will end with the demise of the West as it declines into idiocratic feebleness, and is taken over by Muslims from the middle east and fundamentalist Christians from Africa who understand what a woman’s role in life is a lot better than most Americans.

  98. @Biff

    I am sure he is referring to fertility rates and the one child policy’s impact with emphasis also on the way East Asians, like Europeans, will reproduce earlier – and therefore more often in the long term – amongst the relatively dim.

    As an Australian who sees clever women having no children, or few, as they seek to break glass ceilings I am pleased at the quality of our migrant intake, with qualifications about what all the hairdressing students will do for us when they find that there is not enough hair to go round. (It seems that the list of occupations where there is scarcity in Australia gets updated very incompetently and tardily so Indian and other students wanting a quick path to a visa – so they can drive cabs? – were quick to sign up for short courses; similarly for chefs I believe).

    I guess our average IQ is being maintained by the East Asians (mostly Han) and Indians. But the one child policy in China had its greatest impact on the urban middle classes (prosperous businessmen in Shenzhen would easily pay the fine but still usually didn’t have more than two children I believe). Watch Japan to see how it copes with an ageing population which also is, to some extent, dumbing down. I doubt that multicultural societies will be able to emulate it comfortably.

    • Replies: @Saldim
  99. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    Observed changes in population mean IQ over time are related only in part to cultural changes. Significant genetic changes are are also responsible. As countries modernize, country folk raised in inbred communities migrate to the cities and breed with people from different inbred communities. The result is hybrid vigor or heterosis (combined with an increased genetic load), which in the first generation or two will be manifest in greater vigor, higher intelligence and a lower frequency of genetic disease (Donald Trump’s mother was a purebred Scot, and probably, therefore, highly inbred).

    The effect is greatest in the first generation and then dissipates over subsequent generations. Thus the rise and fall of civilizations. The British who got the industrial revolution first are now in decay, the Americans and Germans followed the Brits, who were followed by the Japanese, who are now fading as the Chinese surge.

    Sadly, the Western national elites are too dumb to devise a sensible population policy. Or they don’t care. Probably the latter, since they’re all globalist bastards or in the pay of globalist bastards who are probably happy to see the masses degenerate, and hopefully, just die as advocated by the National Review.

  100. @Sunbeam

    Will say they seem to suck at music (despite all those classical musicians). Maybe a matter of taste but K-Pop and the Japanese pop acts just don’t have the “It” factor of some of the big Western European acts of days gone by (Fleetwood Mac, Beatles, heck even Abba).

    From what I hear though, K-Pop is bigger in places like Latin America now than American music, so what do I know maybe.

    The Beatles would be comparing apples (!) to oranges, and Fleetwood Mac (if I may gently rib) I might even raise a supercilious brow at; but a good amount of K-pop can proudly hold its own with the illustrious pop stylings of Abba.

    Part of its popularity in the Global South stems, no doubt, from the relative absence of ill*m*n*t* trashiness, but apart from the moral aspect there is an unquestionable and vast aesthetic superiority in the melodicism and grace of many K-pop producers and acts over the sterile four-to-the-floor techno beats and snarl-whisper verses/snarl-scream choruses of American “pop radio” or whatever we should call it nowadays. A minority cohort of entertainment agencies prefer Swedish producers over native Koreans, but their output is still musically preferable to the Judeo-”Western” mainstream.

    With regard to Fred, we shouldn’t be snobs. He has his known tender spots he likes to gadfly about, and while I find his zealotry on behalf of his neighbors in retirement a little grating at times, it’s not unuseful to have these questions aired. He is, at his best, a terrific writer and a not unjust defender of certain points of contention with his opposites like Derbyshire.

    And speaking of certain attenuated forms of g-factor fetishism: it must be said that, polymath that our friend the Derb is, he is capable of quite a bit of aspie silliness, like his dropping the word count of A Midsummer Night’s Dream and suggesting (challenging?) his readers to go through it in an hour.

    Read A Midsummer Night’s Dream in one hour!? Good God man, it’s poetry, not The Wealth and Poverty of Nations. Banish the theatrical run time inside your head, and banish all the world!

  101. @CanSpeccy

    Yes…. but…. The higher processing speed of the higher IQ person is, prima facie, going to help produce ideas that others see as creative because novel. That would be true on average even if there are different neurological ways for processing speed to be affected.

    And is putatively measurable creativity actually the same thing as performed by a potter with IQ of 90 and a tax lawyer with IQ of 140?

  102. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    And is putatively measurable creativity actually the same thing as performed by a potter with IQ of 90 and a tax lawyer with IQ of 140?

    Empirical research suggests there is little if any connection between IQ and creativity, although to be a creative in a particular field you need to have the IQ to master that field of knowledge, obviously.

    So to be a creative mathematician, you probably need an IQ close to 140, but there are lots of mathematicians with an IQ of 140 who never did anything creative, and there’s not much reason to believe that the most creative people have particularly high IQs relative to those in their field of endeavor: Richard Feynman, for example, a math wizz and creative genius in quantum physics of the highest order had, so it has been said, an IQ of only 123, which is consistent with his poor grades on everything but math and physics when he entered grad school at Princeton.

    • Replies: @dearieme
    , @Wizard of Oz
    , @res
  103. @Lot

    My responses (italics) are posted below your comments.

    Thank you for the detailed response. I just read a few of your articles on this topic (not all are available online). I remain unconvinced the magnitude of the decline in genetype IQ is as large as your estimate however. Part of the reason is the “common sense” cross check I mentioned in the prior post.

    Response: Yet the genetic data are fairly unequivocal as to the magnitude of the decline. As I mentioned, the authors of these studies would have found bigger declines than they reported had they used realistic estimates of the additive heritability of general intelligence. Declines in g of a point or so a decade are also not so surprising when you consider the role of age at first birth as a source of dysgenic selection, on top of differential fertility. Don’t forget that low-ability individuals are not just more fertile: they procreate earlier, which means that their generation times are shorter. Heiner Rindermann has produced some simple simulations that will be published in a forthcoming monograph, showing that generational compression among those with low g may actually be a larger source of dysgenic selection than differential fertility. Rindermann’s model is consistent with Kong et al., who found that age at first birth was the principal driver of the dysgenic trend in Iceland.

    It also looks like “educational attainment” is much more negatively selected against than IQ itself.

    Table 1 in your 2015 Personality and Individual Difference article shows Ability–fertility correlations are for both sexes strongest for Educational Level, -.17 and -.12 for the two sexes, while digit span backwards is only -.06 and -0.01.

    This suggests that the genome studies, which look at education level because that is simply that data that exists given the lack of controlled same-age IQ tests for large populations that have been sequenced, would overestimate the decline in genotype IQ.

    Response: Educational attainment should not be thought of as a phenotype, or as a target of selection. It is an outcome of facultative calibration caused by the action of heritable sources of phenotypic variance, chief among which is g with which it shares about 60% of its genetic variance. The measures of g that best correlate with educational attainment are those associated with the ability to acquire and utilize knowledge in solving problems – so-called crystallized abilities, which are also most central to the construct of educational attainment. These measures (such as vocabulary) happen to be among the most heritable measures of g also (Kan et al., 2013); therefore, in as much as educational attainment is a strong proxy for these particular indicators of g it would be expected to correlate strongly with fertility relative to something like backwards digit span, which is relatively less g-loaded (0.6 vs. 0.8 for Vocabulary, for example).

    It is important to note also that educational attainment requires the presence of a very specific kind of environment in order to manifest (i.e. an educational system). Thus, another way of looking at educational attainment is as a source of selection on g. People will forgo opportunities, e.g. for procreation, in order to acquire more educational capital as this boosts economic competitiveness, thus there are tradeoffs. Using cognitive polygenic score (PGS) data from the Add Health sample, Kevin Beaver, Joe Schwartz and I were able to test this model directly via path analysis (Woodley of Menie et al., 2016). We found, as expected, that the main effect of the PGS on fertility was mediated by IQ and educational attainment, via the indirect path: PGS -> IQ -> Educational attainment -> Fertility, with educational attainment depressing fertility. The direct effect of PGS on fertility was small and non-significant in our model, however our power to detect this effect was limited as our sample size was modest (around 1,800). Much bigger studies (such as Kong et al.) have found that cognitive variants are directly negative linked with fertility outcomes net of educational attainment – which is what you would expect from 200 years of dysgenic fertility on g.

    I noticed that your 2015 article suggests the selection effect for IQ causing a decline −.262 points per decade, but “increasing to −1.072 points when the additive effect of mutation accumulation is considered.”

    I read the Arslan article you cited for mutational accumulation/parental age effect, which is responsible for the bulk of the decline in genotype IQ, here

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0090097

    The conclusion of it is “Controlling for parental trait level, we were unable to show significant effects of paternal age, a proxy for new genetic mutations, on offspring IQ, head circumference, or personality traits.”

    I think you are correct that increasing parental age in the West is leading to a higher mutational load and decreasing genotype IQ, however I did not see any basis for the large estimate in your article.

    Response: In a 2015 article I derived an estimate of the impact of mutation accumulation on g using the study that you mention (Woodley, 2015). You are right that the study in question concludes that there was no effect of paternal age on g; however, there was an apparent effect prior to controlling for birth order. As birth order and paternal age are typically highly collinear, I concluded that this control may have spuriously suppressed the effect of interest, but as it happens I was wrong about this. What convinced me of my error was the study of D’Onoffrio et al. (2014), which found no paternal age effect on g after controlling for birth order using a sibling comparison design and a sample size north of 500K. Subsequent mutation calling work has confirmed the observation that g is apparently robustly canalized in development against common mutations, as it has been found that only rare protein coding mutations have an effect on the trait, and even then this effect is only visible when the extreme low or high end of the distribution is compared against the mean (Spain et al., 2015).

    I have devised an alternative estimate of the g lost due to mutation accumulation via reanalysis of secular trend data indicating increasing cranial fluctuating asymmetry in the White population of the US over the last 130 years (Woodley of Menie & Fernandes, 2016). Fluctuating asymmetry is a measure of developmental stability and correlates weakly with g. Mutations that disturb developmental stability may therefore antagonise the canalization of g, exerting an indirect (developmentally mediated) effect on the trait. The resultant g decline is very small however (0.16 points per decade), suggesting that mutations and other system integrity threats have not contributed substantially to the overall decline in g. The old estimate of the effect of mutation accumulation that I derived in the paper that you discuss can therefore be discarded.

    Refs.

    D’Onofrio, B. M., Rickert, M. E., Frans, E., et al. (2014). Paternal age at childbearing and offspring psychiatric and academic morbidity. JAMA Psychiatry, 71, 432–438.

    Kan, K.-J., Wicherts, J. M., Dolan, C. V., & van der Maas, H. L. J. (2013). On the nature and nurture of intelligence and specific cognitive abilities: The more heritable,
    the more culture dependent. Psychological Science, 24, 2420–2428.

    Spain, S. L., Pedroso, N., Kadeva, N., et al. (2015). A genome-wide analysis of putative functional
    and exonic variation associated with extremely high intelligence. Molecular
    Psychiatry
    . http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/mp.2015.108.

    Woodley of Menie, M.A. (2015). How fragile is our intellect? Estimating losses in
    general intelligence due to both selection and mutation accumulation. Personality and Individual Differences, 75, 80-84.

    Woodley of Menie, M.A., & Fernandes, H.B.F. (2016). The secular decline in general intelligence from decreasing developmental stability: Theoretical and empirical considerations. Personality and Individual Differences, 92, 194-199.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Wizard of Oz
  104. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @james wilson

    The normal Bushman’s IQ is 60.

    LOL. How was that precise number determined? I’d be much more inclined to believe the inferiority of the !Kung San intellect if the assessment were based on test clearly free of cultural bias, for example, as a reaction speed test. Anyone got the data? I doubt it. In the meantime, I trust to the speedy reflexes of a people who live by hunting elephants.

    Anyway, Nobel Prize winner, J.D. Watson, said that the !Kung San people were “some of the smartest individuals” he had met.

  105. @CanSpeccy

    Actually breech is not too bad for 92 :-)

  106. @james wilson

    That 60, together with similar figures for Aborigines, was what put me off taking Lynn and Vanhenen very seriously even before I became conscious of the Flynn effect and long before Ron’s devastating takedown of left and right and stupid. That’s not to say that such figures aren”t faintly predictive because the circumstances which cause what might be a brain neurologically capable of IQ 100 performance to score 60 aren’t likely to be conducive to building great civilisations.

  107. utu says:
    @Michael A. Woodley of Menie

    “−.262 points per decade, but “increasing to −1.072″ – Wow, four or even five digit precision? I wonder if people who come up with these numbers ever did any calculations that were meant to be applied to real things. Only in academia! Grow up.

  108. @utu

    In fact, behavioral genetic studies on the adult heritability of IQ virtually always arrive at an estimate around 0.77-0.85. The Kong group doesn’t reach the 0.30 estimate via any substantive analysis. They simply pick a conservative figure, perhaps to avoid the hysterical reactions that typically greet discussions of dysgenics. Why do I sense that you voted for Clinton?

  109. @Michael A. Woodley of Menie

    Would you please enlighten this layman about two matters.

    1. Is there any probability that the mutations with age are likely to occur somewhere that matters. That is to say, if there are 100 age related mutations in the old codger’s 30,000 genes what is the likelihood that one mutation will matter at all for the health of the species?

    2. Are methods of embryo selection for implantation already well enough advanced to allow the dangers of mutations in older fathers’ germ cells to be avoided? If not when? (I am an investor in a small Australian listed company called Reproductive Health Services which I understand to be doing something like that).

  110. dearieme says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “so it has been said”. Could be true, but the discrepancy with his performance is such that I’d like to see evidence.

  111. @CanSpeccy

    Creativity has virtually nothing to do with IQ. Probably not even dependent on the same part of the brain or even the same side of the brain.

    I agree, i think if IQ measure the cognitive boundaries or extension of our intelligences, creativity still correlates only because this broad factor, because presumably, bigger intelligences tend to mean bigger potential/resources. Critical-analytical and speculative thinking is characteristically opposite to the convergent thinking, what IQ tend to capture.

    Convergent thinking quickly capture and accept ”correct’ answers while divergent/ critical thinking look laterally to the flaws and possibilities of ”correct’ answers.

    Some people are directly connected to this speculative thinking, so for this people is even more difficult to converge to the ”correct’ answers without think in other possibilities firstly.

    Basically what we understand as [general] intelligence is, memorize/internalize, learn convergent tasks and replicate them, but most of human knowledge is basically old creativity that become ”common knowledge”.

    BUT creativity is ”within’ the intelligence entity/organism or system — domain.

    What we understand, mistankely, as intelligence, indeed is in true, cognition.

    What really is intelligence is also what creativity is. Just like a system with different sub-systems and with specific functions. Creativity is about think in different possibilities to solve novel or not-so-novel ‘problems”, what intelligence also is in the same way Nervous system is for the human organism.

    Summarizing this bulls…tz: creativity is in the domain of intelligence, even we can agree that both is not exactly the same thing.

  112. iffen says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    I can see how both the fight genes and the flight genes survive. I can’t see how the “what to do, what to do? can’t decide!” ones would make it through.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  113. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    About 6% of the Indian population is high caste Hindu or smart religious groups (Jains and Parsees). Assuming this body of people have an IQ of 100, how does that change the numbers of the smart fraction (let’s say the smart fraction threshold is 120)?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @rec1man
  114. @CanSpeccy

    That 123 figure for Feynman’s IQ is obvious rubbish though no doubt it tickled his well developed sense of humour to have the rumour spread. Someone who could teach himself Japanese so he could lecture in Japan or simply give his lucid (published) lectures on physics clearly had a very superior IQ.

  115. AaronB says:

    Well, whatever you want to say about IQ, his conclusion is definitely correct. Higher IQ countries will be wealthier and more developed.

    They will also be more dull, joyless, materialistic, with life centered on hard work for material gain, and technology – i.e mere convenience – being the highest aspiration. Knowledge will be simpler, impoverished, one-dimensional, focused on control rather than a rich and complex understanding of the world, and intangible pleasures that have no practical utility – i.e do not conduct to physical convenience – will gradually fade away, and people will feel guilty for feeling such things.

    People will feel vaguely restless and miserable without knowing why, but they will have no insight into their condition, because “insight” will be seen as a superstitious relic from a bygone era, since it isn’t precise and cannot be expressed mathematically. Transfixed by the glitter of technology, and the impoverished thinking needed to develop it, they will be trapped with no way out.

    As disgust with life and boredom mount, people will start having less children, and will become self-hating and culturally suicidal, never understanding what calamity has befallen them.

    If this is what you want, I say you should have it. It would be cruel to deny people who can see no higher vision than this the tiny bit of pleasure they are able to get out of life, such as it is.

    But there must remain a space for human beings capable of flourishing and thriving, some sort of “parallel society”, where other values obtain. Increasingly I find the dominant paradigm is trying to extend itself over everyone, to make escape impossible. Unhappy people tend to wish to impose their unhappiness on others. Happy people are tolerant.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @CanSpeccy
  116. AaronB says:

    Interestingly, the stereotype of clever Asians is fairly recent, no sooner than the early 20th century.

    Before that, Europeans never had the impression that Asians were particularly smarter than them. Bertrand Russell, who thought China was the greatest civilization the world had ever seen and taught there for a year, said he did not think the Chinese were more intelligent than Europeans.

    I wonder what Chinese IQ was back then? I’m betting their IQ rose in direct proportion as they became ambitious and began to exert effort to catch up with the West in a serious way.

    The relationship between wealth and technology and IQ is indeed a very close one in modern times, but a subtle thinker might have some doubts about which way the arrow of causality points.

  117. Saldim says:
    @attilathehen

    There are least 6 races of man (Caucasoids, Negroids, Capoids, Australoids, Mongoloids, American Mongoloids).

  118. AaronB says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Maybe he was one of those “unbalanced” types whose g was less important than his special factor (against the general population trend, of course), and he scored dismal on some IQ sub-tests, bringing his score down.

    I’ve read some of his books and he didn’t seem very verbally gifted.

    • Replies: @res
  119. Saldim says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Don’t forget all the killing done by Mongols.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  120. res says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Hmmm. I followed that link of yours and here is their concluding paragraph (emphasis mine):

    Summarizing, intelligence is highly relevant for creativity, but the kind of relationship depends on the level of intelligence as well as on the actual indicator of creativity. In line with early assumptions, intelligence may increase creative potential up to a certain degree where it loses impact and other factors come into play. At this, it possibly applies that the more complex the measure of creativity that is considered, the higher the threshold up to which intelligence may exert its influence. For the most advanced indicator of creativity, namely creative achievement, intelligence remains relevant even at the highest ability range.

    That seems rather different from your statement (which linked the paper as support?!): “Empirical research suggests there is little if any connection between IQ and creativity”

    One of my biggest red flags for taking a person or paper seriously is when their references fail to substantiate their claims.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  121. Saldim says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    I am sure he is referring to fertility rates and the one child policy’s impact with emphasis also on the way East Asians, like Europeans, will reproduce earlier – and therefore more often in the long term – amongst the relatively dim.

    I don’t know if you noticed but East Asian countries don’t have the seriously dysfunctional immigration of White countries.

  122. Saldim says:
    @res

    Go take a look at South Africa after Apartheid ended and come back to us.

    • Replies: @res
  123. res says:
    @AaronB

    I think that is part of it. I’m guessing the test he took was biased towards verbal and away from math as well (IMHO there was a similar problem with the Terman test which missed Alvarez and Shockley). And no doubt he reveled in the story.

    I wonder if he took the SAT (introduced in 1926)? Reputedly he scored outstandingly well on the Princeton graduate admission exams. His Putnam score in 1939 has been variously cited as best in the country, second best, and “top five” here: https://mks.mff.cuni.cz/kalva/putnam/putn39.html

  124. res says:
    @Saldim

    I’m actually more receptive to the colonialism can be beneficial argument than you might think from my comment. But although I agree South Africa was more functional as a country then, I still think the “natives” (meaning the black Africans, though I know there is some dispute about who has rights to that term given settlement patterns there) prefer things the way it is now. Though that might be lessening as the industrial and human capital left from the colonial era is depleted and the “big man” dysfunctionality reasserts itself.

    My original comment addressed the wisdom of importing a ruling class as shown throughout history. I stand by that statement.

  125. utu says:
    @AaronB

    “a subtle thinker might have some doubts about which way the arrow of causality points” – You want subtlety? Not at this address.

  126. @res

    What do you count as imported ruling classes? The Normans in Normandie then England presumably? Mongols and later Manchus in China? ZMuslims in India?

    • Replies: @res
  127. @iffen

    Yes, but the “no need to rush: let’s take our time and get it right” genes could be useful.

    • Replies: @iffen
  128. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz

    or simply give his lucid (published) lectures on physics clearly

    Actually, his lectures on physics weren’t that clear to most of the undergraduates for whom they were intended. Mostly they gave up attending, although their numbers were made up for by graduate students and faculty who attended in their place. Furthermore, the lectures were not published verbatim or anything like, but were the result of intensive editing by physicists Matthew Sands and Robert Leighton. The lectures provided what is widely held to be a brilliant outline of physics, but they were not great in any literary sense.

    To get an idea of Feynman’s actual literary gifts one can read The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen Scientist, which is neither very interesting nor well written.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  129. Saldim says:

    Fred Reed is a SJW.

    >American blacks, the Irish, and Mexicans have similar IQs but different outcomes

    “American Blacks” and Mestizos both have IQs in the 80s with the associated dysfunction (see crime stats, welfare usage, etc.). The Irish IQ is certainly into the 90s.

    >IQ scores for some countries have been revised considerably, suggesting that intelligence measures are unreliable;

    Not really.

    >Maya Indians had cultural achievements out of all proportion to the low IQs of the current inhabitants

    Name all those achievements and tell us what puts them above Crete or Ancient Egypt (which was a land of East Africans with Levantines).

    >the ancient Greek thinkers were very bright, and not dull as the Flynn Effect might imply;

    Richard Lynn is certainly off if he’s saying Southern Europeans are way below the British or French in IQ.

    >the IQ of India cannot be 81 because of India’s cultural achievements

    The Indian Subcontinent has long not been racially or ethnically homogeneous. Even then, the Indian Subcontinent got loads of massacres from Islamic foreigners:

    https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2014/12/27/islamic-india-the-biggest-holocaust-in-world-history-whitewashed-from-history/

    >there is no visible difference in intelligence between Mexicans and Americans

    And yet there’s crime levels, performance in education…

    >nor also with the inhabitants of Taiwan, Vietnam, or Thailand

    Same as above.

    >and what mean IQ is thought necessary to run the infrastructure of modernity?

    https://staffanspersonalityblog.wordpress.com/2013/09/24/the-iq-breaking-point-how-civilized-society-is-maintained-or-lost/

    The cutoff point is apparently 96.

  130. @Anonymous

    My understanding is that the “smart fraction” was the concept of the pseudonymous La Griffe du Lion and that he calculated it to be those above about 107 IQ.

  131. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @res

    One of my biggest red flags for taking a person or paper seriously is when their references fail to substantiate their claims.

    Well despite your snotty remark, my reference fully supports my claim that there is “little … connection between IQ and creativity” except inasmuch as sufficient intelligence is required to grasp whatever it is one is to be creative about. That’s what the article I referred to is about: the threshold effect of intelligence on creativity. And I even acknowledged that to be creative in something like mathematics one would necessarily require a relatively high IQ. Do try to apply a little intelligence to what other people have to say.

    • Replies: @res
  132. res says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    I was thinking mostly of colonial examples, the Normans, and some modern examples like the Tutsi, Igbo, and Sunni in Iraq. Interested in your take on the other examples (especially those you gave) and overall thoughts. I tend to think humans prefer self(group)-rule even if their objective situation is worse.

  133. @CanSpeccy

    No way! Jared Diamond says that the Papuans are the smartest people on the earth, and he is a better authority than some Nobel Prize winner.

    • LOL: Daniel Chieh
  134. @Saldim

    And of course the Rape of Nanjing/Nanking was just the Japanese trying to go one up on Occidentals.

  135. Saldim says:
    @CanSpeccy

    > cultural bias

    Found the Leftist. Do you deny that Negroid women are significantly less attractive than European women too?

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  136. @res

    I think that colonialism usually has perverse incentives in that the governor of the colony has only five or ten years where he has to live in the colony, and therefore benefits from maximizing profit and status within the period rather than establishing a legacy.

    I believe the Romans avoided this to an extent by actually setting up roots post-conquest.

    • Agree: res
    • Replies: @dearieme
    , @Wizard of Oz
  137. res says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Well despite your snotty remark, my reference fully supports my claim

    If so it is notable that the authors of the paper concluded the opposite.

    And the rest of your comment is rather different from your statement that I criticized: “Empirical research suggests there is little if any connection between IQ and creativity”

    Do you stand by that statement as being consistent with the rest of what you wrote and the conclusion given by the paper authors?

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  138. Agent76 says:

    Jan 23, 2017 A Libertarian Builds Low-Cost Private Schools for the Masses

    Bob Luddy was tired of trying to convince North Carolina educrats to improve the state’s public schools, so he built his own network of low-cost private schools that the government can’t meddle with.

  139. iffen says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    no need to rush

    Only works if not rushing does not result in getting your neck chomped by a saber-toothed tiger.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  140. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @res

    it is notable that the authors of the paper concluded the opposite.

    A claim made without any reference to what the authors say.

    Here’s what they say:

    When investigating a liberal criterion of ideational originality (i.e., two original ideas), a threshold was detected at around 100 IQ points. In contrast, a threshold of 120 IQ points emerged when the criterion was more demanding (i.e., many original ideas). Moreover, an IQ of around 85 IQ points was found to form the threshold for a purely quantitative measure of creative potential (i.e., ideational fluency). These results confirm the threshold hypothesis for qualitative indicators of creative potential and may explain some of the observed discrepancies in previous research. In addition, we obtained evidence that once the intelligence threshold is met, personality factors become more predictive for creativity.

    which is entirely consistent with my statement:

    Empirical research suggests there is little if any connection between IQ and creativity, although to be a creative in a particular field you need to have the IQ to master that field of knowledge, obviously.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @res
  141. @CanSpeccy

    Thanks for the suggested reading. It made me atruggle to remember what I have read of Feynman and realised that it was his transcribed words in “Surely you’re joking Mr. Feynman” that are just about all (not having read much of the physics lectures) and that was several years ago.

  142. dearieme says:
    @AaronB

    The early Portuguese and Dutch explorers and traders were agreed that the most impressive people they’d met on their voyages were the Japanese. It might be worth finding out if they reckoned them cleverer than Europeans.

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  143. dearieme says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    There are counterexamples by the dozen.

    • Replies: @res
    , @Daniel Chieh
  144. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz

    Actually, the source of the 123 figure for Feynman’s IQ was Feyneman’s wife, Gweneth. The teacher of their son, Richard Jr., phoned home one evening to ask if young Richard had been unwell that day. Feynman’s wife replied “no, why?” to which the teacher responded, his class did an IQ test today and Richard scored only 124. “Oh,” said young Richard’s mum, “a chip off the old block. His father scored only 123.”

    Probably a joke, but it’s amusing how exercised the IQists become when it is pointed out that IQ has little if any demonstrated connection with creativity, the essence of what we consider to be genius.

    • Replies: @Peripatetic commenter
  145. jay-w says:

    My apologies if somebody else has already made this point, but I don’t see how you can have a meaningful discussion of average IQ versus group achievement without taking into account the social organization.

    I would think that a country/society/tribe/group/whatever could have a fairly low average IQ and yet still accomplish great things as long as the high-IQ people are firmly in charge, and are making the important decisions.

    In Fred Reed’s original post, he showed a photo of a skyscraper as proof of Latin American achievement, and my first reaction was: “So what? It may have taken one guy with an IQ of 120 to design the skyscraper, and 1000 guys with IQs of 80 to haul around rebar & concrete in wheelbarrows to do the actual construction.”

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  146. @Daniel Chieh

    I tried to reply yesterday but it seems my reply got lost.

    Interesting – what is the other source of gunpowder discovery that you would propose? Arabic?

    David Ayelon give the boot to the Arabic proposal. The introduction of gunpowder in the Muslim areas are all too late (and the word ‘naft’ which is a clear cognate of naptha, has changed its meaning over time …):

    https://www.amazon.com/Gunpowder-Firearms-Mamluk-Kingdom-Challenge/dp/B001IVR5YE

    I have also read parts of the 武經總要 (http://www.cos.url.tw/book/4/O-1-040.htm) but that has issues:

    1. Provenance and what happened to it. It is not clear that it was actually written when it is claimed to have been written and we do not know, AFAIK, who worked on the versions we have today,

    2. It is interesting for what it does not say and the names of the ‘recipes’

    3. Gunpowder was a transformative technology. Any state that had it would not have fallen to the Mongols.

    4. Incendiaries are not gunpowder in the same way that the cute little steam toy the Greeks played with was not a steam engine.

    I come down on the side of Roger Bacon as does this guy:

    http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/tech/cannon.htm

    There is much more than could be written … eg, about those who claim that fire pots in the hands of demons are canon (based on their similarity to the depiction of cannon in the Milemete guns: http://www.academia.edu/12138631/The_Milemete_Guns)

  147. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    whatever you want to say about IQ, his conclusion is definitely correct. Higher IQ countries will be wealthier and more developed.

    Not really. The Chinese are supposed, I believe, to have slightly higher IQ’s than Europeans, yet for most of the last four hundred years the Chinese were dirt poor, as many still are today, while the Europeans became the wealthiest and most powerful people on the face of the Earth.

    And if you consider the time before the industrial revolution, were the Europeans in their squalid plague-ridden towns really more prosperous than Africans of supposedly inferior IQ, with their herds of cattle and vast open spaces?

    Prosperity has nothing to do with the IQ of a population. Prosperity is a function of the social system and its institutions of education, defense, government, and religion. The US population governed by a globalist elite since Clinton signed the 1994 Gatt agreement has experienced over the last several decades a decline in prosperity. The Chinese, under an oligarchy committed to national economic development have undergone an astonishing rise in prosperity.

    • Replies: @Saldim
    , @AaronB
  148. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @jay-w

    I would think that a country/society/tribe/group/whatever could have a fairly low average IQ and yet still accomplish great things as long as the high-IQ people are firmly in charge, and are making the important decisions.

    It’s not having intelligent people in charge that matters. All societies are run by smart people. If the people who appear to be at the top are not smart, they are either disposed of in one way or another, or they become the puppets of smart people — Think George Bush, Dick Cheney and the oil industry.

    What determines the success and prosperity of a society are its institutions and traditions, and blind chance.

    • Replies: @anon
  149. @CanSpeccy

    Threshold IQ theory for creativity seems Don’t specify if is IQ performance or subtests that are more important. Because IQ is strongly correlated with mathematics it’s likely threshold hypothesis don’t work for mathematical creativity even the conceptual basis for mathematics has been philosophical and verbally charged.

    Or … Or not

  150. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Saldim

    Do you deny that Negroid women are significantly less attractive than European women too?

    Did you know that the people of Africa, those your refer to as “negroid,” encompass greater genetic diversity than all the rest of humanity combined? No, probably not or you’d have been more specific as to who in particular among “Negroid” women you were referring to.

    But I love this girl: beautiful, tough, and intelligent just like my own blue-eyed blonde, Norman/Scotch-descended granddaughter.

  151. @CanSpeccy

    Probably a joke, but it’s amusing how exercised the IQists become when it is pointed out that IQ has little if any demonstrated connection with creativity, the essence of what we consider to be genius.

    110, and little evidence of creativity either.

  152. res says:
    @dearieme

    You are probably correct, but providing at least one would greatly strengthen your argument.

  153. res says:
    @CanSpeccy

    A claim made without any reference to what the authors say.

    Fascinating that you try to get that argument to fly (you must be digging deep). From my comment 121 (would you like me to repeat the quote in EVERY comment I make?):

    Hmmm. I followed that link of yours and here is their concluding paragraph (emphasis mine):

    Summarizing, intelligence is highly relevant for creativity, but the kind of relationship depends on the level of intelligence as well as on the actual indicator of creativity. In line with early assumptions, intelligence may increase creative potential up to a certain degree where it loses impact and other factors come into play. At this, it possibly applies that the more complex the measure of creativity that is considered, the higher the threshold up to which intelligence may exert its influence. For the most advanced indicator of creativity, namely creative achievement, intelligence remains relevant even at the highest ability range.

    Which is dramatically different from the first part of your full statement:

    Empirical research suggests there is little if any connection between IQ and creativity, although to be a creative in a particular field you need to have the IQ to master that field of knowledge, obviously.

    From my point of view adding the qualifier is akin to saying “Empirical research suggests there is little if any connection between IQ and creativity, although here is an example where a certain level of IQ is necessary for creativity.” There is a difference between a qualifier and a rebuttal, and I think you gave an example of a self rebutting statement.

    I’m not sure it’s possible to get more opposite of ” little if any connection” than “highly relevant.”

    That you are even trying to defend that comment says volumes. We all overstep sometimes in our rhetoric.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  154. @CanSpeccy

    Did you know that the people of Africa, those your refer to as “negroid,” encompass greater genetic diversity than all the rest of humanity combined? No, probably not or you’d have been more specific as to who in particular among “Negroid” women you were referring to.

    Ahhh, diversity is strength, eh?

    Chimps have more genetic diversity than humans as well. Just saying!

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  155. Saldim says:
    @CanSpeccy

    > Not really. The Chinese are supposed, I believe, to have slightly higher IQ’s than Europeans, yet for most of the last four hundred years the Chinese were dirt poor, as many still are today, while the Europeans became the wealthiest and most powerful people on the face of the Earth.

    Twaddle. Nothing reliably points to China having a significantly lower income for its citizenry than Europe as a whole.

    >And if you consider the time before the industrial revolution, were the Europeans in their squalid plague-ridden towns really more prosperous than Africans of supposedly inferior IQ, with their herds of cattle and vast open spaces?

    Stop watching Braveheart and Montry Python.

    By the way, there have never been any remakrbale civilizations. Even if Afrocentrists pretend otherwise out of narcissism and Whitey Leftys pander to them.

    >Prosperity has nothing to do with the IQ of a population.

    Sure. Which is how so many African countries are garbage pits.

    >Prosperity is a function of the social system and its institutions of education, defense, government, and religion.

    Muh Magic Dirt.

    >The US population governed by a globalist elite since Clinton signed the 1994 Gatt agreement has experienced over the last several decades a decline in prosperity.

    Sure, Bernie Sanders.

    >The Chinese, under an oligarchy committed to national economic development have undergone an astonishing rise in prosperity.

    More like they’ve been rejecting Maoism even if they won’t admit it.

    • Replies: @Saldim
  156. Saldim says:
    @CanSpeccy

    >Did you know that the people of Africa, those your refer to as “negroid,” encompass greater genetic diversity than all the rest of humanity combined?

    There are loads of non-Negroids in Africa (see Egypt).

    >No, probably not or you’d have been more specific as to who in particular among “Negroid” women you were referring to.

    Quit being obtuse.

    >But I love this girl: beautiful, tough, and intelligent just like my own blue-eyed blonde, Norman/Scotch-descended granddaughter.

    That’s dandy. Meanwhile Negroid women don’t do hot in cross-racial listings by sex appeal to men. Obviously discounting mulattoes like Halle Barry or otherwise admixtured with non-Negroids.

    • Replies: @Saldim
  157. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Peripatetic commenter

    Just saying!

    Exactly. Why not try thinking in future.

  158. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @res

    From my point of view …

    Yes we understand your point of view, which is contradicted by the research I quoted.

    Creativity has no direct relation to IQ, although to be creative in any field it is necessary to have a sufficiently high IQ to understand the subject, hence the IQ threshold effect for creativity. It is in that sense, and probably in that sense only, that IQ is “relevant” to creativity.

    • LOL: res
  159. Saldim says:

    I wonder when the Left’s worship of Negroids and other muds will end. When will they accept Rousseau was full of it?

  160. Saldim says:
    @Saldim

    > By the way, there have never been any remakrbale civilizations

    I meant there have never been any remarkable Negroids civilizations.

  161. @dearieme

    The Japanese are not cleverer than the Europeans. They are inferiors. Why didn’t the Japanese sail ships to Europe to discover Europeans? Why did the Japanese copy Western ways, technology, to modernize? Japanese belong to Asians, the race below the Caucasians. They are the smartest of the Asians, but they are no where near the Europeans/Caucasians.

    • Troll: Wizard of Oz
    • Replies: @anon
    , @Santoculto
    , @thecock
  162. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Biff

    Read Peter Frost’s comments here:

    http://www.unz.com/article/gangnam-and-minjok/

    • Replies: @Biff
  163. anon • Disclaimer says:

    However, given global competition, countries need many people of IQ 130+ to really prosper

    that depends on whether they use their high IQ to become free riders

    over the last 30-40 years we’ve seen the financial sector suck in a large percentage of high IQ individuals and use those brains for parasitism

    a ruling class made up of high IQ parasites is the worst possible outcome – any country which finds itself in that situation will be destroyed from within very rapidly

  164. @CanSpeccy

    “IQ is relevant to creativity”

    You mean intelligence…

  165. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @attilathehen

    Maybe Europeans used to be smarter but then stopped eating their seaweed so Japanese are smarter now.

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  166. @attilathehen

    “Europeans/caucasians” ON AVG are superior than “east Asians” namely in qualitative aspect of intelligence BUT this difference is not gigantic.

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  167. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    What determines the success and prosperity of a society are its institutions and traditions, and blind chance.

    institutions are partly a function of average IQ

    low average IQ requires rigid authoritarian organizing principles – clever ones give the orders, rest obey

    high average IQ can be much looser and more flexible as can rely on individual initiative throughout the structure

    lots of examples: military, construction, Trump’s team

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  168. Biff says:
    @Anon

    From your link:

    An uninformed traveler would think that English is the second language of Korea, but very few people on the street can actually speak it, despite familiarity with the alphabet. In my experience, the average Korean’s grasp of the English language is much below that of even Eastern Europeans.

    But despite the overwhelming influence of Western business and the English language, I saw little evidence that the multicultural ideology of the state has become anything close to the massive destructive force that it is in the West. Watching TV for a week, I did not see a single foreign character in commercials or dramas. This is nothing like the United States, where every time we see a doctor or engineer, Main Stream Media SJWs take the opportunity to show us how smart minorities are.

    To which I agree. I’ve been to Korea/Seoul and outside of Itiwan the Koreans have no use for English, or anyone else who isn’t Korean.
    Nevertheless, the Korean government is still a client state of Washington, and it no doubt gets some SJW influence there.
    On balance, as your link even suggests, East Asia is not on die hard path to cultural destruction as some other parts of the world are.

  169. @dearieme

    Oh, I won’t deny that there are a number of examples but basic reality of the perverse incentives remain – and there are quite a few examples of abuses caused by that kind of short-termism. But yes, I do think that often colonial governments can bring a form of structure and rule of law that greatly surpasses what was locally available, and actually provide a functional structure where none was found.

    Congo is a great example, where you have people wishing for Belgium to return. Heck, most of Africa is a great example, where even the infrastructure isn’t maintained, let alone expanded.

    • Replies: @anon
  170. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @anon

    low average IQ requires rigid authoritarian organizing principles – clever ones give the orders, rest obey

    Got any actual evidence that differences in IQ account for the differences in social structure between the highly authoritarian Communist Chinese and the liberal-lefty pot-smoking, porn-wallowing, queer-loving, diversity-is-our-strength, let’s-commit-national-suicide-by-replacing-ourselves-with-people-from-elsewhere Dutch, Danes, Swedes, Germans, Canadians, etc.?

    • Replies: @anon
  171. @AaronB

    Interestingly, the stereotype of clever Asians is fairly recent, no sooner than the early 20th century.

    Thank you HBD!!1! lol

  172. @AaronB

    Interestingly, the stereotype of clever Asians is fairly recent, no sooner than the early 20th century.

    Marco Polo described China as beyond more advanced than Europe for what it is was worth, and was pretty glowing in his praise of some of the people. At the time, though, China was definitely still leading in GDP and possibly technology.

  173. @iffen

    I think there must be some Godwinesque rule against introducing sabre tooth tigers…

  174. @CanSpeccy

    I think res ends up with the prize on the final subtest worth 1 per cent of the total marks because you got off on the wrong foot with appearing to deny relevance and causation when you effectually contradict that by admitting that whatever (or some one or more of the whatevers that) cause[s] high IQs is/are causally necessary for some creativity.

    And now that I have I trust given a demonstration of my “never-be-outpedanted” technique allow me to note that James Thompson seems to agree with me that the processing speed that contributes to high g is likely to contribute to the less precisely defined characteristic of creativity.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  175. @Daniel Chieh

    You might care to consider the importance of very different traditions and conditions. Begin perhaps with Claudio Véliz’s “The Centralist Tradition of Latin America” to start seeing the huge importance of the contrasting tradition in North America. But America is of course the continent of real colonialism where immigrant colonists came to form much or most of the population. You really need to temper your generalisations by recognition that India would never have been regarded as a colony, run at the top as it was by a tiny handful of Brits though long term inhabitants of the British, French and Portuguese trading posts might appropriately have been called colonists in the original Greek sense. At some stage Hong Kong, Singapore and even African countries like Nigeria seem to have joined the category of “colonies” (as in the “Commonwealth and Colonial Office” after true traditional colonies like those in Australia, NZ and Canada – after America’s 13 – had become independent countries). But India surely deserves its separate character and I don’t think your reasoning about governors appointed for 5 to 10 years has much explanatory power. Late Viceroys like Curzon and Reading (Rufua Iaaacs) were not long term residents of India but a very high proportion of the Brits who governed India were, sometimes several generations born in India, and, after the impeachment of Warren Hastings in the 1780s ruling India was not a path to gross enrichment.

    • Agree: Daniel Chieh
  176. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz

    Yes, thanks for clearing up all possible misunderstanding.

  177. thecock says:
    @attilathehen

    Dont know about thehen, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attila#Appearance_and_character

    “Some modern scholars have suggested that this description is typically East Asian, because it has all the combined features that fit the physical type of people from Eastern Asia, and Attila’s ancestors may have come from there.[5][7]:202″

  178. @Daniel Chieh

    Yes, and it is an enduring question as to what, exactly, caused the acceleration of Western economic and other activity.

    Nick Szabo has some comments on this: http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2013/11/european-asian-divergence-predates.html

    I speculate that the Imperial system in China worked against people who would improve things because those higher up the chain could simply take everything you created … but who knows.

    On a related topic, Peter Turchin has good ideas about what forced the Chinese state to come about.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  179. AaronB says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    That’s true. I wonder if European IQ rose only after the Renaissance, in line with their new culture of materialistic ambition, and is now midly deflating again. Perhaps it’ll rise again as ambition returns, in response to the new feeling of insecurity among whites.

    On the other hand, Europeans were reporting that Ayutthaya in Thailand vastly exceeded anything seen in Europe, and the Spanish thought Aztec cities did as well. So Europeans had similar responses to countries not thought today to be high IQ. It wasn’t just China.

    IQ, it seems to me, as a very recent invention, measures aspects of cognitive function related to modern economies, and is bound up with the ambition to create and succeed in such economies. I’m not sure how valid it is to apply it to pre-modern conditions.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Santoculto
  180. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Excellent point, and one I often bring up myself when discussing the anomalies and simplistic thinking that cluster around discussions about IQ.

    Today, several Asian countries have higher IQ yet are less wealthy than European countries.

    It seems that IQ only has explanatory power up to a rather modest point. It breaks down at the upper levels across the board, where micro trends begin to develop against the macro trends, etc.

    • Replies: @res
  181. res says:
    @AaronB

    It seems that IQ only has explanatory power up to a rather modest point. It breaks down at the upper levels across the board, where micro trends begin to develop against the macro trends, etc.

    So modest that national average IQ only correlates 0.82 with GDP and 0.64 with rate of economic growth from 1950–1990.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations#Outline

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @CanSpeccy
  182. @Santoculto

    It’s big – the world “Westernizes.’ It never “Easternizes.”

    • Replies: @AaronB
  183. @anon

    If you are European, you are a perfect example of this non-seaweed eating low IQ European.

    • Replies: @anon
  184. rec1man says:
    @Anonymous

    About 20% of the Indian population is high caste
    5% Brahmins
    5% Merchants ( Jains are part of Merchants 0.5% )
    5% Forward Caste Dravidians ( South Indian Landlords )
    5% Scribes, Nobles etc

    If you look at 2017 California National Merit, 140 IQ cut off

    850 Chinese
    100 Koreans
    75 Vietnamese
    25 Japanese

    55 Muslims

    125 Jews

    275 Indians
    of which

    125 Brahmins ( 90 Southern, 35 Northern )
    65 Merchants ( 15 Jains )
    55 Dravidian Landlords

    whereas among mid-level peasant castes

    4 Patels
    3 Jat Sikh

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  185. AaronB says:
    @res

    .64 I consider rather modest, but I’d agree with you that .84 is pretty good.

    Still, even .84 would only give us broad generalizations and considerable room for all sorts of interesting micro-trends that go against the grain to develop.

    I find the point about Asian economies to be a fascinating anamoly, not easily explained by any numerical metric, and likely only explainable by “intangible” factors, although I have no idea what they may be.

    It’s the same reason why China can’t seem to develop viable jet engines despite having over a billion people with an IQ higher than Europeans (an astonishing failure of IQ theory, if you really, really are honest with yourself), and why Japan vastly outperforms higher IQ Korea and roughly same IQ Taiwan in cutting edge technology and engineering, or why similar IQ countries in Europe display vastly different intellectual outcomes.

    Fascinating stuff, if you ask me, not to be swept under the rug so easily – so much richer and more complex than facts like .84 corellation, etc.

    • Replies: @res
    , @utu
    , @anon
  186. AaronB says:
    @attilathehen

    Except in spiritual things – all religions come from the East. The West has always been second rate in things of the spirit.

    Material advances have lately been coming from the West, as you’d expect from a basically materialist culture, but probably not for much longer.

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  187. res says:
    @AaronB

    .64 I consider rather modest

    Do any of the things you advocate over IQ in other threads (e.g. ambition) come anywhere close to having this kind of explanatory power?

    Social scientists seem to disagree with you. For example, http://condor.depaul.edu/sjost/it223/documents/correlation.htm
    gives 0.6 as a threshold for a correlation to be meaningful in the social sciences.

    Fascinating stuff, if you ask me, not to be swept under the rug so easily – so much richer and more complex than facts like .84 corellation, etc.

    “so much richer and more complex than facts”– that explains a lot. You must really dislike understanding the world if you turn your nose up at a single variable which correlates so well with a country’s GDP.

    For those with more interest in such a descriptive variable, here is an article with plots of an older version of the data and some further discussion which fits in with Dr. Thompson’s post: http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/sft.htm

    And this PDF finds that fitting log(GDP) works even better: https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2006-dickerson.pdf
    Taking the logarithm of variables like income or GDP frequently gives better results than the raw numbers.

  188. dux.ie says:
    @The Alarmist

    Re: IQs as an explanatory variable for the election of Trump

    Talking about IQ can upset some people. It is more acceptable to talk about
    the percentage of people with university degrees. With respect to the US
    presidentail election many of the MSM still talked about reactions to the
    top 1% high income earners, diversity, inequality, unemployment, shrinking
    job market, etc.

    Instead, on Novermber 13 I showed statistically that using the
    regression p value (or the Rsq value) as the criterion, among the various
    factors, the most significat factor influencing the electrion result was the
    percentage of people with university degrees, the lower the PctDeg the higher
    the Rep margin.

    [MORE]

    http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2016/11/coalition-diversity-whose-diversity-diversity-just-win.html#comments

    Using the Republican margin RepMargin=RepPct-DemPct as the variable,

    RepMargin = -3.46*PctDeg +99.53; n=51; Rsq=0.66; p=5.269e-13
    RepMargin = -3.40*PCIncK +102.02; n=51; Rsq=0.48; p=1.752e-08
    RepMargin = -541.79*Gini10 +249.61; n=50; Rsq=0.23; p=0.0004493
    RepMargin = +0.090*SAT14 -90.64; n=50; Rsq=0.17; p=0.002817
    RepMargin = -35.00*Div15 +21.59; n=51; Rsq=0.048; p=0.1213
    RepMargin = -2.12*Unemp16 +13.75; n=48; Rsq=0.0079; p=0.5473

    where PCIncK = per capital income (’000)
    Gini10 = economic inequality Gini Coeff
    SAT14 = average SAT score
    Div15 = diversity index
    Unemp16 = unemployment rate

    With more data at the county levels more complex models were also developed
    but I wont elaborate here.

    Nate Silver is a noted political analyst and forcaster and he came to the
    same conclusion on November 22. I scooped him with the results by 9 days.

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/education-not-income-predicted-who-would-vote-for-trump/

    Later, the MSM switched to talking about the less educated Republican voters.
    This again was not strictly correct. The result above actually showed that
    the Rep margin was significantly positively correlated with the average SAT
    score.

    There is a disconnect that SAT score tends to be where the person
    was from and PctDeg tends to be associated to where the person goes to
    university or work. The slope of the equation turns out to be the reverse
    and the data points are a bit more scattered (Rsq is low), though still
    significant at p=0.002817. Thus I concluded that there would be population
    movements draining away the potential Dem voters from the rural areas.

    These three opposing trends might be setting up an interesting weak population
    circulation pattern, i.e. Republican states tend to have less degree holders
    (less knowledge based jobs) which might (weakly) incentivize a few of the
    students to study harder and to achieve better SAT scores and they tend to
    move to universities in the Democrat states (e.g. California, Massachusetts
    and NewYork) and work there (in the more knowledge based jobs), and the
    too liberal high schools there might not equip some of the students to work
    in the knowledge based jobs there and they might end up in the Republican
    states. Concentration of degree holders in the Dem states gives less electoral
    votes.

    This was confirmed by the Bloomberg report on 14 Dec 2016,

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-14/in-trump-country-the-brain-drain-takes-a-toll-bloomberg-index

    “””Brain Drain Takes a Toll in Trump Country”””

    • Replies: @res
    , @The Alarmist
  189. utu says:
    @AaronB

    If we remove all countries with the lowest GDP from the graphs the correlation will be significantly lower than the number the IQ fetishists makes a great deal of.

    Conversely Lynn could have made his point even stronger and get much higher correlation if he added to his graph few countries that have zero GDP and zero IQ like the Republic of Bonobo.

  190. Malla says:
    @MarkinLA

    Exactly, with continuous improvements in robotic and automation, one wonders what is the need of big populations anymore. The big issue should not be Japan and Germany having a falling population but who is going to give jobs to the fast growing Africans, Arabs and Pakistanis in the near future.

  191. malla says:

    In the pre industrial agriculture age, the most important driver of your economy was how much grain you could grow. Northern Europe and Japan/ Korea/ Mongolia had limitations in growing enormous quantity of grains due to climatic conditions unlike places like Egypt, Iraq, the Indian subcontinent etc… Thus in the medieval era they were poorer. Even with Europe Germany/ Scandinavia though ample in water could not compete with say Italy in food production due to climatic restrictions. A similar case can be made for Japan vs China/ Indonesia etc… There was no way England could compete with the Ganges of India in food production even though England had good soil quality. Similarly Scotland could not compete with England because of the topography of the land (more mountains). That explains why England has about 10 times the population as Scotland and was more wealthier. Take this difference and multiply it many times to get the difference between Northern Europe/ Japan Korea on one hand and the Middle zone (India, Middle East etc..) Besides Northern Europeans and North East Asian were located at the edge of Eurasia unlike people in the middle zone and thus could not gain wealth from trade passing through their territories. So even if these populations of the North had higher IQs and other favourable traits they were poorer and more backward than the middle IQ populations in the middle zone.
    The Industrial revolution changed all that. Now wealth creation was moving from Agriculture to industry and wealth creation was no longer tied to the amount of grain they could grow in their lands. And it was now the high IQ cold climate populations of Europe and North East Asia finally got their advantage over the Middle Zoners. Also thanks to innovations made in transportation technology in Britain (steam ships), moving resources from the tropics to the temperate zone for manufacturing was easy and cheap. This is what explains why India or the Middle East were so advanced in the agricultural age but now are failures compared to Europe, Japan, Korea, Taiwan etc… and the Northern European settled places like North America, Australia, New Zealand in this technological age.

    In short in the pre-industrial revolution agriculture era, land and location mattered more for a nation. Post Industrial revolution era what matters more is IQ and productivity of your working and middle classes. So comparing today’s India to India 500 years ago is ridiculous. Just because your civilization rocked in the pre industrial era is not guarantee you will rock now or even in the future ever. After the Industrial revolution, we are in a different game.

  192. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @rec1man

    1. What’s the source for 10% of overall Indian population being merchant or brahmin?
    2. There are only 250 million people in South India. How could 70 million be the descendants of landlords?
    3. Why are scribes not represented among the merit scholars?

    • Replies: @rec1man
  193. @AaronB

    I think bourgeoisie demographic expansion is correlated with increase in cognitive skills levels among Europeans if in the medieval past we had only and or basically two social classes: Governors and governed. Governors usually are smarter but also sociopathic while serfs are usually less ambitious and less smart. Bourgeoisie is the intermediary socio-economic class between serfdom and “noblesse”. Bourgeoisie or middle classes even this days most of upper elites are or have bourgeois origin.

    • Replies: @AP
  194. @AaronB

    I think since humans invented numeracy and literacy systems IQ might be viable. Modern societies are not so different than other past societies what differentiate them maybe is the percent of people with enough hardware cognitive levels to provide “decent” numeracy and literacy as well universalization of both, radically different than in the past when in most societies illiteracy was exceptionally common.

  195. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    examples:
    - regular infantry platoon vs special forces
    - software development vs factory production line
    etc

    the higher the average IQ i.e. the more people with 100+ IQ, the more initiative based vs authoritarian any organisation involving those people can potentially be

    (obviously)

    IQ isn’t the only factor of course – for example if a minority want to impose their will against the wishes of the a majority (like communists) they have to be authoritarian regardless of average IQ

  196. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @AaronB

    Interestingly, the stereotype of clever Asians is fairly recent, no sooner than the early 20th century.

    first contact was 1543

    Bertrand Russell, who thought China was the greatest civilization the world had ever seen and taught there for a year, said he did not think the Chinese were more intelligent than Europeans.

    maybe Euro IQ declined in the interim

    for example maybe

    1) industrialization and the demand for mass factory labor led to a disproportionate increase in the left side of the bell curve for a hundred years or so

    2) dietary changes

  197. @res

    Not feasible with most intelligence tests of reasoning or vocubulary, but easy with processing speed tasks, reaction times, and some memory tests, cf Ebbinghaus.

    • Replies: @res
  198. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    basic reality of the perverse incentives remain

    colonialists want to extract value from their colonies so the default case should be that colonialism is bad for the colonized

    i think the logical exceptions to that would be

    1) where the local elite was worse i.e. they extracted 60% and the colonial elite extracted 40% (this would still be bad for the local elite but not the rest)

    2) the colonists imported tech that increased productivity enough such that even after colonial extraction the locals were better off – this would decline as the locals figured out the tech itself

    • Replies: @res
  199. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Creativity has no direct relation to IQ, although to be creative in any field it is necessary to have a sufficiently high IQ to understand the subject, hence the IQ threshold effect for creativity. It is in that sense, and probably in that sense only, that IQ is “relevant” to creativity.

    so IQ is a necessary but not sufficient condition for creativity

    i.e. fundamentally relevant

    • Agree: res
  200. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @attilathehen

    “let’s you and him fight”

  201. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @AaronB

    .64 I consider rather modest, but I’d agree with you that .84 is pretty good.

    Still, even .84 would only give us broad generalizations and considerable room for all sorts of interesting micro-trends that go against the grain to develop.

    So you agree that IQ is obviously of critical importance – 0.84 – but doesn’t explain everything – 0.16 – so there are additional questions to be answered

    or

    you’re trying to obfuscate the clearly critical importance of IQ (0.84) by focusing on the unexplained fraction (0.16)

  202. rec1man says:
    @Anonymous

    1. Per 1931, Indian census, they had caste data, 5% Brahmin, 5% Merchant

    2. Forward Caste Dravidians / Upper Caste Dravidians, such as Kamma, Reddy, Nair, are the group I am talking about and they are predominantly Landlords / Kulak / Dominant Peasant caste

    3. In the 2017 California National Merit list there are about 15 Kayasth ( scribe ) and 10 Rajputs ( Nobles ) – in most parts of India, the scribe function was done by brahmins, but in the Hindi-Bengali regions, that function was done by a specific caste ( Kayasth ) – vs 125 Brahmins on the Merit list

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  203. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @res

    national average IQ only correlates 0.82 with GDP and 0.64 with rate of economic growth from 1950–1990.

    What kind of analysis is that?

    Why not 1939–1945, over which period the economic data would prove that German and Japanese IQs shrank.

    The whole approach is idiotic.

    What if you extend the analysis from 1800 to 2017? Then you find, at the outset, that Brits were the most intelligent people in the world. But in the 19th Century it was the Germans and the Americans, although they were eclipsed by the beginning of the 20th Century by the Japs whose rate of economic growth exceeded that of all previous champions, only themselves to be outdone in the post-WW2 era by the people of S. Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, they in their turn soon to be overtaken by the Chinese who, since 1990, have been doubling the size of their economy every ten years.

    Explain all that on the basis of trivial differences in population mean score on some paper and pencil brain-teasing test of dubious significance? LOL.

    It’s institutions and political arrangements, military conquest or defeat, imperial expansion or decay that determine rates of economic growth. IQ tests explain nothing except the mania of some people to prove that black people are mentally inferior to whites, a futile obsession since we can see at a glance that black people are like white people very dumb to quite smart, in the latter case especially when they are properly educated.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @res
    , @anon
    , @JackOH
  204. res says:
    @dux.ie

    Interesting results. It looks like those are all single variable regressions. What did the multiple regression results look like?

    If I read correctly your analysis was at the state level. What were your data sources?
    How about for your county analysis? Did you have all of the same variables for counties? How similar were the results?

    Some interesting observations about the meanings of SAT and PctDeg in your data.

    • Replies: @dux.ie
  205. res says:
    @James Thompson

    Thanks. Has anyone taken a detailed look at analytic variation academically? Gwern (and I think some other Less Wrong folk) uses dual N back tests to do N=1 studies of various things. Not as rigorous as a large sample paper by any means, but Gwern seems like a smart and thorough guy who makes an effort to use sound methodology within the limits of N=1. IIRC he was a fairly frequent commenter on your blog though I haven’t seen signs of him recently.

    For myself, I find ability to do Sudoku or Freecell varies in interesting ways though I have not done rigorous tests.

    P.S. Gwern has many results at https://www.gwern.net/Nootropics
    I think think melatonin makes a good inexpensive, safe, and easily available example: https://www.gwern.net/Melatonin

    P.P.S. Thanks for the Ebbinghaus pointer. He was new to me, but I took a quick look at his Wikipedia page and he sounds like an interesting researcher. My bias is analytic so his work sounds congenial to me. Interesting to see he focused on N=1 given commentary above.

    Am I right to summarize that most of his work was in the behavior over time of memory? Fascinating and important work, but my interest in this thread is more with the variation in analytic ability. With a side question about microscale variation of memory (i.e. I don’t think the memory curve is monotonically decreasing, I think it also varies as I describe above with things like blood sugar and fed state).

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  206. res says:
    @anon

    colonialists want to extract value from their colonies so the default case should be that colonialism is bad for the colonized

    Perhaps a fair default position, but I think the obvious question we are discussing is whether the colonizers add more value than they extract (i.e. it is not a zero sum game). Investing in infrastructure is a good example of this. Often ROI is good on those investments, but the locals just can’t/don’t do it for various reasons.

    You make good additional points. I especially find dividing locals into non/elite is thought provoking in this context.

    • Replies: @anon
  207. res says:
    @CanSpeccy

    The whole approach is idiotic.

    Now there is a cogent, thoughtful and well argued rebuttal.

    You do make some interesting points after that. Please feel free to do any or all of those analyses. I would be interested in seeing the results. Don’t be so quick to assume IQ would not matter though.

    One could make an argument that an interesting characteristic of our current world is that the effects you mention seem (much?) less important now than they were historically. The why and how of that might make for an interesting conversation. Do we see a similar pattern with other periods of relative in/stability?

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  208. @AaronB

    Spirituality is tied to IQ/race. Asians being inferior also have inferior beliefs. Christianity is unique in that it received it’s greatness from Caucasian/Europeans.

    Judaism, Buddhism, Islam have nothing to offer the West. The West has religion: the paganism of the European and Christianity.

    Eastern faiths know nothing about the person and human rights.

  209. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @res

    yes – i’d think as a basic default that colonialism *ought* to be negative because the colonialists want to extract value – and there’s plenty of historical examples of that – but there’s also plenty of evidence of benefit.

    the square is circled (at least in the short term) by technology transfer – especially as colonialism will often result from technological superiority.

  210. @dux.ie

    “Thus I concluded that there would be population movements draining away the potential Dem voters from the rural areas.”

    I could have told you that by observation as a Closeted Conservative living in Manhattan in 1992 … it was a lonely place to be if you decided to come out. The first observation was the only thing that made New York city work was the very sizeable number of midwestern and southern people at all strata of the workforce of the major businesses that were the lifeblood of the city. The second observation was that the vast majority … almost a collective like the Borg … were Democrats. If you wanted to have a polite discussion of Conservative or even Republican ideas or values, you had to seek out a local, like someone from Staten Island.

    The Dems are onto the same phenomena you have observed and are adjusting to it by moving as many lower class, solid bloc voting groups away from the cities they have gentrified and assured they will dominate, and moving them via programmes like Section 8 to more rural areas presently dominated by Republicans and controlling the majority of Electoral College votes.

    Despite all the gains Republicans have made at the local and national levels in the last decade of elections, we are perhaps one generation away from total Democrat domination via resettlement of inner city poor and new arrival poor. They are pissing and moaning so fiercely because Trump, unlike the Vichy Republican elite, might actually put an end to their longer-term strategy.

  211. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @rec1man

    Very helpful, thanks.

    1. While the figure of 5% for Brahmins appears well established, I can’t find verification for your figure for merchant. Does the merchant caste correspond to the category of Bania? According to Joshua project figures, Bania including Jains number 30 million and so are 2% of India. https://joshuaproject.net/people_groups/16318

    2. Since Northern Brahmins outnumber Southern Brahmins by perhaps 4 times while while being represented among merit finalists by 1/3 of Southern Brahmins, does it appear to be the case that Northern Brahmins are only modestly smarter than the Indian average and way below the Southern Brahmins?

    3. It appears Tamil Brahmins are much smarter than these are other Brahmins. But why is a place like Nagercoil (where 10% of the population is Tamil Brahmin) not more developed than the rest of the state?

    4. Given that 30% of the population of South India belongs to a smart group and North India’s Brahmin 5% could barely even be called a smart group, isn’t it obvious that South India should split from the union?

    5. What is the breakdown of groups by smartness in Western India? In Bengal?

    • Replies: @rec1man
  212. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @res

    Thank you for the soft answer.

    But I still see the idea of linking national mean IQ to economic development a, um, meritless, approach.

    If you look at the entire sweep of history, economic success has always been about institutions, the outcome of wars, and blind chance.

    You should read Carroll Quigley`s account (in Tragedy and Hope) of the industrial revolution in Britain, the result of sheer chance, specifically, the existence of the English Channel.

    The Channel meant that England needed no standing army, which meant that the tyrannical Stewart monarchs were defeated in their contest with the forces of Parliament, which meant that the landed aristocracy and the country squires who controlled the two Houses of Parliament were able to legislate the enclosure, i.e., privatization, of common land, which made investment in agriculture worthwhile, which stimulated agricultural innovation, and generated surpluses of income, food and labor, all of which were invested in transportation infrastructure (canals and later railways), mines and factories.

    There is more of course to the story of England’s rise to become the greatest imperial power the world has ever seen, the wealthiest country in the world and the world’s leading center of industrial innovation and scientific discovery. A key factor was the defeat of France in the Napoleonic wars, which in turn was dependent on the merger of England and Holland, leading to the creation of the London bond market, which enabled the British Government to raise more funds for war than France, a country with twice Britain’s population and natural wealth.

    The defeat of France meant that Britain got the best colonies, which in turn, meant huge profits from sugar, tobacco, rum and cotton, these to be invested throughout the world in factories, railways, and much else beside, thereby generating huge capital account surpluses, which funded Britain’s rule of the world’s oceans and protection of the world’s trade conducted mainly in British-built, British-owned and British-insured ships.

    But it all started with the English Channel, the existence of which had nothing whatever to do with the average IQ of an Englishman. The rest of the story had nothing to do with the average IQ of an Englishman, either.

  213. @res

    N=1 studies can show normal variation, particularly diurnal variation. They are also good “upper limit” training studies. For example, can you boost reaction times or digit span with repeated practice? The latter apparently so, in some cases.

  214. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Once you note the ~ 0.8 correlation the rest of the analysis is very clear.

    The ~ 0.2 left over shows there are other factors as well, so variation in those other factors over time can explain anomalies.

    Personally I think IQ people (imo) should focus on the factors which cause the 0.2 because for every factor they find they will improve the base correlation.

    So instead of

    ~0.8 correlation with IQ

    it becomes

    ~0.9 correlation with IQ + other known factors.

    It won’t help against people who dispute it for political reasons but might swing it for neutrals.

    #

    (For example has anyone checked if the Flynn effect correlates with the greatly increased fish consumption in the developing world?)

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  215. res says:
    @CanSpeccy

    But I still see the idea of linking national mean IQ to economic development a, um, meritless, approach.

    Meritless is hard to justify IMHO. Incomplete on the other hand…
    (to be clear, are you referring to GDP, growth, or both?)

    To my thinking one of the most interesting features of looking at the IQ-GDP correlation is that it throws the exceptions into sharp contrast. If you looked at the PDF I linked earlier:

    https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2006-dickerson.pdf

    you would have seen that extending the dataset to 81 and 185 countries lowered the correlation (that would make a good counterargument against my earlier 0.82 number, but I guess most folks don’t follow links) and showed big outliers like the Middle Eastern oil producers.

    Having identified the exceptions we can ask interesting questions about why. Perhaps that is a feature of the IQ-GDP analysis that you and AaronB can get behind.

    Tying back into earlier comments, I think two of the ways the present differs dramatically from the past are:
    - An extended period of relative stability.
    - Increased realization of both human and material capital across the broad spectrum of countries/peoples (though still with some obvious dysfunctional exceptions).
    I think both of these have increased the IQ-GDP correlation with the major remaining exceptions being mostly natural resource rich countries (the dysfunctional exceptions noted tend to be low IQ so still correlate reasonably).

    As much as I might criticize the impact of global capitalism, one stunning success has been the increased utilization (exploitation?) of both human and material capital around the world.

  216. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @anon

    Once you note the ~ 0.8 correlation the rest of the analysis is very clear.

    Twaddle.

    The O.8 correlation is for a very thin hand-picked slice of history. It’s the result of mere chance. The relationship would certainly not hold up over any length of time.
    Try extending the relationship to 2017, and back as far as the data will go. Then you’ll see the effect dissipate to essentially nothing.

    • Replies: @anon
  217. @attilathehen

    The right of open borders and free immigration is a human right. I, too, praise the West.

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  218. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    You left off the critical part

    The ~ 0.2 left over shows there are other factors as well, so variation in those other factors over time can explain anomalies.

    It’s the 0.2 that matters.

    Once the factors determining the anomalies are discovered then we should be able to rewind history predictably.

    the industrial revolution in Britain, the result of sheer chance, specifically, the existence of the English Channel.

    maybe yes, lots of iodine from Atlantic rainfall and fish – like the Japanese and their seaweed

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  219. @The most deplorable one

    Thank you, I will read and consider them. Should be interesting.

  220. @CanSpeccy

    If you look at the entire sweep of history, economic success has always been about institutions, the outcome of wars, and blind chance.

    Ahhh, yes. If only black Africans or the Chinese had developed institutions they would have started the industrial revolution. It all makes so much sense. Thank you for pointing it out.

    You should read Carroll Quigley`s account (in Tragedy and Hope) of the industrial revolution in Britain, the result of sheer chance, specifically, the existence of the English Channel.

    The Channel meant that England needed no standing army,

    Except, of course, in 1066. And in 1588 (although, it was called a navy then) and in 1940.

    So, that magic English Channel meant that they never needed a military at all. Such lucky people, the English. Can we all wish to have an English Channel in future?

  221. @Daniel Chieh

    You are insane. You will leave.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  222. @The most deplorable one

    And, then you have to explain why black Africans, who had a head start on the rest of us (if you believe the current view of multiple out-of-Africa migrations with admixture and limited back migration, which I find compelling) then you have to explain why black Africans didn’t discover these magic institutions first.

    Of course, the answer is obvious to you, I am sure. Slavery and colonialism. See, the pre-historic white debils enslaved the black Africans and stole their magic institutions, which prevented them from developing advanced economies and the industrial revolution.

  223. @attilathehen

    But its an human right, which the high IQ West has invented, which is therefore better as you said. Surely nothing of Western beliefs are wrong, therefore, you are incorrect for having contradicted yourself.

  224. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @The most deplorable one

    Except, of course, in 1066. And in 1588 (although, it was called a navy then) and in 1940.

    No exception in either year. In 1066, Harold lost for the lack of a standing army. He had just fought the battle of Stamford Bridge in Yorkshire and had to send out a call for new troops to be mustered as he marched the remnants of his army South to meet the French.

    As for 1588, that was a naval battle. A navy is not the same thing as a standing army and it is useless for suppressing a rebellious parliament.

    The fact is, England does not have, and never has had, a large standing army*, which is why, in 1914, Britain was able to dispatch only six infantry divisions and five cavalry brigades to France, as the Germans advanced with 27 division, and the French defended with 39 Divisions.

    So, that magic English Channel meant that they never needed a military at all. Such lucky people, the English.

    It’s rather silly to call it magic. It’s a simple fact of military logistics that it is difficult to move an invasion force across 20 miles or more of open water, when your opponent’s coast is defended by the world’s most powerful navy. You could inform yourself by studying the vast preparations made by the allied forces during WWII prior to the Normancy landings: floating harbors, undersea oil pipelines. The operation was vast and resulted in over 400,000 killed.

    You’d do well to forget the sarcasm and learn the facts.

    ———
    * It was recently estimated, but the British themselves that the Russians could wipe out the British army in an afternoon.

  225. @The most deplorable one

    The existence of heavy draft animals was also mentioned in the link you sent me, and of course, is a core component of Jared Diamond’s theories. I think that its fair to consider that there is some environment component to wealth, as Saudi Arabia testifies.

    Its not an either/or component, though, and I would say that higher IQ populations certainly are necessary for a certain degree of development, and the appearance of functional systems.

  226. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @anon

    maybe yes, lots of iodine from Atlantic rainfall and fish

    Are you kidding, or do you actually mean that all President Trump needs do to make America great again is to organize the free distribution of fish oil capsules and iodine tablets?

    • Replies: @Sunbeam
    , @anon
  227. RW says:
    @Michael A. Woodley of Menie

    Dr. Woodley, I read “Some phenotypic measures may therefore be better at picking up the ‘true’ genetic trend than others (such as reaction times). Working memory on the other hand appears to be relatively insensitive to the ‘genetic g’ decline, whereas the visual processing measures seem to be picking up the effects of some additional suppressing factor beyond declining ‘genetic g’. ”

    It seems possible that reaction times are negatively correlated with higher fat to muscle ratio as populations become more sedentary.

  228. JackOH says:
    @CanSpeccy

    FWIW-I’m trying to imagine an “IQ-centric” single issue political party or advocacy group, or an “IQ-phile” faction within a mainstream party, or an “IQ-ist” political ideology. That’s because I think some of the commenters wish there were such a party or faction divvying up goodies according to IQ scores. I could be misreading things of course. In other words, I share your skepticism about the more grasping claims made about the connections between IQ and, well, a whole lot of other stuff.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  229. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    Governors usually are smarter but also sociopathic

    Why do you think so? This sounds like 18th century revolutionary propaganda, justifying theft from the nobility by the emergent bourgeoisie.

    In societies that did not undergo such changes (such as in pre-Commie central and eastern Europe) the nobility were a hardworking service class, albeit one with many perks. Franz Josef worked over 60 hours a week well into his 80s. Various dukes, counts, princes worked as mayors, governors, generals, etc…all the way down to lesser nobles who served as junior officers, worked as professors, and managers. One of the hardest working mayors of Moscow was Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich.

    Democracy, which requires the ability to manipulate the masses in order to gain power, probably selects for more psychopathic traits among elected leaders than were common among the old aristocrats who had once ruled.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Santoculto
  230. dux.ie says:
    @res

    The presidency was decided at the state electoral college levels and some
    of the extreme sentiments were averaged out at the state levels and might not
    be significant at this level, e.g. diversity. To avoid over fitting the
    regression equation only single variable at a time was tested. Deeper
    levels of sentiments can be determined at the county levels.

    Because of the correlations among the variables, the respective effects were
    shared among the related varaibles, e.g. EduDeg with White, Asian, OccMgt,
    etc. So they might not stand out. The coeffs for Diversity and Gini looked
    large because of relative scaling. The overall result for RepMarg when
    non-significant variables were removed,

    [MORE]

    Coefficients:
    Estimate Std. Error t value Pr( gt |t|)
    (Intercept) -81.853481 12.749067 -6.420 2.07e-10 ***
    White 1.215639 0.053574 22.691 lt 2e-16 ***
    Uninsured 1.784194 0.134345 13.281 lt 2e-16 ***
    Unempl -1.807456 0.223368 -8.092 1.65e-15 ***
    OccServ -1.438411 0.188706 -7.623 5.64e-14 ***
    Diversity 34.799267 5.365481 6.486 1.37e-10 ***
    EduDeg -1.249949 0.197802 -6.319 3.91e-10 ***
    OccConstr 1.367461 0.235825 5.799 8.89e-09 ***
    EduPGrad -1.859734 0.371189 -5.010 6.40e-07 ***
    Homicide -0.551607 0.151224 -3.648 0.000278 ***
    OccMgt 0.807101 0.222531 3.627 0.000301 ***
    Violent -0.008718 0.002549 -3.419 0.000652 ***
    Gini 39.002043 18.574785 2.100 0.035996 *

    Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1

    Residual standard error: 14.41 on 1027 degrees of freedom
    Multiple R-squared: 0.7979, Adjusted R-squared: 0.7955
    F-statistic: 337.8 on 12 and 1027 DF, p-value: lt 2.2e-16

    Positive coeff means positive correlations with RepMarg. Both
    EduDeg and EduPGrad appeared in the model and pro-Dem. Note the
    coeff for Diversity is positive, i.e. pro-Rep. If the Dem had done
    a proper focus group study they should realize that they were
    pushing something that now favoured Rep. This together with the coeff
    for White might be considered as the so called ‘whitelash’ at the
    county levels, though not at the state levels. Interestingly the
    counties in the Rep states on average there was only the ‘lash’ without
    the White (the variation % across counties might be small) while other
    ethnic groups were on average pro Dem.

    Trump’s talk of building infrastructure resonated with the OccConstr
    but bringing the jobs back did not seem to resonate with OccServ and
    OccMgt and no traction with OccProd, OccSales and OccFarm.

  231. @AP

    Because it’s true??

    Because Marxists (also) said it don’t mean it’s not factual.

    I don’t say every governors but “usually”

    Higher intelligence and sociopathy go hand to hand to the top of power. Whatever known political/ideological regime, governors are on avg subconscious incompetents (morally stupid) or they are on avg conscious evil.

    Ignorance, rampant poverty and injustice has been common place in most human societies and governors are directly responsible for that.

    Very simple: Good people are not corruptible as morally stupid (but who are not psychopath) tend to be. And we have sociopaths who are corrupt by nature.

  232. @AP

    You take a very bad example: pre soviet Russia. A terribly bad governed nation.

    The fact noblesse also have regular jobs don’t mean most them were more capable and specially, morally correct than others.

    I agree that communism or “pure power” tend to select or to attract classical sychos but aristocratic regimes also select for this kind of people in disproportionate way, less than in communist regimes but still inacceptably higher.

    Usual governors on capitalistic and even in aristocratic regimes tend to be just like “high functioning avg Joey”, technically smart, neurotypicals but morally inept just like most people tend to be.

    • Replies: @AP
  233. Sunbeam says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “Are you kidding, or do you actually mean that all President Trump needs do to make America great again is to organize the free distribution of fish oil capsules and iodine tablets?”

    Doesn’t seem a terribly difficult or expensive thing to do a study, and a long term one at that on.

    Be interesting to see the results too.

  234. @CanSpeccy

    Ahhh, like Ximinez you claim:

    “Our three main weapons are 1) an almost fanatical belief in the magic of institutions, 2) the English Channel and 3) luck”

    When I called you on it, you the went back to:

    “Our four main weapons are 1) an almost fanatical belief in the magic of institutions, 2) the English Channel, 3) luck, and 4) a navy to block invaders trying to cross the channel.”

    All you have is a “just so” story and you are intellectually bankrupt.

    However, maybe I should compare you to Jared Diamond in your insistence for proclaiming the the geographical luck of the British.

    You also seem unaware that institutions are downstream from IQ …

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  235. EH says:
    @joe webb

    The normal distibution drops off to either side super-exponentially. Slight differences in means yield order of magnitude differences in the tails. Also the size of the standard deviation differs by up to 20% between populations. Comparing a 100IQ, 15 s.d. US White population with an 85 IQ 13.8 s.d US Black population, and assuming conservatively that those personally advancing science with their insights rarely have IQs of less than 130:
    * 1 in 44 Whites will have the needed intelligence
    * 1 in 1800 Blacks will have the needed intelligence
    which is a ratio of 41, that is, per capita Whites are 4000% more likely than Blacks to score over 130. The White population in the US is about five times the size of the Black population, so the so for every Black with an IQ over 130 there are over 200 Whites.

    Now 85 IQ isn’t all that low, several countries in Asia have similar scores. African countries are typically in the upper 60s to low 70s. Nigeria with an IQ of 69 according to Lynn (2010), and a population of about 180 million can be expected to have only about 4300 people above IQ 130, assuming a 15 point standard deviation. If it is 13.8 as for US Blacks, the number above 130 IQ is fewer than 1000. A US city with an effective White population of 50-250k (any town with a large university) has more intellectual potential than Nigeria. (There are a couple of smallish but powerful tribes in Nigeria that have much higher average IQs than their neighbors that have virtually all the 130+ Nigerians, which complicates the reckoning, balanced somewhat by their high emigration rate, but they aren’t the same people as most of their fellow Nigerians, as they will be the first to tell you.)

    Even to run a shop (do taxes, make schedules, buy stock, set prices etc.) requires an IQ of at least 105. Fewer than 1 in 120 Nigerians can meet that bar. No matter how you set things up, there just isn’t enough brainpower in Black Africa to sustain a civilization with retail shops, let alone modern utilities and transportation.

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  236. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    You take a very bad example: pre soviet Russia. A terribly bad governed nation.

    Not really. This is mostly a myth propagated by the Bolsheviks (and not much contested by Westerners many of whom were rather sympathetic to Bolsheviks, and if not were Russophobic anyways). Russia in the decades prior to World War I was a bit like China in the 21st century. Obviously getting into World War I was an utter disaster, though it was a stupid move not limited to Russia.

    I agree that communism or “pure power” tend to select or to attract classical sychos but aristocratic regimes also select for this kind of people in disproportionate way

    Violent revolutionary regimes have elements of criminal enterprises, so they probably attract people with the most psychopathic traits – the more ruthless, cunning, bloody, etc.

    But democracies also select for people with certain psychopathic traits. In order to win elections, one has to be able to manipulate people. In order to “get ahead”, one often screws people over. To a certain extent, in a democracy there is a “check” on such behavior – relatively free media, and elections – that is absent in closed dictatorial regimes. These weed out the worst and most obvious psychopathic people. But still, you end up with leaders who are skillful manipulators/liars who are able to deftly and relatively humanely outmaneuver others, who perhaps have more scruples.

    Aristocratic traditionalist governments selected least for psychopathic traits, as there was much less selection going on in general. Leaders were generally far more intelligent than the average person, but this was without necessarily accompanying traits such as ruthlessness and cunning. They didn’t have to grasp their way to the top.

    • Agree: utu, reiner Tor
  237. @EH

    In my comparison I usually assume a standard deviation of 15 for all groups, though it is likely the African s.d. is narrower. I will search for more up to date data on s.d.s

  238. @AP

    And the % of very poor people in Tzarist Russia??

    You don’t need have a electoral process to select morally stupid people. The idea that aristocratic regime is the least that select psychopaths don’t convince me. Some evidences?

    Do you think most of parasitic-like royal European families are not at least within anti social personality spectrum??

    • Replies: @AP
  239. Some commentators have proposed specific reasons for countries doing well, and have suggested that these would be in some way separate from the mental ability of the people of those countries. I would be happy to see papers which take the same publicly available data sets on country scholastic ability and overall country statistics and show how those variable add to (or completely supplant) the correlations found for intellectual measures, both past and present.

    In the mean time, here is a link to a scholar whose work on the wealth and poverty of nations I have always found particularly scholarly and compelling.

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/david-landes-economic-historian

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  240. @AP

    ”Leaders were generally far more intelligent than the average person, but this was without necessarily accompanying traits such as ruthlessness and cunning.”

    I thought you have a ”dolce vita” version of the old times.

    ”Leaders” tend to be like that more because their persuasive skills, force and status, and not because they are definitively a ”leader”, a authentic leader, those who guide [wisely**] their people.

    If you put a average person in the leadership how she/he will behave* I really don’t know but i think whatever known or existent political/ideological regime power tend to attract psychopaths ”even” aristocratic ones, the very existence of royalty is already a sign of psychopathy, a class of people who think they are naturally superior than everyone and tend to have a luxurious and parasitic lifestyle while most people are living in horrible conditions.

  241. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @The most deplorable one

    1) an almost fanatical belief in the magic of institutions, 2) the English Channel, 3) luck, and 4) a navy to block invaders trying to cross the channel.”

    Makes sense to me. Consider:

    Institutions include the Pentagon, the CIA, the US Supreme Court, Harvard University, etc. Do institutions such as these not have something to do with the success or failure of a civilization?

    The English Channel and the British Navy have kept England free of invaders since 1066 — almost 1000 years — not a bad record. And in 1066, England was a poor country with a navy comprised of little more than a bunch of rowing boats. After that fiasco the Royal Navy improved, a lot.

    As for luck, in 1066, the Battle of Hastings could have gone either way, until Harold took an arrow in the eye, which meant game over for the English. Was that bad luck or what?

    But you dismiss these factors with contempt cleaving to a seemingly fanatical belief in the magic of a couple of points difference in population mean IQ.

    Well at least your theory reflects well on the intelligence of my English ancestors who ruled much of the world for a lot longer than the US is likely to do.

  242. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    all President Trump needs do to make America great again is to organize the free distribution of fish oil capsules and iodine tablets?

    no – America’s primary problem by far is its ruled by a parasitic banker class

    iodine tablets would be the second thing

    (more seriously aiming for an average IQ of around 105 partly by demographic control and partly by ensuring people reach their full biological potential – which among other things means iodine in pregnancy and childhood)

  243. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @JackOH

    I think some of the commenters wish there were such a party or faction divvying up goodies according to IQ scores.

    Yes, I think there are some who see IQ, like inherited social status, as the basis of privilege that one need take no trouble to earn. Hence the use of SAT tests for entry to the Ivy Leagues. If you’re really bright, who cares what, if anything, you know. And if you never do bother to learn anything, you can, like the late Ted Kennedy, hire a swat to sit the exams for you.

    • Replies: @JackOH
  244. utu says:
    @AP

    The contract on Russia was issued because Russia was doing well and had great prospects for the future development. Bolsheviks were just the well paid executors who succeeded in Russia’s destruction and transfer of immense wealth from Russia to original investors who funded the Bolshevik coup.

    • Replies: @Malla
  245. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @James Thompson

    Yes, Landes essentially espoused the view I expressed above, i.e., that national success depends on institutions, political arrangements and cultural traditions. Thus he attributed the creation of the modern world to Europe, and in particular to England, which had, among its institutions, the Royal Society, a sovereign Parliament, the Royal Navy, the common law, trust law and, after Bloody Mary, a tradition of religious toleration (among Christian sects). Europe, divided into rival states, created the political conditions that spurred competition in innovation across the continent in both military and commercial fields.

    English trust law is interesting because it led to the creation of many sporting clubs, which explains why all of the world’s most popular sports were invented in England: soccer, football (with the oval ball, i.e., rugby), tennis, rounders (baseball), skiing, billiards (pool), and the modern athletics movement.

    • Replies: @anon
  246. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    national success depends on institutions, political arrangements and cultural traditions

    yes, institutions evolved over time as a result of genetic traits like average IQ and (imo) traits which collectively create a nation’s cooperation/corruption index

    so

    wealth of nations ~ effective IQ * cooperation/corruption index

    (where effective IQ is genetic potential * dietary index)
    (and corruption/cooperation are the inverse of each other)

    • Replies: @res
  247. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    And the % of very poor people in Tzarist Russia??

    Don’t know. However the squalor of places like London at that time was worse than anything in Russia. One of my grandparents grew up in a peasant household in the Russian Empire and life was fine prior to the Revolution.

    The idea that aristocratic regime is the least that select psychopaths don’t convince me. Some evidences?

    Compare Nicholas II, Alexander III or Alexander II to what came later. Or Wilhelm II or Franz Josef or Karl I to what came later. Or those guys to Clinton, Blair, etc. or other “graspers.”

    Do you think most of parasitic-like royal European families are not at least within anti social personality spectrum

    Since those guys worked very hard they certainly were not parasites. And in terms of psychopathic traits, they had fewer of them than do most leaders in democracies, and fewer still than do the leaders of revolutionary dictatorships.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Santoculto
  248. @James Thompson

    Since it was clearly an example of what can happen on a relaxed early morning walk when high processing speed fires up the perhaps all-too-active “divergent” aspect of my mind I make that my excuse for using this thread to pose a question the answer to which might interest many.

    It occurred to me that the “Unsubcribe” link to be found on many dubious marketing emails (“You have $500 credit at Woolworths” or whatever, with the presumably merely optimistic or opportunistic ones, as distinct from the malicious, mentioning an address in Spain or Germany or Florida) could well be one of those links which plants a Trojan or other malware on one’s computer or phone….. How can one tell? How can one safely deal with those, or any other, suspect links?

    Presumably using an option to look at “Source” could help – but what expertise is needed if that is to provide the answer?

  249. @AP

    It might well be that the supply of poor (including Jewish refugees) even in late 19th century London ensured that poverty in parts of the East End remained truly squalid but Malthusian tendencies and bad seasons must have kept most Russian peasants pretty close to disaster. Indeed the great Geoffrey Blainey’s “Triumph of the Nomads” (an offshoot of his lecturing in economic history when he realised that little was known or written about Aborigines before the 1788 settlement at Port Jackson) offers the opinion that Australian Aborigines probably ate better than the average Eastern European peasant circa 1800. (No doubt infanticide helped keep population stable though there were allegedly some methods of contraception).

  250. Malla says:
    @utu

    What the early Soviet Leadership under Lenin did was follow a policy called Decapitation. The best of the high IQ Russians who were a threat to the new regime were just simply liquidated. Followed by smart ethnic manipulation of all the populations within the Soviet Union.

    From

    http://www.whitenationalism.com/rj/rj-32.htm

    “When the Germans “liberated” the Ukraine, they found a decapitated society, largely incapable of producing the essentials of civilized life, or indeed, of feeding themselves. In the words of a German officer responsible for performing a quick census [page 62]:

    “The Russian and Jewish upper classes withdrew together with the Red Army. The leading Ukrainians have been partially deported and, if they held leading positions in administration and industry, they were also forced to move east of the Dnieper. Numerous tractor and other specialists on the countryside met the same fate. In June, many young men were called up and put in garrison in the interior of the USSR…. Because of this development there is a tremendous scarcity of people capable of assuming responsible positions in administration, industry and agriculture in the Ukraine…”

    Similar patterns of packing minorities into the upper middle classes of the ethnic republics can be seen in the Baltic Republics (Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia) as well as Belarus.

    Indeed, it appears that the very essence of Communism is ethnic manipulation and population transfer. It is a pattern that holds true even at the top of the communist party structure. In the early days following the revolutions of 1917-1918, none of the top officials in Moscow were ethnic Russians.”

    Thus all the intelligent high IQ Russians were killed off during the early days of Lenin’s rule.

    This is best explained by this video

    It seems some religious Jews suffered at the hands of their leftist Jewish brothers in the Soviet Union. Is there a clash between leftist Jews and conservative Jews??
    Thus Communism might have led to a fall in the average IQ of the populations under the Soviet Union. Things did return to normal during the later days of the Soviet Union but an IQ loss has happened.

  251. JackOH says:
    @CanSpeccy

    CanSpeccy, we could benefit from debate that separately asks: “How should we use our knowledge of intelligence to create a better-ordered society?” I want to be cautious, but I think some of the comments here by very bright UR readers seem naïve or unclear about what an “IQ-enriched” politics might actually sound like.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @anon
  252. @AP

    You are using anecdotal evidences.
    Yes it’s not All Russians who had very bad standard living but still so many them, majority them had, seems.

    I compared but you are using non explicit psychopath aristocrats with quasi explicit democratic psychopath politicians.

    Those guys Don’t work very hard. Or they are even more subtle than a vulgar revolutionary and energic leader.

    • Replies: @AP
  253. res says:
    @anon

    If you are interested in testing your model further, here is a site with some data:

    http://www.sq.4mg.com/corrupt.htm

    Interesting how much the corruption correlation coefficients vary depending on whether the countries are developed/developing/underdeveloped
    I wish they had given the correlations across all countries as well.

    hbdchick wrote on IQ and corruption (but not GDP) here: https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2013/07/02/intelligence-and-corruption/

    Another possible candidate for a model is individualism vs. collectivism.

    https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2013/09/07/national-individualism-collectivism-scores/

  254. rec1man says:
    @Anonymous

    1) Bania = Merchant includes Sindhi, Jain, etc, per 1931 census around 5%
    After 1931 caste census was stopped due to many castes filing court cases – such as whether to be be classified as Clean Shudra or Unclean Shudra

    2) In the 2017 California National Merit List, 30 North Indian Brahmins, 95 South Indian Brahmins ( 45 Tamil Brahmins ) vs 65 North Indian Bania ( merchants ) and 55 Kulak class Dravidian upper castes – so yes North Indian brahmins are dumber than South Indian Brahmins, dumber than North Indian bania, at the level of Upper Caste Dravidians – several reasons, they got genocided by muslim invasions, and most of the community leaders got killed ( higher IQ segment ) many North Indian mafia leaders are brahmins, North Indian brahmins mostly abandoned their hereditary scholarly niche

    Average Indian is represented by Patel ( 4 winners ) and Jat Sikh ( 3 winners ) vs 30 North Indian brahmin winners on CA National merit list, so North Indian brahmins are much above the Indian average

    3) Tamil Brahmins are 1% of Tamil Nadu, Used to be 2%, half migrated away due to official anti-brahmin quota of 69% ( actual quota = 99.9% ) – there are now zero Tamil Brahmins in any Tamil Nadu Govt Job, including clerk, school teacher etc . Sundar Pichai or Indra Nooyi or Ramanujam or Vishwanathan Anand cant get a Tamil Nadu govt school teacher job – thanks to this Dravidian IQ miracle?? Whereas in CA National Merit List, 44 Tamil Brahmin, 22 Tamil Dravidians

    Tamil Brahmins in Tamil Nadu live in Chennai, where they are about 10% of the population – in Rural Tamil Nadu, including Nagarcoil, 0.1% of the population is Tamil Brahmin, not 10% – Nagarcoil has 50% christian population

    4) On the CA National Merit List,
    Eastern India – Bengal – 12 Brahmins, 6 Kayastha ( scribe ) total 18

    Western India, Maharashtra, 16 Brahmin, 4 Kayasth (scribe ) total 24

    Gujurat, 16 Jain, 8 Hindu merchants, 4 Brahmins , 4 Patels – Note in USA, there are 10 Patels for every Gujurati Brahmin

  255. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @JackOH

    “How should we use our knowledge of intelligence to create a better-ordered society?”

    That’s a big question!

    One thing that would increase the intelligence applied to decisions in government and the public sector would be to slash management from the current eight, ten or twelve layers from top to bottom to something like the maximum of four upon which it is said that the Mafia rely.

    That way you’d eliminate most of the bureaucracy and place the indians under the direct control of the chiefs. That should increase the quality of the decision making as well as the IQ of those few (presumably the best and the brightest) making the decisions.

    A model I particularly admire is that of British Colonial Office in the 1850′s under the direction of Lord Palmerston. The department’s total staff consisted of two under secretaries and four clerks. Palmerston dictated responses to all dispatches received by the department. The clerks were expected to work until midnight if necessary, but if they arrived for work before 10.00 AM they were given breakfast. Such efficiency presumably explains why the empire grew so large and was, as such things go, pretty much of a success.

    Looking at the gigantic bureaucracies that supposedly manage the US empire and one understands why it is falling apart though it costs so much.

    • Replies: @Uebersetzer
  256. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    You are using anecdotal evidences.
    Yes it’s not All Russians who had very bad standard living but still so many them, majority them had, seems.

    In 1890 Russian per capita income in 1990 dollars was $944, higher only than that of Serbia (and slightly lower than that of Greece). In 1913 it was $1551 – highest growth rate in Europe that that time. Russia had surpassed the per capita incomes of Portugal and Greece.

    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.361.386&rep=rep1&type=pdf

    I compared but you are using non explicit psychopath aristocrats with quasi explicit democratic psychopath politicians.

    I also used the leaders in the countries with their replacements in the same countries.

    Those guys Don’t work very hard.

    They worked as hard or harder than anyone else. Franz Josef was working 60+ hours a week his entire life, until his death when he was in his eighties. His last words were “I haven’t been able to finish my work, please wake me up tomorrow morning at half past three, as usual.”

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  257. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @attilathehen

    Go back home to Europe.

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  258. @AP

    Russia was a terribly socially unequal society. Yes but you know per capita tend not to be great to compare nations because it’s like a weight, their avgs often don’t reflect how well their wealth is distributed so it’s quite common you have two nations with the same per capita but very different wealthy distribution.

    I already read quite superficially, expected from me, about this improvement in Russia some years before the revolution but this don’t deny the fact that during great part of your history while a aristocratic regime Russia has been a successions of bad governments.

    Seems you are exceptionalizing instead be honest and accept the rule among aristocracy or officialized parasitism.

    We have a family who think they are near to god, naturally superior than everyone, living in luxurious life (I hope you will not deny the luxurious life of Russian noblesse) whatever how bad, avg or good other people are living, often atomized about problems of the nations they live comfortably. We have a current examples about how useless and evil aristocrats tend to be for example European royal families today supporting colonization of “their” “own” lands by foreign and suspect people. Aristocrats never are concerned with the quality of culture, dignity, intelligence and character of their people why?? Because they always were a extractive class as well “$piritual/religious classes”.

    I never will understand this monarchist people, they believe it’s perfectly rational accept a out of touch class of 1% of people who think they have blue blood and the lands they live are their oysters. There are a undeniable long time history of aristocratic regimes and they are rarely good for regular people. Of course British noblesse did nothing to stop capitalistic exploitation of the really hard working classes during 200,300 years isn’t??

    • Replies: @AP
  259. I’m not defending

    - communism

    - communist revolution

    But either about monarchies, period.

    Yes, the best regime, ideally speaking, by now, is democracy, but most people are not wise enough to know how to use it.

  260. Malla says:
    @attilathehen

    Check out Koestner’s book

    https://www.amazon.com/Lotus-Robot-Arthur-Koestler/dp/0060900806

    Goes to the mysterious East India and all and realises that the West is really superior spiritually

    Islam is just a branch of Arian Christianity

    http://shoebat.com/2014/09/25/muhammad-founder-islam/

    http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/islam-actually-christian-heresy

    [MORE]

    Hinduism flawed

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a2OVY9o9vk

    Hindu astronomy is laughable and crazy

    Hindu Gurus are fake out to fool people

    Jews worshiped some Volcano

    Judaism

    Buddha descended from blond haired Sythians

    http://thaimangoes.blogspot.in/2009/08/h9.html

    • Replies: @attilathehen
  261. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    Russia was a terribly socially unequal society. Yes but you know per capita tend not to be great to compare nations because it’s like a weight, their avgs often don’t reflect how well their wealth is distributed so it’s quite common you have two nations with the same per capita but very different wealthy distribution.

    Another Bolshevik myth, used to justify theft from the middle and upper classes.

    http://web.williams.edu/Economics/wp/Nafziger_Lindert_RussianInequality.pdf

    Gini coefficient in Russia in 1904 was .36 – so Russia was a lot more equal than England-Wales in 1867 (.490), Sweden in 1903, and a bit more equal than 19th century Latin America. It was a lot more equal than modern Russia, the USA or Brazil (gini coefficients of .453, .464, and .612, respectively).

    Seems you are exceptionalizing instead be honest and accept the rule among aristocracy or officialized parasitism

    Again, parasitism implies that they didn’t work or didn’t work hard. You have provided no evidence of that. I did provide examples of hard-working aristocratic rulers.

    We have a family who think they are near to god, naturally superior than everyone, living in luxurious life (I hope you will not deny the luxurious life of Russian noblesse) whatever how bad, avg or good other people are living, often atomized about problems of the nations they live comfortably

    I don’t know about thinking “near to God’, but the rest of what you wrote can also apply to the modern Western upper middle classes just as much (read Murray’s Coming Apart). I guess you think that modern physicians and engineers are also parasites who don’t work hard?

    Aristocrats never are concerned with the quality of culture, dignity, intelligence and character of their people why

    Europe’s cultural Golden Age occurred precisely at the time when it was ruled by aristocrats. Why? We have seen an erosion of those qualities (at the top) in the modern age why?

    I never will understand this monarchist people, they believe it’s perfectly rational accept a out of touch class of 1% of people who think they have blue blood and the lands they live are their oysters.

    In Russia in 1904, the top 1% had 20.2% of the nation’s income. In Sweden in 1903 the top 1% had 27% of the nation’s income, in England-Wales in 1867 they had 28.6% of the nation’s income, in USA 1917 it was 17.6% (just a little lower than in Russia).

    There are a undeniable long time history of aristocratic regimes and they are rarely good for regular people.

    Post-aristocratic regimes in Central and Eastern Europe killed a few tens of millions of people. That wasn’t good for regular people, was it?

    Russia is more unequal now, than it was in 1904. Modern USA is more unequal than Russia was in 1904.

    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Santoculto
  262. @AP

    Russians were more homogeneously poor than other people. So the inequality appear to be lower because you have less than 20% of population who are less poor, middle class and upper class and 80% of very poor.

    It’s a joke. You provide individual examples or supposed examples. It’s not a real evidence of anything. Just like “a study with two individuals proved..”

    Some people born to be slave….

    Your comparisons are ridiculous. You are comparing regular workers with people who live purely via status.

    You are saying that professional classes tend to act like…aristocrats????

    Ok…

    Sociopathic way of thinking. Son, “Golden age” is just part of this story because below the carpet very bad things happened specially against people as you (if you…). You are justifying extremely exploitation of European people and other people’s?? The means justify the ends?

    No. “Golden age” in Europe started when “noblesse” and “church” was being neutralized, only when bourgeoisie become hegemonic and when aristocracy become even more useless and ridiculously frivolous.

    Russia was already more populous and their wealthy were less than in England for example.

    You are comparing England that you say was even worse … with Russia. So you are saying Russia was less worse… But even worse.. than England??

    Russia pre revolution was feudal. If Russia was a heaven as you saying so no had any fertile ground to foment a social revolution.

    Ok ok. Any evidence aristocratic regimes was less sanguinary?? Or it’s just your opinion?

    • Replies: @AP
  263. @AP

    I’m open to change partially my views about it, specifically about tzarist Russia, BUT…

    no, no have any evidence that aristocratic regimes has been better than other types, the same social injustice, same moral problems of all nature, and fundamentally the existence of ”blue blood” people.

    ”Russia pre revolution was feudal. If Russia was a heaven as you saying so no had any fertile ground to foment a social revolution.”

    Now you need ask me about Cuba, ;)

    Why Cuba had a communist revolution if it was reasonably good country before this event*

    I recognize that you’re right about many things here but the most important you’re inevitably wrong, that to the government be good it’s necessary a ”royal family”.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  264. @Santoculto

    Actually, I would argue that there is strong evidence for cultural Golden Ages to rise in aristocracies, not democracies; concentration of wealth in the hands of patrons tends to lead to skilled artists and artisans who basically focus their lives to the perfection of their craft, rather than in more mercenary endeavors.

    Whether this is good for the public weal is a different story.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  265. @Daniel Chieh

    Cultural Golden ages, we are not talking about social and moral ones.

  266. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    Russians were more homogeneously poor than other people. So the inequality appear to be lower because you have less than 20% of population who are less poor, middle class and upper class and 80% of very poor.

    Prior to the Revolution was indeed poor but catching up, showing the highest per capita income growth rate n Europe. It had already passed up Greece and Portugal. It did this while having income inequality that was lower than that of many other countries, such as Sweden, England, and South America and slightly worse than but similar to the USA..

    It’s a joke. You provide individual examples or supposed examples. It’s not a real evidence of anything. Just like “a study with two individuals proved..”

    Review my posts. I provided data for countries, not individuals, with links to the data.

    You are justifying extremely exploitation of European people and other people’s?? The means justify the ends?

    You think the communist party didn’t exploit people? That modern corporations in democracies don’t exploit people?

    The old aristocratic states in central and Eastern Europe enjoyed economic growth and, in the case of Russia at least (I don’t have time to dig up stats for Wilhelmine Germany or Austria-Hungary but I suspect these were not much more unequal than was Russia) had lower inequality than many modern democracies (such as the USA) do, and lower inequality than did many of their western democratic neighbors.

    Russia was already more populous and their wealthy were less than in England for example.

    I’m not quite sure what you are trying to say. In 19th late century England the top 1% received 28% of the country’s income. In Sweden it was 27%. In Russia the top 1% only got 20.2% of the country’s income. So in Russia income was more evenly distributed across society than it was in England. Gini coefficents for England and Russia were .490 and .360, respectively.

    No. “Golden age” in Europe started when “noblesse” and “church” was being neutralized, only when bourgeoisie become hegemonic

    Actually nuetralizing the church and nobility led to cultural decline. Russia’s Golden Age was in the 19th century. Shakespeare lived before the bourgeoisie became the ultimate rulers of England. Etc.

    Russia pre revolution was feudal. If Russia was a heaven as you saying so no had any fertile ground to foment a social revolution.

    Russia got itself into a stupid war that resulted in nearly 2 million deaths from combat and nearly 1 million deaths from non-combat related causes, resulting in instability that was deftly taken advantage of by professional foreign-supported and based revolutionaries.

    Ok ok. Any evidence aristocratic regimes was less sanguinary??

    Do you doubt that the Communist, fascist, and Nazi regimes that followed the aristocratic ones were more bloody than the ones before? Really?

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  267. @AP

    After many sacrificed generations the fantastic tzarist Russia finally started to become prosperous… Probably because aristocratic Russia started to copy pre democratic”western” European societies ;)

    Your two questions are crucial about what you are thinking about my point of views. No, I know very well that communist and democratic regimes exploit people (as in aristocratic as you said implicitly) and the first even worse.

    Russia had more inhabitants than “England” already in that period and with less wealthy to be distributed.

    USA today have more social inequality but most people have enjoyed a great standard living, since aristocracy become just a “tradition” in the west standard living improved so much. At the same time church and aristocracy down and democracy/bourgeoisie up standard living started to increase incomparably.

    Shakespeare was only one individual. Russian literature golden age yes have their golden days during the XIX and many Russian genius writers of this time have compiled many stories of poverty of mujiks, reality they lived and registered in their books.

    Yes but the state/level of soldiers/army tend to show the state of nation namely in big nations.

    In absolute terms nazi, commie and fascist regimes was more bloody but specially in the apex of European demographic explosion. How about aristocratic regimes and their constant belligerence?? And in relative terms?? I know in the war of 30 years German population was reduced in 20%, seems.

    I don’t deny the perversity of this regimes but at least to me it’s also impossible to deny the perversity of the aristocracy, have a long time to prove their efficiency and quality. Indeed fascist communist and nazi regimes emulate the supremacist culture of aristocracy, they see themselves as substitutes of royal families.

    • Replies: @AP
  268. @Anonymous

    The USA is Europe. I am in Europe. Are you Jewish, Asian, black? Or maybe have family members of this type?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  269. @Malla

    Thanks. I’ll look up this book. Yes, Islam is a Christian heresy. And what’s worse, the polygamy, black slavery,concubinage, first cousin marriage it introduced into North Africa destroyed the original Caucasian peoples and their high IQs. St. Augustine and Hannibal are examples of these intelligent people. This evil belief system now wants to destroy Europe.

    IQ once lost can never be recovered.

  270. AaronB says:
    @AP

    I think you’re generally right about the benefits of aristocracies and have thought so for a long time, but lately I’ve come to have some reservations.

    1) Aristocracies over time “decay” – they lose the will to power and thus they lose the skill needed to gain and keep power. The security of their position leads to this outcome. Ultimately, they become vulnerable to the sociopathic elements in society, who are keener, hungrier, more power hungry, and more ruthless.

    2) In Europe, the aristocracies allied with the Jews to financially prey on the population. Jews could never have been any kind of force in Europe if not for the active aid and protection of the aristocracy, who were happy to use this ruthless outsider community against their own people. Why did this happen? Even though the aristocrats were themselves not so rapacious and predatory as Jews (when Jews took over tax farming in any land, the profits to the lord shot skyward), they seem to have had a fatal weakness for forming alliances with extremely ruthless outsiders against their own people. Perhaps contracting out the predation salved their conscience somewhat, but in the end the results were the same.

    In a way, this is a pattern we see to this day.

    Aristocracy as an institution seems to have a much better incentive structure than capitalism – economic and social security lead to a relaxed elite and the formation of an ethic of noblesse oblige, as well as an interest in leisure, arts, and sciences (today’s elite have no time to do anything but scramble for power, position, and money) – but in the end this very security lead to vulnerability, and more significantly and much more more damning, somehow social security and noblesse oblige failed to provide a robust bulwark against inordinate greed – provided they could ease the sting of guilt by using an outsider community as their cats paw.

    What to do? In a human community there will always be a sociopathic element, they will always eventually rise to the top, their greed, ambition, boredom, and immorality will eventually destroy themselves and their community, collapse will ensue, and the cycle will start again. Its why every empire and “great” nation ultimately becomes decadent and nihilistic.

    I don’t believe there can be any “institutional” solution to psycopathy and sociopathy – democracy was the last great effort to do so, and it failed. The sociopaths colluded and gamed the system, when the premise was that factions of sociopaths would balance each other out in a system of checks and balances. We sought to use sociopaths against each other, but they joined together against us. “Meritocracy” was substituted for traditional hierarchies – and very soon “merit” came to mean how sociopathic you can be.

    In the end it’s a human problem that needs human solutions not political solutions – political solutions can always be gamed, and its a fatal weakness of Enlightenment thinking that abstract political or organizational solutions can work

    Religion and other non-rational factors are probably key. The old Chinese system was probably the best the world had ever seen for moderating the sociopathic element, but it depended heavily on an ethic of world-resignation (in a positive sense) – not taking the physical world too seriously, seeing worldly ambition as a bit ridiculous and finding happiness in escape from worldly concerns. In such an environment, sociopaths, who are extreme materialists and motivated entirely by concern for worldly status, are less likely to flourish.

    Once the West turned to extreme materialism, no political solution was ever going to prevent the rise of the sociopath, who is the logical extension of extreme materialism.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @AP
  271. @AP

    The Marquis de Sade was a French aristocrat, although he spent a lot of time in jail for his proclivities, and tried without much success to accommodate himself to the French Revolution.

  272. @CanSpeccy

    Whichever office in the British bureaucracy was in charge of Ireland in the previous decade proved startlingly inefficient when it came to dealing with the effects of the Potato Famine. Unless it was thought lots of dead Irish was a good thing.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
  273. Aron says:

    I don’t really agree with you that India scores 80 IQ on IQ testing.

    Presently the IQ of India is close to 86-90. I will show you IQ data.

    [MORE]

    IQ of Chennai, Tamil Nadu:-

    Study 1:-

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3018494/

    IQ of 107 as a community sample. 4 zones in Chennai and 12 schools were selected randomly. Sample size of 717. 606 children belonged to families with less than 6500 INR monthly income. And 130 had illiterate mothers. If anything, the selection bias towards socio-economic status is downward.

    Study 2:-

    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1179/oeh.2005.11.2.138

    IQ of children was found to be 102. And 95 for those having high lead in blood level.
    ——————————————–
    IQ in Chandigarh, Punjab:-

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3767262/

    Average IQ is 99. 5 private schools and 5 government schools were randomly selected out of 37 schools. And sample size is 2400.

    —————————————————-
    IQ in 2 rural and 2 urban areas of Punjab:-

    http://www.ijres.org/papers/Volume%204/v4-i7/Version-2/G4724854.pdf

    IQ in 2 rural areas is 96.2, 90.4. And 2 urban areas is 102, 106. IQ grades are available (0 to 10th percentile, etc.) and online statistical tool is required to read.

    Rural areas are in Dera Bassi and Tehsil Kharar. Urban areas is in Fatehgarh Saheb. And Tehsil Kharar.

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    IQ of Delhi:-

    Study 1:-

    http://heapol.oxfordjournals.org/content/17/4/420.full.pdf+html

    IQ of kids of slum dwellers in New Delhi living in plot area is 92.4. And shanty houses/homeless is 89.4.

    IQ of kids who have attended schools is 96.7 (plot area) and 93.2 (shady houses)

    Study 2:-

    http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/Kundu-2015.pdf

    IQ of 76.2 in Najafgarh (rural area of Delhi) and 85.2 in Defense Colony (slightly urban area). Government school were selected in both areas.

    76 IQ in high fluoride region and has to be taken with precaution.

    Study 3:-

    Cited by Lynn:-

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/lynn-race-differences-in-intelligence.pdf

    Page 60:-
    Row 3 gives an IQ of 93 for 14-year-old students at St. Xavier’s School in Delhi.

    Study 4:-

    http://www.ruralneuropractice.com/article.asp?issn=0976-3147&year=2016&volume=7&issue=2&spage=238&epage=243&aulast=Ranjan

    In the above IQ sample, average full scale IQ was found to be 90.6.

    However 36/50 were from rural areas and 14/50 from urban areas.

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    IQ in Andhra Pradesh (rural):-

    “Effect of fluoride exposure on Intelligence Quotient {IQ) among 13-15 year old school children of known endemic area of fluorosis, Nalgonda District, Andhra Pradesh.” KM Sudhir, Journal of Indian Association of Public Health Dentistry Year : 2009 | Volume : 7 | Issue : 13 | Page : 88-94

    http://www.jiaphd.org/downloadpdf.asp?issn=2319-5932&year=2009&volume=7&issue=13&spage=88&epage=94&aulast=Sudhir&type=2

    IQ in 4 villages in Andhra Pradesh is 88.7, 84.5, 84.5, 80.

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    IQ in West Bengal:-

    Study 1 (rural):-

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297722925_Dental_fluorosis_and_urinary_fluoride_concentration_as_a_reflection_of_fluoride_exposure_and_its_impact_on_IQ_level_and_BMI_of_children_of_Laxmisagar_Simlapal_Block_of_Bankura_District_WB_India?_sg=OxEw86Y9iI6rPYqTlpXNxf3sHxsD4oLarEkZXw_AKdiC1SmLw9IzIsEDusa540LU

    IQ in Villages in Laxmisagar Village was 108.3 in normal regions and 85–92 in fluoride contaminated areas.

    Study 2 (rural):-

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281872250_Association_of_iodine_status_with_IQ_level_and_academic_achievement_of_rural_primary_school_children_in_West_Bengal_India?_sg=C6DW2flLBxL70uQRbTh5PevuX6aK06oaIwvFWRYRrHYOP39LDEWGNEkXL5C1W4dQ

    Average IQ in 3 Government schools was 88.4

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    IQ of Karnataka (rural):-

    http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/eswar-2011.pdf

    http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/sebastian-2015.pdf

    http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388&year=2011&volume=29&issue=2&spage=117&epage=120&aulast=Shivaprakash

    IQ of 2 villages is 86, 88.

    IQ of villages near Mysore is 80, 86, 88.

    IQ of village in Bagalkot is 76.36.

    IQ of Scheduled tribes in sub-urbs of Karnataka:-

    http://web.inflibnet.ac.in/ojs/index.php/IJFS/article/view/3461/2722

    IQ of 102 with 106 IQ for healthy group.

    WISC III was administered for testing.

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    IQ of Kolkata:-

    Study 1 (Lynn’s sample):-

    http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1974-10149-001

    “Compared scores of 2 geographically separated Bengali-speaking groups of schoolchildren, grades IX-XI, on Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices. 2,836 Ss from Calcutta and 2,100 Ss from Agartala were tested. Ss from Calcutta were superior to those from Agartala by an average of 7 points.”

    Lynn reports this as IQ of 83. However, IQ of Calcutta was 87 and Agartala (Burmese/Tibetans/Chinese inhabited area) show IQ of 80. As shown above.

    Study 2:-

    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.22648/full

    Average IQ in 81–90 range (10th and 25th percentile for British).

    57.95% undernourished kids in the sample (downward sampling of population). 21.5% kids had IQ above 120.

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    IQ in Uttar Pradesh:-

    Study 1 (rural):

    http://www.jcdr.net/article_fulltext.asp?issn=0973-709x&year=2015&month=November&volume=9&issue=11&page=ZC10&id=6726

    IQ of 110 in village Tiwariganj, Lucknow and 85–92 in village, Unnao district of UP.

    85-92 is in high fluoride region.

    CPM scores are mentioned. And is normalized to 110 IQ at 29 mean CPM score.
    Mean age of participant was 9 as mentioned in the sample.

    I will use normalization data for Australia:-

    http://docslide.us/download/link/a-normative-and-reliability-study-for-the-ravens-coloured-progressive-matrices

    Average CPM score for kids in Australia in 2003 matched for same aged group shows 27 mean and 30 at 75 percentile. So, the data is well normalized as per Australian 2003 norms.

    Study 2(urban):

    http://hrcak.srce.hr/file/44025

    IQ of Muslims in Aligarh city, Uttar Pradesh (Average IQ of 107)

    Source: “Badaruddoza. Inbreeding effects on metrical phenotypes among North Indian Children. Collegicum Antropologicum 28(Suppl. 2): 311-318. (ISSN No. 0350-6134.”

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    IQ of Gujarat rural:-

    http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/trivedi-20124.pdf

    http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/trivedi-2007.pdf

    IQ in 6 villages of Gujarat is 97 (optimum environment) and 92 (un-optimum conditions).

    IQ of villages near Ahmedabad is 104.

    ——————————————————————————————————–
    IQ in Maharashtra (Pune):-

    http://www.indianpediatrics.net/feb2004/feb-121-128.htm

    86.1 for low birth weight, 92.1 for medium birth weight and 97.2 for normal birth weight.

    https://www.indianpediatrics.net/july1999/july-669-676.htm

    IQ of control group was 101.38. And LBW was 94.

    ——————————————————————————————————–
    IQ of Madhya Pradesh (rural):-

    http://www.ruralneuropractice.com/article.asp?issn=0976-3147&year=2012&volume=3&issue=2&spage=144&epage=149&aulast=Saxena

    IQ of villages near Bhopal is 98.5.

    IQ of remaining 3 high fluoride villages in Madhya Pradesh is 83.6, 87 and 91.6.

    ——————————————————————————————————–
    IQ of Rajasthan (rural):-

    http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/singh-2013.pdf

    IQ of villages near Jaipur is 93.31 and near Dausa is 84.48.

    Study 2 (Lynn’s sample, Agarwal and Sinha 1984):-

    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01068128

    IQ of Muslims in government schools near Jaipur is 81 (non-inbred).

    Lynn cited this as average IQ of 78. A combination of inbred and outbred Muslims.

    Muslims not practicing inbreeding show 81 IQ.

    ——————————————————————————————————–
    IQ of Bihar:-

    Lynn’s sample:-

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/19964938_Consquences_of_consanguinity_on_cognitive_behavior

    Average IQ is 93 suburbs, 79 rural.
    And 79 suburbs, 69 rural for inbred muslims.

    Lynn reports this as 79 average IQ. However, Muslims not practicing inbreeding show IQ of 85.

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    A table with details is presented below. And it contains IQ data, date of publication, norms used, test conducted, location, etc.

    Many of the IQ samples have been standardized on old norms. Like IQ in Chennai is published in 2013, measured in 2005. And standardized on Binet-Kamath scale of 1967 which measures IQ with respect to British 1967 kids.

    To remove bias of standardization on old norms, I present the following table:-

    Where date of measurement is not given, I have used date of publication as date of measurement. One location of IQ measurement represents one row in the table below.
    Flynn effect is used as 2.25 based on

    http://eyeonsociety.co.uk/resources/RPMChangeAndStability.pdf

    Changes of RPM scores in UK. As IQ data is on people with less than 20 years age, Figure 3 is used. IQ changed from 1938 to 1979 as “50 th percentile of 1979 was equivalent to 70 th percentile of 1938″.

    Location….IQ (old norms)……Date…..Year of norm…..Diff…..Flynn …..IQ (new norms)
    Punjab…….90.28……………….2016…….1979………………37…….2.25………81.955
    Punjab……..96.43……………….2016…….1979………………37…….2.25………88.105
    Punjab…….102.33……………..2016…….1979………………..37………2.25……..94.005
    Punjab…….106.34……………..2016…….1979………………..37………2.25……..98.015
    Chandigarh.99.31………………2008…….1979………………..48………2.25……..88.51
    Delhi…………76.2……………….2015……..1979………………..17………2.25……..72.375
    Delhi…………85.8……………….2015……..1979………………..17……….2.25……..81.975
    Delhi…………92.5……………….1999………1979………………..13………2.25……..89.575
    Delhi…………89.4……………….1999………1986………………..13………2.25……..86.475
    Delhi…………90.4……………….2016………1969………………..47………2.25……..79.825
    UP……………107.42…………….2004……..1974………………..30………2.25……..100.67
    UP…………….110.1………………2015………NA………………..17………….NA……..110.1
    UP……………..90………………….2015………NA………………..17………….NA……..90
    Gujarat……….97.17………………2012………1989………………..23………2.25……..91.995
    Gujarat……….92.53………………2012………1989………………..23………2.25……..87.355
    Gujarat……….104.44…………….2007………1989………………..18………2.25……..100.39
    Gujarat……….91.72……………….2007………1989………………..18………2.25……..87.67
    Karnataka……88.8………………..2011………1977………………..34………2.25……..81.15
    Karnataka…….86.3……………….2011………1977………………..34………2.25……..78.65
    Karnataka…….86.37……………..2015………1998………………..17………2.25……..82.545
    Karnataka……..88.6………………2015………1998………………..17………2.25……..84.775
    Karnataka……..80.49…………….2015………1998………………..17………2.25……..76.665
    Karnataka……..76………………….2011………2004………………..7……….2.25……..74.425
    Karnataka……..66………………….2011………2004………………..7………..2.25……..64.425
    Karnataka……..106…………………2015……..1991………………..32………2.25…….. 100.6
    AP………………..88.7……………… 2009……..1992………………..17………2.25……..84.875
    AP…………………84.5………………2009……..1992………………..17………2.25……..80.675
    AP…………………84.5………………2009……..1992………………..17………2.25……..80.675
    AP………………….80……………… 2009………1992………………..17………2.25……..76.175
    MP……………….98.5………………2012………1992………………..20………2.25……..94
    MP……………….91.6……………….2012……….1992………………20………2.25……..87.1
    MP……………….87………………….2012………1992………………..20………2.25……..82.5
    MP……………….83.6……………….2012………1992………………..20………2.25……..79.1
    Rajasthan……….81………………….1984………1977………………..7………2.25……..79.425
    Rajasthan……….93.3……………… 2013……… 1992 ………………..21………2.25……..88.575
    Rajasthan……….84.48……………..2013………1992………………..21………2.25……..79.755
    West Bengal……106………………..2015……… 1989………………..26………2.25……..100.15
    West Bengal…….90…………………2015………1989………………..26………2.25……..84.15
    West Bengal…….88.8………………2014………2003………………..11………2.25……..86.325
    Chennai………….107………………..2006………1967………………..39………2.25……..98.225
    Chennai………….102………………. 2013……….1973………………..40………2.25……..93
    Pune………………97………………….2000………1973………………..27………2.25……..90.925
    Pune……………….101.38……………1994……….1960………………..34………2.25……..93.73

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    The average IQ at 42 locations of India is 86.41 IQ. With 9/42 IQ samples done in urban areas like Chennai. Note that Delhi is considered as rural area in below calculations as IQ data used for Delhi is in slum area of Delhi, or Nazafgarh (a village outside Delhi) and a hospital where 72% admits where rural.

    IQ of urban areas of India based on the IQ data available is: 93 IQ.
    IQ of rural areas of India based on the IQ data available is: 85 IQ.

    India is 30% urban and 70% rural.

    Calculating on urban/rural divide of India, average IQ of India is 87.4 IQ.

    As many of the data-set is on fluoride IQ studies on India, IQ of Fluoride free regions is also desired.

    IQ of fluoride free regions of India based on IQ data available is 88.73 IQ (rural).

    Studies showing mal-nourishment and IQ,

    http://heapol.oxfordjournals.org/content/17/4/420.full.pdf+html

    This is the only study showing mal-nourishment effects on IQ.

    IQ of malnourished kids is 10 points below at 83 IQ v/s healthy kids having same socio-economic status is 93 IQ.

    India faces 40% mal-nourishment. So, average IQ of 40% of India’s population is down by 10 IQ points.

    Which will put average IQ of India down by 4 IQ points due to mal-nourishment.

    So, a combined effect of fluoride and mal-nourishment is bringing IQ of India down by 8 IQ points.

    I conclude that average IQ of India will be 95 IQ on removal of fluoride and mal-nourishment from a current estimate of 87 IQ based on rural/urban IQ analysis on India.

    For any further improvements, India may have to switch to meat based diets, putting itself at par with Europe on iodine consumption status which will put India at par with Europe on average IQ (97).

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    IQ of India by caste:-

    There is no major differences between Indian castes and IQ results.

    https://books.google.co.in/books?id=9tZ4AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA16&lpg=PA16&dq=chopra+iq+difference+between+castes&source=bl&ots=mUJt4iGaiY&sig=K5__8u3gFJA4AG6yXxjnwnzm4Xk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUm83W_MbQAhUEQI8KHW–DpEQ6AEIOjAC#v=onepage&q=chopra%20iq%20difference%20between%20castes&f=false

    Page 16.

    This book covers several IQ samples of India by caste.

    There is no major differences between Indian castes. As per IQ tests done.

    On non-verbal IQ tests (Raven’s Progressive Matrices), there are no significant differences among Indian castes.

    As it is observed via IQ testing that Vaishyas have higher non-verbal IQ than Kshatriya who have higher non-verbal IQ than Brahmins followed by SCs.

    Rather the difference between Vaishyas and Brahmins on non-verbal IQ tests (as per IQ research) is same as the difference between Brahmins and Scheduled Castes.

    Secondly, the differences among Indian castes is estimated to be less than 3 IQ points on non-verbal IQ tests.

    However on verbal IQ tests, the difference is 11 IQ points.

  274. Aron says:

    Same guy here who wrote the above text.

    Some conclusions that I draw from the IQ data of India and Richard Lynn’s work on Indian states:-

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZQlIxM3EwSXg4REk/view

    [MORE]

    1. Uttar Pradesh has the highest non-verbal IQ in India:-

    If you read Richard Lynn’s data on Indian states. Uttar Pradesh has highest T2 score (score for 3rd grade kids in maths, closely related to IQ) for any state in India.
    That’s full one standard deviation above Delhi. And 0.6 standard deviation above average Indian.

    Given the fact that Orissa scored 404 on TIMSS and Rajasthan scored 382 on TIMSS 2003, I can deduce TIMSS score of Uttar Pradesh to be around 460. Which has probably risen since 2003.

    In recent IQ samples on Uttar Pradesh, average IQ is around 100. With 62 pc mal-nourishment and 24% fluoride contaminated districts.

    Higher average IQ of Uttar Pradesh is also visible in New Delhi (neighboring region of UP).

    Homeless people in Delhi in areas near UP have higher IQ than top class families in South West Delhi (bordering Rajasthan).

    This is evident from IQ samples:-

    Study 1 in Nand Nagari, Delhi (region bordering Uttar Pradesh):-

    http://heapol.oxfordjournals.org/content/17/4/420.full.pdf+html

    IQ of kids of slum dwellers in New Delhi living in plot area is 92.4. And shanty houses/homeless is 89.4.

    IQ of kids who have attended schools is 96.7 (plot area) and 93.2 (shady houses)

    Study 2 (Dwarka, region bordering Rajasthan):-

    Cited by Lynn:-

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/lynn-race-differences-in-intelligence.pdf

    Page 60:-
    Row 3 gives an IQ of 93 for 14-year-old students at St. Xavier’s School in Delhi.

    So, top 1% of people on socio-economic status in West Delhi (St.Xavier kids, bordering Rajasthan and Haryana) have a lower IQ than bottom 1% of East Delhi (homeless people near UP border).

    This difference is attributed to higher average IQ in Uttar Pradesh and lower average IQ in Haryana and Rajasthan. A gap as big as 11 IQ points currently.

    2. IQ in Uttar Pradesh is high only in River facing areas:-

    http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER%202014/District%20Estimates/uttarpradesh.pdf

    This document covers district wise reading and maths score in districts in Uttar Pradesh.

    Average reading and maths score of districts that are near Ganga river is much higher than off shore areas near Himalyan mountain.

    Due to the same, average IQ in Uttarakhand (a hilly area near Uttar Pradesh) is below national average as shown by Richard Lynn.

    This is because historically the smartest people in India settled at or around Ganga river in Nothern India.

    3. Brahmins in UP:-

    UP has 12% Brahmins. Population of UP is 200 million which means that 50% of Brahmins in India (25 million) live in Uttar Pradesh.

    The higher IQ of Brahmins in USA is wrongly interpreted as a caste difference. The reality is that people in Uttar Pradesh have higher IQ than rest of Indian states (irrespective of caste). And it just has 50% of Brahmin population.

    This is wrongly interpreted on HDB that “Brahmins have higher average IQ” which is actually “UP has higher average IQ”.

  275. Aron says:

    Other North Indian states:-

    Jammu and Kashmir:-

    [MORE]

    IQ in Jammu and Kashmir is the lowest in India. This is also confirmed by Richard lynn’s work.

    Lower IQ in J&K has nothing to do with location. Rather, J&K is a disputed territory and a constant war zone between India and Pakistan.

    Due to terror activites, it has drained all the cognitive elites from J&K to Punjab and Himachal Pradesh.

    As a result, IQ in Punjab is close to 90 as measured by IQ data above.

    And is above national average as measured by Lynn’s recent publication on India.

    Cognitive drain from Pakistan:-

    At the time of independence, very large proportion of cognitive elites moved from Pakistan to India. This can be seen here:-

    http://www.oldindianphotos.in/2009/10/mass-migration-during-independence-of.html

    7 million people in Punjab, India came from Pakistan in 1947.

    As mostly rich and cognitive elites migrated from Pakistan, the average IQ in Punjab is higher than Harayana and Himachal Pradesh (other regions in North India).

    Low IQ in Rajasthan:-

    IQ in Rajasthan is much lower than national average. Average IQ in Rajasthan based on IQ data above is only 83.

    This is also confirmed by TIMSS 2003 where average score for Rajsthan was only equivalent to 83 IQ.

    This is also confirmed by Lynn’s work:-

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZQlIxM3EwSXg4REk/view

    Where Rajsthan underscores average Indian by 0.2 standard deviation or 3 IQ points.

    However, Rajasthan faces highest fluoride contamination in India as per national data:-

    http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/State-wise%20Districts%20with%20Fluoride%20and%20Arsenic%20Contaminated%20Groundwater.pdf

    Around 91% districts in Rajasthan are fluoride contaminated v/s 48% all over India.

    So, IQ in Rajasthan has the highest scope of IQ gains.

  276. Aron says:

    IQ in Punjab is higher than IQ in Chandigarh.

    Based on IQ samples above, IQ in Punjab is 90.52.

    [MORE]

    IQ in Chandigarh is 88.51.

    If you look at the IQ paper on Chandigarh as cited above, they have tested close to 2400 kids randomly in 33% schools and have covered all kids in Chandigarh.

    If you look at Richard Lynn’s work on Indian states:-

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZQlIxM3EwSXg4REk/view

    Punjab scores around 253, 3 points above national average.

    Chandigarh scores around 247, 3 points below national average.

    The difference between Punjab and Chandigarh is 0.12 standard deviation. Which is close to 1.8 IQ points.

    So, the IQ data on India and recent tests by Lynn show shocking consistency point by point.

    Chandigarh is capital on Punjab. But has a lower IQ as Punjab pulls cognitive elites from J&K (war zone). So, cognitive clustering explains this trend.

  277. Aron says:

    IQ in Gujarat:-

    Based on 4 IQ data on Gujarat as cited above done in 8 different locations, the average IQ was 91.85.

    IQ data in Gujarat is done in Kachh and Ahmedabad districts. District wise reading and maths score is also available:-

    http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER%202014/District%20Estimates/gujarat.pdf

    [MORE]

    Average test score for Kachh and Ahmedabad is 59.7 percentile reading and 23.75 maths.

    Average for Gujarat is 57 reading and 29 maths.

    So, reading scores are higher while maths score are lower.

    Based on this, I estimate that Gujarat will be much higher on maths and much lower on reading. As compared to the IQ of Kuchh and Ahmedabad, averaging at 91.85 IQ.

    5.25 percentile change will cause IQ jump by 2 on normal distribution, putting Gujarat non-verbal IQ at 93.85.

    2.7 percentile dip will cause IQ dip by 1, putting Gujarat verbal IQ at 90.

    Based on Lynn’s sample on India:-

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZQlIxM3EwSXg4REk/view

    Average IQ in Gujarat is marginally higher than Chandigarh which scores 88.5 IQ based on very reliable IQ sample including large no. of kids.

    Note that IQ of India will be just 1 IQ points higher than IQ in Chandigarh at 89.5 IQ (verbal and non-verbal). Based on the IQ sample on Chandigarh and normalizing it to Richard Lynn’s work.

    Maths score of Gujarat is 262 while reading score of Gujarat is 247.

    Maths score is higher than national average by 4 IQ points. At 93.5 IQ.

    Reading score is same as national average at 89.5 IQ.

    So, you have perfect estimates. Based on Lynn’s work, IQ data on Gujarat, district wise reading and maths score in Gujarat.

    IQ in Madhya Pradesh:-

    IQ of Madhya Pradesh based on IQ data is 85.3 IQ.

    If you look at district wise reading and maths score in MP:-

    http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER%202014/District%20Estimates/madhyapradesh.pdf

    Shivpuri and Bhopal where IQ tests were conducted show same maths scores as average for Madhya Pradesh.

    Average maths score is same for (Bhopal+Shivpuri average) and rest of MP.

    So, IQ of MP will be 85.3 maths IQ.

    Based on Lynn’s data on India the average score in MP is 239 maths. 0.22 standard deviation below average Indian.

    So, average IQ of India projected from IQ and Lynn’s data on MP will be 88.6 maths IQ.

    Which is consistent with IQ projection to rest of India from Punjab, Gujarat, Chandigarh, etc. to rest of India based on Lynn’s work, IQ data on India and district wise reading and maths scores.

  278. Aron says:

    IQ in West Bengal:-

    There are two districts where IQ tests are done in West Bengal. First one is Bankura district where average IQ in 100.15 in optimum conditions and 84.15 in un-optimum (fluoride) conditions.

    [MORE]

    Average IQ of Bankura district is 92.15 IQ.

    Second one is mostly done in 24 North Paragnas in 3 government schools where average IQ is 86.325 IQ.

    District wise reading and maths results in West Bengal are also available:-

    http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER%202014/District%20Estimates/westbengal.pdf

    Bankura has 51.7 percentile kids accomplishing maths task. And 59.5 on reading.
    North Parag average is 67.6 reading. And 45.1 on maths.

    However, iodine study as cited above is only done in government schools. And it is well known that kids in private schools in India show higher IQ.

    So, IQ in Bankura district is closer to 89 IQ as low side sampled IQ shows 86.325.

    Average maths score of West Bengal will be marginally above the average in North Parag, and 2 IQ below Bankura as difference between average score for WB and average score for Bankura is 6 percentile which is 2 IQ.

    Average IQ in West Bengal will be 90.2 IQ.

    Based on Lynn’s work:-

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZQlIxM3EwSXg4REk/view

    Average maths score of West Bengal is 260.5. Around 3 IQ above national average.

    So, you have good consistency with IQ data. That average India will score around 87-90 IQ.

    Same projections from IQ data in Punjab, Chandigarh, MP and Gujarat to rest of India based on average state wise score and district wise reading and maths score.

    Average IQ in Kolkata:-

    Kolkata had 2 IQ samples. One cited by Lynn and one other cited above, both show average IQ of 87. With good enough sample size.

    In second sample, 57% kids were undernourished. And 22% population was above 120 IQ.

    This is because Kolkata is a major city and pulls in top class immigrants from all over India.

    I conclude that long term Kolkata will be close to 100 IQ. As 57% undernourishment will push the average IQ by good amount, 6 points at the bare minimum and Kolkata will keep pulling high skilled immigrants from all over India.

  279. Aron says:

    IQ in Orissa:-

    No IQ data.

    Orissa participated in TIMSS 2003 and average score was 404. England on which IQ is generally normalised scored 492 same year.

    [MORE]

    Rajasthan scored 384.

    Lynn’s work shows that:-

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZQlIxM3EwSXg4REk/view

    Mean maths score in Orissa is 247.5. And Rajasthan is 242.

    Orissa is 0.12 standard deviation above Rajasthan or 2 IQ.

    So, IQ in Orissa is close to 86 at the moment. And is also confirmed by TIMSS 2003 score on Orissa.

    Average score in Orissa is below average Indian as per Lynn, etc. by 1 IQ point.

    So, again you get the same IQ projection that average Indian will score 87-90 IQ.

    IQ in Karnataka:-

    Average IQ in Karnataka based on IQ samples cited above is 80.15 IQ.

    Average IQ was done in 2 villages in Devangree, 3 villages in Mysore, 2 villages in Bagalkot and in a suburb in Bellary.

    In Bellary sample, only Scheduled Tribes were selected.
    Bellary showed IQ of 100.6 for healthy group (non-stunted). And 6 points below for stunted group.

    As Bellary has appx. 60% under-nourished, average IQ is close to 96. As test was done on WISC, both verbal and non-verbal IQ is reported.

    In Devangree, two government schools were selected as mentioned in IQ sample above. The average IQ is close to 79.9 non-verbal IQ. As government schools show lower IQ and is a downward sample, the average IQ is likely to be close to 82.9 non-verbal IQ.

    In Mysore, both government and normal schools were selected and average IQ is close to 81.3 IQ.

    In Bagalkot, the average IQ was found to be 74.4 for non-fluoride group and 64.4 for those facing dental fluorosis. As majority people don’t face dental fluorosis, I will take average IQ to be 72 in Bagalkot, Karnataka.

    So, average IQ of these 4 districts is 83 IQ.

    Here are district wise maths result on Karnataka:-

    http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER_2010/KARNATAKA_2010.pdf

    Average maths score for Bagalkot is 19 percentile below average for Karnataka.
    Average maths score for Mysore is 13.25 percentile below average for Karnataka.
    Average maths score for Devangree is 12.95 percentile below average for Karnataka.
    Average maths score for Bellary is 7.95 percentile below average for Karnataka.

    So, you get consistency that Bellary scores highest among these 4 districts in Karnataka followed by Devangree followed by Mysore with Bagalkot at the bottom. Consistent with IQ data on Karnataka on these 4 districts.

    IQ in Chimoga, Chikmanglur, Chitradurg, Dakshin and Uttar Bidar will be on higher side based on district wise reading and maths score.

    So, all districts where IQ test is done score below Karnataka average on reading and maths.

    To calculate the IQ of Karnataka, I will use normal distribution tool.

    http://www.wolframalpha.com/widgets/view.jsp?id=67817f2e01eecd366e6d73ac7a71bcd1

    Average IQ in 4 districts of Karnataka is 83 with SD of 19. Average Karnataka will score at 64 percentile of these 4 districts based on district wise reading and maths score in Karnataka.

    So, average IQ in Karnataka will be close to 89 IQ. Based on IQ test done in 4 districts and projecting the average to rest of Karnataka based on district wise reading and maths score.

    Lynn’s sample shows:-

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZQlIxM3EwSXg4REk/view

    That average score in Karnataka is 255 on maths. Which is just 0.1 standard deviation above national average.

    So, again you get the same projection that entire India will score 87-90 average IQ.

    Which is consistent if you look into the IQ data on Chandigarh, Punjab, West Benagal, Gujarat, Orissa, Rajasthan and MP and try to find the average IQ of India based on district wise and state wise scores.

  280. Aron says:

    Average IQ in New Delhi:-

    Based on IQ samples in New Delhi in 5 locations, average IQ is 83.

    Study 1 is done on homeless people in East Delhi in area bordering UP. Showing average to be 88 overall and 93 for those kids who attend schools.

    As it is extreme downward sampling of population as they are measuring IQ of homeless people (bottom 1% of socio-economic status), average in East Delhi will 8 points higher at 96 IQ.

    [MORE]

    Study 2 cited above is on government schools showing average IQ to be 77.2. Average will be 80.2 as government schools score 3 points below average population.

    Study 3 is cited by Lynn showing average IQ of 93 on upper end population on socio-economic status. Average will be 8 points below as mentioned by Lynn in his book. So, average IQ is close to 85 in West Delhi.

    Study 4 shows average of 80.

    So, average IQ of Delhi will be close to 85.5 based on IQ samples.

    As per Lynn:-

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZQlIxM3EwSXg4REk/view

    Delhi scores 240.5 maths score. 0.2 standard deviation below average Indian. Or 3 IQ points.

    So, average IQ of India will be 87-90 range based on IQ samples in Delhi and projecting it to rest of India based on state wise scores.

    IQ in Chennai and Tamil Nadu:-

    IQ in Chennai is 96 as measured by IQ samples. IQ sample on Chennai showing average IQ of 98 is even more reliable as they are randomly testing large number of kids in all zones of Chennai.

    There are no IQ samples on Tamil Nadu.

    To see average IQ in Tamil Nadu, I had to look at average score of Tamil Nadu in ASER, Lynn’s work and PISA.

    PISA score was 351 maths, 337 reading. At 77.5 maths IQ, 75.6 verbal IQ.

    Lynn showed average score of 257 maths, 249 reading. And is 2.1 non-verbal IQ above average Indian and same at verbal IQ.

    Based on IQ data all over India; that would transform to 90.6 maths IQ, 88.5 verbal IQ.

    As Lynn’s sample is in 2015 while PISA sample is in 2010, I had to see trends over time to see if average score for Tamil Nadu has actually risen from 2010 to 2015 as suggested by two data sets.

    http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER%20TOT/State%20pages%20English/tamilnadu.pdf

    This is a document that captures scores of Tamil Nadu over time.

    Class 5 reading score (2006):- Tamil Nadu: 29.2, All India: 53.1
    Class 5 maths score(2007):- Tamil Nadu: 17.5, All India: 42.5

    A class 5 student in 2006 will be class 9 student in 2010, that is sampled by PISA.

    In 2014:-

    Class 3 reading score(2014):- Tamil Nadu: 37.9, All India: 40.3
    Class 5 reading score (2014):- Tamil Nadu: 46.9, All India: 48.1

    Class 3 maths score(2014):- Tamil Nadu: 24.3, All India: 25.4
    Class 5 maths score(2014):- Tamil Nadu: 25.8, All India: 26.1

    So, in 2010 the average score in Tamil Nadu for 15 yo should be 24.5 percentile below national average in 2010. 23.9 percentile below on reading. And 25 percentile below on maths. Based on state wise reading and maths score.

    Calculating average IQ of India based on PISA of Tamil Nadu in 2010:-

    http://www.wolframalpha.com/widgets/view.jsp?id=67817f2e01eecd366e6d73ac7a71bcd1

    PISA showed 77.5 maths IQ, 75.6 verbal IQ. In Tamil Nadu. SD of IQ was 17 in PISA of TN.
    Average score for all India average is 25 percentile higher on maths, 23.9 percentile higher on reading. As compared to TN. Based on state wise reading and maths results.

    Using normal distribution calculator, average IQ of India extrapolating from PISA of TN will be 86.5 verbal IQ, 89 non-verbal IQ.

    So, you get the same IQ projection on India that average IQ is 87-90 based on all IQ and test data on India (TIMSS, PISA, IQ reports).

    Average scores for Tamil Nadu has increased and can be seen in ASER link of TN. And in 2015, the scores are same as national average in 2015 as can be seen in Lynn’s work.

  281. Aron says:

    Average IQ in Maharashtra:-

    Average IQ in Pune is 92.33 based on 2 IQ samples cited above.

    To see average in Maharashtra, I will use district wise reading and maths results:-

    http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER_2010/MAHARASHTRA_2010.pdf

    [MORE]

    Average maths score in Pune is 65.6 percentile.

    Average score in Maharashtra is 55.9 percentile.

    Pune scores higher than average for Maharashtra by 9.75 percentile on non-verbal IQ.

    Calculating on normal distribution,

    http://www.wolframalpha.com/widgets/view.jsp?id=67817f2e01eecd366e6d73ac7a71bcd1

    Average IQ of Pune is 92.33, SD of 15.

    Average IQ of Maharashtra will be 88.6 IQ.

    Lynn’s work shows:-

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZQlIxM3EwSXg4REk/view

    That average maths score of Maharashtra will be 256.5.

    1.9 IQ above national average.

    So, average IQ of India will be 86.7 based on IQ samples on Maharashtra and projecting it to average Indian by using state and district wise scores.

    Again you have great consistency of all psychometric test data on India.

    IQ in Andhra Pradesh:-

    Based on IQ data in Andhra Pradesh, average IQ is 80.6. With IQ being 85 in non-fluride region and 76 in severe fluoride region.

    As severe fluoride region is not so common in AP, average IQ in Nalgonda in AP is close to 82-83.

    IQ tests were done in Nalgonda district.

    District wise maths score on Andhra Pradesh are available:-

    http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER%202014/District%20Estimates/andhrapradeshtelangana.pdf

    Average score in Andhra Pradesh is 56.1 vs 53.4 percentile in AP.

    That’s a difference of 1.1 IQ.

    So, average IQ in Andhra Pradesh is close to 83-84 IQ.

    Based on Lynn’s work:-

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZQlIxM3EwSXg4REk/view

    Average maths score of AP is below national average by .2 SD. That’s a gap of 3 IQ

    Average IQ of India projecting from IQ samples on AP will be 86-87 range as well.

    So, all the test, IQ and all psychometric data on any part of India predicts the same thing that average IQ in India is in 86-90 IQ range.

  282. Aron says:

    More IQ data on India.

    Here is a recently published paper on IQ data on Karnataka, published on 30 Dec 2016 which I missed in my analysis:-

    http://www.jispcd.org/article.asp?issn=2231-0762;year=2016;volume=6;issue=9;spage=237;epage=242;aulast=Aravind#ref5

    Results:-

    [MORE]

    Date of measurement: September 2014.
    Norms used: Raven’s 1977.
    Place:- One village in Kodagu. Two villages in Hassan.
    Schools:- Government schools.

    Average IQ:-

    97.78 in Kodagu in low F.
    101.45 in Hassan in med F. And 89.6 in high F.

    Note that the IQ numbers in paper are not normalized for mental age. You can use the results in which grades are mentioned (95%+, etc.) to calculate the IQ.

    Average IQ after normalizing it because of usage of old norms:-

    89.46 in Kodagu in low F.
    93.13 in Hassan in med F. And 81.27 in high F.

    As the measurement is done in government schools, average IQ is 92.46 in Kodagu. And 96 in Hassan in good fluoride conditions and 84 in worse fluoride environment.

    As worse fluoride environment is rare, I will use the average IQ to be 94 in Hassan.

    Here are Karnataka district wise maths results:-

    http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER_2010/KARNATAKA_2010.pdf

    I already showed that Bagalkot, Devangree and Mysore where average IQ was 72, 83 and 81 were way below average for Karnataka by 15-19 percentile.

    Average scores for Hassan is 14 percentile higher than average for Karnataka.
    Average score for Kodagu is 3.75 percentile higher than average for Karnataka.

    Calculating on normal distribution,

    http://www.wolframalpha.com/widgets/view.jsp?id=67817f2e01eecd366e6d73ac7a71bcd1

    Average IQ of Karntaka extrapolating from average IQ in Hassan is 87.9 IQ.
    Average IQ of Karnataka extrapolating from average IQ in Kodagu is 91.2 IQ.

    Average IQ of Karnataka even on IQ data published 20 days back is 89 IQ. Which is exactly the same as average IQ calculated using IQ of Mysore, Devangree, Bagalkot. As shown above in my comments.

    So you get the basic picture that Indian villages which are decent on nutritional status score 90-95 average IQ as well. Like many of the IQ samples attached above. While the IQ is as low as 70-75 in places where nutritional status is weak and the same is also reflected in district wise test results.

  283. Aron says:

    First of all, Karlin’s claims are unbacked by any scientific evidence.

    Karlin claims that by the time a Chinese student reaches end of school, he is much smarter due to genetic potential as evident in PISA.

    This doesn’t hold true globally.
    PISA by race in Rest of Anglo sphere (UK, Australia, Ireland, Scotland, New Zealand)

    Source: https://humanvarietiesfiles.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/2006-levels-immigrant-pisa.pdf

    [MORE]

    Indians in Australia score 576 on maths and 566 on reading in PISA.

    Indians in New Zealand score 529 reading and 534 on maths in PISA.

    Indians in Scotland score 504 reading and 525 on maths in PISA.

    Indians in Ireland score 496 reading and 496 on maths in PISA.

    As a comparison,

    Chinese in Australia score 569 on maths and 541 on reading in PISA.

    Chinese in New Zealand score 506 reading and 555 on maths in PISA.

    Chinese in Scotland score 498 reading and 555 on maths in PISA.

    Chinese in Ireland score 430 reading and 475 on maths in PISA.

    Mean scores of Chinese and Indians living in Anglo-sphere:-

    Chinese: 563 maths, 526 reading.

    Indians: 561 maths, 552 reading.

    Indians outperform Chinese on reading PISA in any location where both ethnicity are present. Maths score being same.

    So if there is any gap on potential, Indians educated overseas shouldn’t score consistently above chinese. That too in bulk (millions of Indians/Chinese).

    Secondly, PISA is not the only test which indian kids give. Other academic tests have different results.

    GMAT:-

    http://poetsandquants.com/2014/01/04/why-53-countries-beat-the-u-s-on-the-gmat/

    Average GMAT score (SAT and GRE will have same trends):-

    USA: 533 (90,000 sample size/year; IQ of 105)

    India: 577 (25,000 sample size/year; IQ of 114)

    China: 581 (50,000 sample size/year; IQ of 115)

    Indians perform at par with chinese on SAT, etc. And that comes at a cost when almost none Indian kids knew Pythagoras theorem by age of 15 as evident in PISA.

    Then, national IQ of India is higher than China.

    https://www.quora.com/Is-India-stronger-than-China/answer/Walter-Lee-45

    In this answer you will find sufficient data on average IQ in India and China. And the results are clear.

    More importantly you will get large amount of IQ data on China in low 80s average IQ and India in high 100s average IQ (data supposedly thrown by Lynn) which you will find on Malloy’s blogs.

    Lastly, here is my analysis on test scores (pisa, TIMSS) on India and China:-

    Why do India score 350 maths, 340 reading and China score 600 maths, 560 reading. Implying IQ of 115 non verbal/109 verbal, 77.5 non verbal, 76.5 verbal in India and China ?

    For that, I will take you to local test results in both India and China.

    India selected Tamil Nadu. Here are the results of ASER (equivalent to PISA) survey on Indian states:-

    http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER%20TOT/State%20pages%20English/tamilnadu.pdf

    If you are unable to view it, I have attached the results:-

    This is a document that captures scores of Tamil Nadu over time.

    Class 5 reading score (2006):- Tamil Nadu: 29.2, All India: 53.1
    Class 5 maths score(2007):- Tamil Nadu: 17.5, All India: 42.5

    A class 5 student in 2006 will be class 9 student in 2010, that is sampled by PISA.

    Note that all these results in 2009 were published before PISA.

    So, Indian state of Tamil Nadu indeed is 21 percent behind national average of India on intellectual potential or educational attainment. As of 2009.

    If you were to calculate on a normal distribution, 21 percent shift in mean value results in 0.8 standard deviation or 12 IQ.

    As Tamil Nadu is low scoring region of India (as evident in local cognitive tests done in India by ASER), for a fair comparison the test results should be compared with the likes of Georgia or Albania. And not with highest scoring regions of Europe (UK).

    China selected Shanghai for PISA. Here is Chinese IQ map:-

    http://www.city-data.com/forum/world/2348902-china-iq-map-provinces-8-10-a.html

    Average non verbal IQ in Shanghai is 115.3, 12.7 points above national average.

    So you are actually comparing a top 3 scoring region of china which scores 12 IQ above national average with lowest 3 region of India which scores 12 IQ below national average.

    That’s why china scores higher than average IQ of china while India scores below average IQ of India.

    Let’s look at test results (TIMSS, PISA) from other states of India and China:-

    This is an article of India’s TIMSS performance.

    Source: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2008/06/17/000158349_20080617085945/Rendered/PDF/wps4644.pdf

    Poorest states (not known for IQ) were selected in TIMSS. I will compare India to European nations and South East Asia.

    New Zealand: 494, Orrisa(India): 404, Rajasthan(India): 382, Philippines: 378

    Average IQ of 84 in Rajasthan and 86 in Orissa.

    Source(Table 3): http://sites.bu.edu/neudc/files/2014/10/paper_38.pdf

    http://www.younglives.org.uk/sites/www.younglives.org.uk/files/Rolleston%20et%20al_UNESCO-GMR-background-paper_Jan2014.pdf

    Average TIMSS score in Andhra Pradesh is 460. Or 95 IQ.

    Average IQ of 4 Indian states based on international testing is 85.6

    If you read about reading and maths scores of Indian states, average IQ will be 88 based on India PISA and TIMSS scores of 4 Indian states.

    Chinese states participated in PISA 2015.

    https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf

    And B-J-S-G (Beijing Jiangsu Shanghai and Guangdong) had average score of 520. At an IQ of 103.

    If you read IQ data on china, it is a perfect match.

    Guangdong scores 101 maths, 94 reading. 101 million.

    Beijing and Shanghai score 115 maths, 109 reading. 45 million.

    Jiangsu scores 107 maths, 101 reading. 78 million.

    Calculating based on population of these 4 region, average score should be 106 maths, 99 reading.

    Or 531 maths, 493 reading.

    Which is actually the PISA scores.

    IQ data doesn’t lie.

    So, average IQ of china based on international testing (pisa) is 103 maths, 96 reading.

    Average IQ of India based on international testing (PISA, TIMSS) is 88 maths, 87 reading.

    The gaps are explainable by average IQ gap.

    Now the question comes, why do 100 million overseas Indians outscore overseas Chinese on PISA when both are similarly selected for IQ.

    There can be 2 reasons for this:-

    Overseas Indians are more selected than overseas Chinese.

    Or, India china IQ gap is environmental.

    First one has been disproved by genetic studies. To test second one, one has to look at mal-nourishment and iodine consumption.

    http://wcd.nic.in/Schemes/research/nti1947/7.11.3%20Iodine%20deficiency%20%20pr%20%208.2%20new.pdf

    http://www.ign.org/scorecard.htm

    % of people facing iodine deficiency:-

    India: 30%, China: 4%.

    “a third of all children born with IDD-related mental damage live in India.”

    Mal-nourishment:-

    China: 4%, India: 44%.

    Rather, India has recently implemented universal salt iodization.

    India:-

    http://www.ijph.in/article.asp?issn=0019-557X&year=2010&volume=54&issue=3&spage=120&epage=125&aulast=Pandav

    Iodine consumption was 50 pc when tests were done. Source above.

    How to adjust for these factors:-

    One percentage of mal-nourishment causes 0.1 IQ jump.

    Source:-

    It is well shown that mal-nourishment reduces your IQ by 8–12 points.

    Here are some research papers:-

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4979774/

    http://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-016-2956-6

    http://heapol.oxfordjournals.org/content/17/4/420.full.pdf+html

    Average IQ of non-malnourished is 10 points higher on average after controlling for all other things.

    It is well shown that consuming iodized salt increases your IQ by 13.6 points.

    http://000do4q.myregisteredwp.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/1836/2016/05/china-iodine-study.pdf

    Or there are plenty of other sources that say the same thing.

    So India is performing 11.2 IQ below it’s genetic potential (50*0.136+44*0.1) as compared to Chinese.

    In the long run, average genotypic IQ of India will be 1 to 2 points below china on non verbal IQ scales. And 4 to 6 IQ above on verbal IQ scales.

    Exactly similar to what PISA scores you get on overseas Chinese and Indians, both groups are equally selected for IQ.

    To see if regions in India having decent nutritional status score that high or not, i present IQ data on India and China:-

    https://www.quora.com/Is-India-stronger-than-China/answer/Walter-Lee-45

    And IQ of china including Shanghai’s IQ seems pale as compared to their Indian counterpart cities. Or Indian states.

    So the article by karlin is misleading and science fiction.

    It is accepted worldwide by most psychology professional that Indians have higher IQ potential than Chinese.

    And even mother nature doesn’t lie:-

    East Asian societies like Singapore and Hong Kong:-

    Indians have been living in Singapore and Hong Kong for generations.

    Both places are known to possess smartest Chinese population.

    Indians migrated to Singapore as peasants in British empire. And they were bodyguards to white men in Hong Kong.

    Hong Kong:-

    Indians are the richest ethnic group.

    Income difference:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indians_in_Hong_Kong

    90 percentile for Chinese living in Hong Kong barely earn at par with 75 percentile of Indians in HK.

    Indian median income being much higher.

    Singapore:

    Income status of Indians in Singapore:-

    Household income in Singapore (2010):-

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

    Chinese: 7330, Indians: 7664, Malays: 4575

    2. Education:-

    https://www.singstat.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-document-library/publications/publications_and_papers/cop2010/census_2010_release1/cop2010sr1.pdf

    Page 24-Table 1

    Below Secondary:- Chinese: 33.8, Malays: 37.0, Indians: 22.5

    Secondary:- Chinese: 18.2, Malays: 27.1, Indians: 17.2

    Post-Secondary (Non-Tertiary):- Chinese: 9.9, Malays: 19.2, Indians: 11.2

    Diploma & Professional Qualification:- Chinese: 15.5, Malays: 11.6, Indians: 14.1

    University:- Chinese: 22.6, Malays: 5.1, Indians: 35.0

    Indians outperform Chinese and Malays in Singapore on education and schools since 1965.

    As per Singaporean government’s published data. Not anyone’s opinion.

    Conclusion:-

    One can easily conclude that Indians are much smarter than Chinese in Singapore and Hong Kong.

    Chinese living in India:-

    Chinese and Tibetans are living in India in significant numbers. As per the scientific norms, Chinese and Tibetans born in India should have lower IQ than Indian natives. It’s actually true and can be inferred from their status in India.

    Kolkata:-

    http://www.atimes.com/article/kolkatas-chinese-live-in-stateless-sorrow/

    “They were shoe-makers, tanners, restaurateurs, hair-dressers or dry-cleaners.”

    Chinese migration to India:-

    http://www.livemint.com/Politics/VhMy2MGaVx1TEatRsQpnON/Chinese-immigrants–A-shrinking-community.html

    “Most of these settlers came from Canton (or Guangdong), while people belonging to the Hubei community, who were dentists by profession, came from the eponymous neighbouring province.”

    South West Chinese in India:-

    http://www.telegraphindia.com/1160616/jsp/northeast/story_91472.jsp#.WD64M7J97cc

    45 students of ethnic Chinese ancestry (North East Indians) made it to IITs in 2016.

    Out of 20,000 candidates that were selected.

    Population size of North East Indians: 60 million (5 percent of India).

    What’s worse. Out of 100,000 candidates; only 100 odd were from North East.

    So, it is quite clear that Indians (below average Indians) thrive in China and Singapore and outperform locals. While Chinese (Cantonese and Tibetans, average chinese) struggle in India and under-perform locals. And is constant with the fact that low IQ races struggle in high IQ society and high IQ races thrive in low IQ societies.

  284. @AaronB

    ”I think you’re generally right about the benefits of aristocracies ”

    He lacks historic memory to say ”aristocracy have benefits”, without sociopathic elements yes most of the political/ideological regimes have their benefits but the problem is that aristocracy mean basically ”all the power in the hands of ‘blue blood’ people”, you are basically trusting a entire nation in the hands of hereditarian ‘special’ family and

    you can’t change it too much.

    It’s like have luck, sometimes the next king will be a good governant, other times he will be nasty, and you can’t change it.

    The structure of the power is exceptionally rigid as if everything upper classes to do it is right, while in perfect society, only the best profiles would be promoted to the government whatever their social classes and even their cognitive [size] skills, specifically their capacity to judge and to govern at morally correct way.

    Aristocracy have a several thousand years in the human history and very few benefits, specially insipid idea that there are ”blue blood people” and a big chain of social injustice.

    Monarchist people are very similar with those ”communist partisans”, they have a slave-mind type, they easily accept the idea that some people are unmistakably superior and everything they do is right or justifiable.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  285. Aron says:

    You have claimed that average IQ of India is 80 based on 26 IQ studies.
    Can you point out those studies ?

    If you are talking about Richard Lynn’s data-set, then here is my criticism:-

    [MORE]

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/lynn-race-differences-in-intelligence.pdf

    Page 54:-

    13 IQ studies on India, 2 IQ studies on Pakistan, 1 on Sri Lanka.

    Let’s see the IQ studies:-

    Mohanty and Babu 1983 (Average IQ: 79):-

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239801334_Bilingualism_and_Metalinguistic_Ability_among_Kond_Tribals_in_Orissa_India

    As mentioned in the topic of the research article, the sample has been conducted on “Tribal population” in Orissa. Without any doubt, selection bias of “including only Tribal population” and excluding all “non-Tribals”. Which leads to the fact that data is invalid.

    Afzal 1988 (IQ of 79, studies conducted in Urdu):

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/19964938_Consquences_of_consanguinity_on_cognitive_behavior

    Abstract: “In order to study the effects of consanguinity on IQ, a survey was conducted among the Ansari Muslims of Bhagalpur residing in suburban and rural areas. Both outbred (N=390 from suburban areas and N=358 from rural areas) and inbred (N’s=300 and 266, respectively) children aged 9 to 12 years from socioeconomically middle-class families were administered the Weschler Intelligence Scale for Children—Revised.”

    Even in many of his other samples, he is citing the results of the IQ tests of Asians living in India.

    Majumdar, P. K., and Nundi, P. C. (1971)

    http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1974-10149-001

    “Compared scores of 2 geographically separated Bengali-speaking groups of schoolchildren, grades IX-XI, on Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices. 2,836 Ss from Calcutta and 2,100 Ss from Agartala were tested. Ss from Calcutta were superior to those from Agartala by an average of 7 points.”

    Agrawal, N., Sinha, S. N., and Jensen, A. R. (1984). Effects of inbreeding on Raven matrices. Behavior Genetics, 14, 579-585.

    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01068128

    “Indian Muslim school boys, ages 13 to 15 years, whose parents are first cousins, were compared with classmates whose parents are genitically unrelated on the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices, a nonverbal test of intelligence.”

    4 IQ studies (lowest scoring IQ studies) are done on Muslims, Tribals and North East Indians (Ethnic burmese).

    The average IQ will obviously be lower.

    Secondly, IQ data on India showing high IQ results has not been considered (something similar to Africa, Wicherts et. al.).

    In many of the IQ samples cited above, average IQ is way high (~100-110).

    Then, average IQ of India is not properly calculated.
    Based on Lynn’s sample (4/13 done on Muslims, Tribals and North East), average IQ is 82.

    However, if you consider the sample size of IQ data and calculate by weighing for it, you will get 84.5 average IQ.

    Lynn is just calculating average IQ by averaging different IQ samples, irrespective of sample size.

    Then, if you look at cognitive test scores on India; IQ in Uttar Pradesh is 9-12 IQ above Indian average. Uttar Pradesh is also the most populous region of India (200 million).

    If you calculate IQ of India, by averaging state by state IQ data; the average will result 4 IQ points above Lynn’s estimate. Due to higher average IQ in most populous Indian regions like Uttar Pradesh.

    Lynn is calculating average IQ of India by averaging 13 IQ studies, done in Bihar, Orissa, Delhi, Rajasthan, North East India.

    These are very low scoring IQ regions of India even as per Lynn’s work mentioned by you in “hetero-genous state of India”. And shouldn’t be represented by 50% of IQ data. On top, population of these states isn’t very high.

    Rather population of these 5 states is same as total population of Uttar Pradesh. So, it is unfair that average IQ of these 5 low scoring IQ states be represented with 50% samples.

    So, IQ of India will be most likely 6 IQ points above Lynn’s estimate of 82.

    Low IQ is perfectly explained by iodine deficiency per state.

    Tamil Nadu has only 18% households consuming iodized salt v/s 50% of rest of India.

    Source: http://www.ijph.in/article.asp?issn=0019-557X&year=2010&volume=54&issue=3&spage=120&epage=125&aulast=Pandav

    As a result, Tamil Nadu not only scores below “rest of the world” but also below average Indian. As evident in local test results.

    Andhra Pradesh has iodine consumption of 28 % and IQ data is also suggesting 82-83.

    High scoring states also have high iodine consumption.

    In the long term, this is the “IQ of India v/s iodine” based on IQ data on India:-

    76 for 15% iodine consumption.
    84 for 30% iodine consumption.
    88 for 50% iodine consumption.
    91 for 70% iodine consumption.
    95 for 100% iodine consumption.

    The IQ changes fast from 70-90 IQ due to non-linear IQ scales. And then IQ change is 0.136 IQ points/(1 percent of households consuming iodine)

    Remember that IQ of 70 means 1 percentile. And 90 means 25 percentile.
    Actual intelligence gap between someone who is 1 percentile in US society and 25 percentile need not be same as intelligence gap between someone who is 25 percentile in US society and 50 percentile.

    This is similar to IQ in Africa where average test scores are extremely correlated to iodine consumption and mal-nourishment.

    https://www.quora.com/How-can-you-increase-your-IQ/answer/Walter-Lee-45

    Here is how average IQ of African nations look by “iodine and mal-nourishment”.

    You get something similar IQ graph in India where states having high iodine consumption (Gujarat) score up-to 10 IQ higher than iodine deficient regions like Tamil Nadu.

  286. AaronB says:
    @Santoculto

    You’re right about aristocracies, but democracies reproduce all the defects you mentioned, but with none of the redeeming features of aristocracies, and with added incentives for sociopaths.

    But I think I agree with you, for the time being – aristocracies aren’t the answer. The solution cannot be political, in my view. The Enlightenment conceit that we can design rational political systems that limit sociopathy seems based on an illusion.

    What’s more, it rests on a typically modern stupidity – reductionism, this idea that you can isolate elements from a whole and then engineer them at will, singly. We can create a world obsessed with materialism and without any transcendent purpose, but can limit the fallout in increased sociopathy by designing just the right political system. Yeah, right.

    I mentioned this principle with regard to IQ on the Fred Reed thread – the belief that you can separate IQ from the whole man – his values, attitudes, and personality traits – and then treat his IQ as a separate unit, to be raised or not without regard to anything else about him. A peculiarly modern silliness that you meet everywhere.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Daniel Chieh
  287. @AaronB

    redeeming features of aristocracies

    Democracy as well every other political/ideological system have their redeeming features but usually all of them is also very ”populated” by irremediable failures, to start the dubious quality of their rulers.

      Charismatic, democratic politicans but also cold manipulators, or ” average joey high-functioning ”, who are corruptible and morally apathetic, classically psychopathic communist politicians, or hypo-emotive capitalists,

    or megalomaniacal and despotic aristocrats.

    The Enlightenment conceit that we can design rational political systems that limit sociopathy seems based on an illusion.

    Because morally enlighted people tend to be blind about human nature, that some people simply born like that, that most people are not ideally correctable, that soft attitudes is not always better than more-stronger-attitudes, etc

    But when we start to based our rational political systems without this so common ilusion, i think sociopathy will not be more the rock in our path.

    I mentioned this principle with regard to IQ on the Fred Reed thread – the belief that you can separate IQ from the whole man – his values, attitudes, and personality traits – and then treat his IQ as a separate unit, to be raised or not without regard to anything else about him. A peculiarly modern silliness that you meet everywhere.

    Agree absolutely, well i was the first here to say that IQ tests is just like a new way to ”classify the quality of teeth of enslaved people”, i have take notice.

    I think it’s important down the false gods to raise the real ones.

    • Replies: @AP
  288. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    After many sacrificed generations the fantastic tzarist Russia finally started to become prosperous… Probably because aristocratic Russia started to copy pre democratic”western” European societies

    Adopting certain practices is not the same thing as changing the system. Modern China has adopted many Western elements and is more prosperous, but is hardly a Western democracy.

    Russia had more inhabitants than “England” already in that period and with less wealthy to be distributed.

    Correct, but the top 1% were the top 1% in both societies.

    Sweden was much closer in wealth to Russia than was England, yet it was about as unequal as England.

    At the same time church and aristocracy down and democracy/bourgeoisie up standard living started to increase incomparably.

    The increase began, and was great, prior to the Revolution.

    Let’s compare improvement of per capita GDP between monarchies and democracies in Europe from 1890 to 1913:

    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.361.386&rep=rep1&type=pdf

    Russia under the Tsar: 64% increase
    Germany under the Kaiser: 51% increase
    Austria-Hungary under the Kaiser: 34% increase

    Democratic France: 47% increase
    Democratic Netherlands: 27% increase
    Democratic England: 24% increase

    Shakespeare was only one individual. Russian literature golden age yes have their golden days during the XIX and many Russian genius writers of this time have compiled many stories of poverty of mujiks, reality they lived and registered in their books.

    Yes, but do not mistake their humanitarian and condemnation of injustice for an idea that Russia was worse. Dostoyevsky saw both Russia and England and viewed England’s squalor is having been far worse than what he saw in Russia.

    How about aristocratic regimes and their constant belligerence?

    Democracies engaged in more wars than did countries ruled by kings. Parliamentary England was the greatest warmonger in history.

    Indeed fascist communist and nazi regimes emulate the supremacist culture of aristocracy, they see themselves as substitutes of royal families.

    Nonsense, they saw themselves as the opposite of “supremacist culture of aristocracy” they see themselves as rule by “the people.” Commie regimes massacred aristocrats, Nazi one placed them in concentration camps.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  289. @AaronB

    It seems fair to conceive of systems as living bodies. Like any living body, the longer the exists, the more cancer and parasites it will attract, and eventually it collapses under its own weight. The natural solution has been to allow for a frequent cycle of death and rebirth – but that’s much less easier to implement on a governmental level.

    That said, I do prefer more fixed hierarchies myself. It feels more natural, and allows me to focus on excelling in my role, rather than participating in this stupid race rat to the top where it all feels meaningless.

    My issue with democracy is that it actually manages to introduce new, unique flaws – it basically equates groupthink with the superior solution. Groupthink is almost never the best solution.

    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @Santoculto
  290. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    megalomaniacal and despotic aristocrats.

    This is simply bizarre. It’s like a cartoon produced in a commie country. These people were comfortable in their positions, the positions they were born into, and went about trying to make the world a better place, rather than trying to manipulate their way to the top either humanely (in democracies) or through violence and terror (commie and fascist dictatorships).

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  291. AP says:
    @AaronB

    1) Aristocracies over time “decay” – they lose the will to power and thus they lose the skill needed to gain and keep power. The security of their position leads to this outcome. Ultimately, they become vulnerable to the sociopathic elements in society, who are keener, hungrier, more power hungry, and more ruthless.

    I don’t think it’s a matter of “decay” – Karl I would have implemented significant reforms and modernization in A-H, for example. You are correct however in that the aristocratic systems, which were refined over centuries, produced a ruling class that were imbued with a sense of honor and decency that made them somewhat helpless under extreme circumstances – such as the World War – when faced with revolutionary enemies who thought “outside the box” in terms of ruthlessness and cruelty. This may have been a “bug” but one which reflected a society’s goodness.

    I suppose a violent psychopath could wreak havoc in the Amish community – but this doesn’t mean that something is wrong with the Amish community.

    In a human community there will always be a sociopathic element, they will always eventually rise to the top, their greed, ambition, boredom, and immorality will eventually destroy themselves and their community, collapse will ensue, and the cycle will start again. Its why every empire and “great” nation ultimately becomes decadent and nihilistic.

    Pure psychopaths actually rarely get close to the top, because certain psychopathic traits such as poor impulse control, lack of loyalty, etc, cause them to burn out (get discovered, arrested, etc.) before they get there. Perhaps the one who came closest in the West was Kerry’s VP choice, Edwards. Rather, the ones that get to the top are typically those with more psychopathic traits than the average person has, but who is not actually a psychopath.

    In the old aristocracies compared to modern democracies or violent revolutionary governments, there was the least opportunity or need for psychopathic traits to be associated with rulers.

    I don’t believe there can be any “institutional” solution to psycopathy and sociopathy – democracy was the last great effort to do so, and it failed.

    Once can’t bring back the old aristocratic governments. Those systems, refined and developed over centuries, are gone. Democracy combined with a rigorous free press is the least of the bad options. Informed people with the right to vote at least will weed out potential rulers who are the most psychopathic – those who would utterly frighten or disgust the regular people. Obviously, the more intelligent and well-informed the electorate, the better. And of course morality is central to the process.

    Once the West turned to extreme materialism, no political solution was ever going to prevent the rise of the sociopath, who is the logical extension of extreme materialism.

    Very well said.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  292. @AP

    You have watched many disney movies my friend!!

    Kings want to do a better world…

    yesss

    They want to do a better world since a long time, and never can…

    • Replies: @AP
  293. @AP

    ”Adopting certain practices is not the same thing as changing the system.”

    It’s like to say

    ”Our old [aristocratic and feudal] regime is not working”

    Correct, but the top 1% were the top 1% in both societies.

    Sweden was much closer in wealth to Russia than was England, yet it was about as unequal as England.

    You fixed in your mind that 1% i said in my comment but generally royal families are not even 0,3% of general population. We are talking about a very very few individuals with luxurious and unfair privilege… just because they born with ”blue blood”.

    Yes, but do not mistake their humanitarian and condemnation of injustice for an idea that Russia was worse. Dostoyevsky saw both Russia and England and viewed England’s squalor is having been far worse than what he saw in Russia.

    Yes and royal ”english” family rarely did something to reduce this social problems because they were/are very concerned about their ”traditions”.

    Democracies engaged in more wars than did countries ruled by kings. Parliamentary England was the greatest warmonger in history.

    So countless conflicts among, between and within aristocratic or imperial regimes [throne battles] are just imagination of my mind or mistakes of historians.

    Nonsense, they saw themselves as the opposite of “supremacist culture of aristocracy” they see themselves as rule by “the people.” Commie regimes massacred aristocrats, Nazi one placed them in concentration camps.

    You’re being very naive to think commies and democ-ratz leaders really believe they ”are representant of people”, in the same but factual way priests and kings seeing themselves as ”representant of God”.

    Yes, they ”are people” BUT they live as KINGS, ;)

    Luxury, aristocracy and frivolity are quasi-synonimous in the ”popular imaginary”.

    Nazi one placed them in concentration camps

    Do you are talking about the self-chosen ones*

    I’m not against a natural leadership of WISE, RATIONAL chosen people. But seems very easy to agree that ”blue blood doesn’t mean ”more rational/wise/character skills & levels”, isn’t*

    • Replies: @AP
    , @Daniel Chieh
  294. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    Well, they did. Improvement in standard of living and income was greater in European monarchies than in western democracies, as I have shown you.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  295. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    ”Adopting certain practices is not the same thing as changing the system.”

    It’s like to say

    ”Our old [aristocratic and feudal] regime is not working”

    No more than saying that any reforms or new laws mean the regime or system isn’t working.

    Correct, but the top 1% were the top 1% in both societies.

    Sweden was much closer in wealth to Russia than was England, yet it was about as unequal as England.

    You fixed in your mind that 1% i said in my comment but generally royal families are not even 0,3% of general population. We are talking about a very very few individuals with luxurious and unfair privilege…

    Are you suggesting that say, the Vanderbilts (from a democracy) were a lot poorer than the Habsburgs? In his day Rockefeller (from a democracy) was the richest man on the planet.

    Or course under Communism everyone was poorer, even the upper class. I don’t think that was an improvement.

    Luxurious, fine. But this is the case in all governments. All US presidents have a plane for his personal use, a massive mansion, and estate outside of the city, hundreds of servants, etc. Why is it better because presidents are elected (that is, they manipulated and lied their way into power) but monarchs were born into it? Why do presidents deserve it more?

    As for “unfair privilege” – why unfair? I already explained to you that the aristocratic rulers worked very hard, often without retiring, their whole lives in service to the country. Old Franz Josef was working 60 hours weeks until the very day he died. Do you know of anybody in your life who has worked as much, and as hard?

    As I showed, the monarchs worked hard in running systems that gave more benefits for the people in terms of economic growth and lower income inequality while also presiding over spectacular cultural achievements.

    Democracies engaged in more wars than did countries ruled by kings. Parliamentary England was the greatest warmonger in history.

    So countless conflicts among, between and within aristocratic or imperial regimes [throne battles] are just imagination of my mind or mistakes of historians.

    You like to make claims but don’t supply facts.

    You claimed that monarchies were bad for economies.

    I provided fact that economic growth was much greater in monarchies than in democracies.

    You claimed there was too much economic inequality in monarchies.

    I provided facts showing that it was greater in democracies.

    Now you claim that monarchies or imperial regimes have more wars?

    A Study of War by Prof. Quincy Wright

    Wars involving European countries, 1815 to 1907:

    BRITAIN 10 wars
    RUSSIA 7 wars
    FRANCE 5 wars
    AUSTRIA 3 wars
    PRUSSIA-GERMANY 3 wars

    So Democratic England in first place, monarchic Russia in second, democratic France in third.

    Altogether, Europe’s two democratic powers were in 15 wars, Europe’s three monarchies were in 13 wars.

    Warfare was pretty universal, but democracies were a little worse than monarchies.

    You’re being very naive to think commies and democ-ratz leaders really believe they ”are representant of people”,

    They came to power on that basis and their ideology is based on it.

    • Agree: utu
  296. @Santoculto

    So countless conflicts among, between and within aristocratic or imperial regimes [throne battles] are just imagination of my mind or mistakes of historians.

    Well, there’s certainly a difference in scale and devastation between Junker dueling and the total wars of the recent eras. My empirical understanding from some analogous systems is since there is a more fixed position, the overall level of violence is reduced even though there is a lot more posturing.

    I mean, China existed for hundreds of years basically fighting only defensive wars once it was centralized enough. Without a moral imperative to conquer and with no real economic gain in doing so, the dynasties just settled into basically a long and passive defensive slog.

    As far as “blue blood”, I’m actually a “blue blood” myself. I’m descended from nobility and have a clear family tree going back 500+ years. There’s clearly some genetic correlation with success, as I’m still in the top 10% of income, even now, even after a history of being slaughtered and then impoverished. In Japan, they found that most government officials are still samurai descendants. At some point, there’s an obvious genetic component.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @attilathehen
  297. @AP

    I will not try to convince a people as you what you’re organically incapable to understand, accept and deal with it.

    There are some types of very dumb people, namely ”white” ones:

    communists

    libertarians

    capitalists

    and yes

    monarchists

    I never will lower my head and pay reverence and respect to the “blue blood ones.”

    And no, you did not provide any solid evidence to prove your fanaticism.

    • Replies: @AP
  298. You are trying to justify aristocracies flaws just like that

    ”ok, it’s not good, but democracy is still [slightly] worse”

    even when it’s not true.

    Your evidences prove my own, thank you.

    A mix of extreme naivety and apathy if you are not a ”very interested” in the success of aristocracy/monarchy.

    So sorry for you.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  299. @Santoculto

    I would say that you seem pretty ideological motivated yourself as well. So let’s place this as the criteria, I think – what would be your “defeasibility” proposition? Where would you, for example, acknowledge that your position in opposition would be incorrect and what amount of evidence would you need?

    Obviously, our defeasibility is if the evidence is presented demonstrating ill success, and something more solid than “unjustified privileges.” I mean, if the preponderance of evidence is that books are better when written by committee, if meeting decisions are better when made by groups, if battlefield victories come about after voting for the best decision, then I would have no choice but to accept the greater strength of your findings.

    Such does not seem to be the case, however. Power centralizes, and we see this even in natural systems. I mean, the body privileges the brain over all other tissue in the body, and it seems like it worked out better for complex systems than having a diffuse neural network across the body.

    Partly, you have to understand, that this is empirical too. I’ve participated in groups that were effectively aristocracies – many people in the military may also have lived in what is, to some extent, a pretty rigid hierarchy. And its pretty functional, even effective, and while I wouldn’t say that it is an universal solution, its merits shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  300. @Daniel Chieh

    No you are not a blue blood whatever the social position of their family.

    “Success”??

    Success to go to the top. Not to govern wisely. That’s the fundamental question.

    The two great wars of XX century was a anomaly in terms of magnitude because their global scale and because the demographic explosion in the west, where great part of conflicts succeeded.

    Monarchists think:

    Whatever the character or rationality all individuals who are related or belong to “royal” families deserve to govern, it’s a “natural” order.

    I think:

    Whatever social class or genealogical tree every naturally disposed wise and/ or rational men or women deserve to govern because they are designed to do it.

    I’m wrong??

    The first criteria is irrational, based on “tradition”.

    The second criteria is just the right thing to do.

    Criminality rates in monarchist England during medieval period was very higher as well in most European countries.

    I agree with you that stability is important but to be stable you don’t need have kings and queens to conquered it.

  301. @Daniel Chieh

    So tell my (known) ideology

    Communism??

    Most of my claims here are not incorrect. When you will do this kind of claim just exemplify after because if not it is just a personal opinion.

    People need to be blind to don’t see the intellectual dishonesty of AP specially in their last comment. Become even more clear. He’s manipulating their “evidences” and seems is very easy to take notice….

    Only if you are “personally interested” as you showed now to deny this reality.

    When exactly centuries of aberrant social inequality, social injustice of all natures possible and the most important: The so called blue bloodness, can be understood as “success”?? I don’t care about cultural golden ages without socio-moral improvements. Shakespeare lived very well and give little importance to the social problems of their nation.

    Most of aristocracy and empires was build and criterized via

    Power

    Bloodlines

    Intellectual skills has been optional at the best. Moral ones?? Very weakly required.

    The natural governors are not those who born in powerful families but those who born with powerful and morally healthy minds, period.

    When i said rigid systems I’m to say

    ” societies where merit of talent is less important than merit of family status”

    Great part of post modern problems are effects of centuries of human exploitation and little concernment about intellectual and moral quality of people. One of the reason west is declined is

    Materialism (most western people are very materialistic and put their “things” above people)

    Morally hypocrites ( virtue signaling)

    Thanks to the long time of monarchic dominance Europeans has been selected to be servants and not to be thinkers.

    Hierarchy works pragmatically well ;)

    Not rationally well

    Army structure works very well. But it’s designed to fight for stupid wars instead to try to understand firstly what’s going on.

  302. @Daniel Chieh

    You may be a “blue-blood” in China, but in the West you are yellow and don’t belong.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  303. @attilathehen

    While Mr. Santoculto deserves a more extensive response, you only get this from me:

    <3

  304. rec1man says:

    2017, California National Merit List,

    Total = 2100

    Chinese = 850
    Korean = 100
    Vietnamese = 75
    Japanese = 25

    Muslims = 55

    Jews = 125

    Indians = 275, of which

    [MORE]

    Bengali speakers, total = 18, Brahmin = 12, Kayasth ( scribe ) = 6

    Gujurati speakers, total = 18

    Brahmin = 3
    Low caste peasant = 1
    Patel = Kulak / Dominant peasant = 4

    Merchants = 20, ( 6 Hindu, 14 Jain )

    Hindi speakers , total = 46
    Brahmin = 14
    kayasth ( scribe ) = 2
    Peasant = 1
    Bania ( merchant ) = 20
    Rajput ( noble ) = 9

    Kannada speakers = 18
    Brahmin = 14
    Upper Caste Dravidian Landlord / kulak = 4

    Malayalam Speakers = 7
    Brahmin = 1
    Nair = Upper Caste Dravidian Noble ( also visually and genetically = brahmin, bcos their women were impregnated by brahmins for 1000 years ) = 6

    Marathi speakers = 22
    Brahmin = 18
    Kayasth ( scribe ) =2
    Maratha ( noble ) = 2

    Punjabi Speakers = 21

    Jat Sikh = Kulak / dominant peasant = 3
    Khatri ( Merchant ) ( most of bollywood ) = 18

    Sindhi speakers = 6
    Merchant = 6

    Tamil Speakers = 64
    Brahmin = 44
    Upper Caste Dravidian = Merchant, Landlord, Kulak = 20

    Telugu Speakers = 44
    Brahmin = 16
    Upper Caste Dravidian = Merchant ,Landlord, Noble, Kulak = 28

    • Replies: @Aron
  305. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    And no, you did not provide any solid evidence to prove your fanaticism.

    Yet another false claim you make, without any facts.

    A final review:

    Democracies vs. Monarchies in terms of economic growth, 1890-1913:

    Russia under the Tsar: 64% increase
    Germany under the Kaiser: 51% increase
    Austria-Hungary under the Kaiser: 34% increase

    Democratic France: 47% increase
    Democratic Netherlands: 27% increase
    Democratic England: 24% increase

    Democracies vs. Monarchies, income inequality:

    Russia, 1904 gini coefficient, – .360
    England-Wales, 1867 – .490

    Modern Russia .454
    Modern USA .464

    Democracies vs. Monarchies in terms of war:

    A Study of War by Prof. Quincy Wright

    Wars involving European countries, 1815 to 1907:

    BRITAIN 10 wars
    RUSSIA 7 wars
    FRANCE 5 wars
    AUSTRIA 3 wars
    PRUSSIA-GERMANY 3 wars

    So Democratic England in first place, monarchic Russia in second, democratic France in third.

    Altogether, Europe’s two democratic powers were in 15 wars, Europe’s three monarchies were in 13 wars.

    Links for the facts are in my earlier posts.

    Since reality is not on your side you, naturally, provided no facts.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Santoculto
  306. @AP

    ”Russia under the Tsar: 64% increase
    Germany under the Kaiser: 51% increase
    Austria-Hungary under the Kaiser: 34% increase

    Democratic France: 47% increase
    Democratic Netherlands: 27% increase
    Democratic England: 24% increase”

    Ok, ””’England””, the first industrialized nation in the world. France, the second.

    Germany, only recently reunified in that time.

    Russia, when you have nothing or little and you want increase it, growth tend to be higher, ;)

    Yes you are exposing facts but not what you are trying to convince…

    • Replies: @AP
  307. Russia, 1904 gini coefficient, – .360
    England-Wales, 1867 – .490

    Modern Russia .454
    Modern USA .464

    So based on your fantastic logic, to live in Tzarist Russia was better than live in modern USA, congratulations!!

    Your ”differences” are ”gigantic”, lol

    Again, Russia had great portion of poor people, so inequality appear to be lower.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2014_Gini_Index_World_Map,_income_inequality_distribution_by_country_per_World_Bank.svg

    One of the poorest nations in the current world seems are less socially inequal than one of the most richest nations, why**

    because most people there are poor.

    • Replies: @AP
  308. Wars involving European countries, 1815 to 1907:

    BRITAIN 10 wars
    RUSSIA 7 wars
    FRANCE 5 wars
    AUSTRIA 3 wars
    PRUSSIA-GERMANY 3 wars

    You’re comparing one tiny period of european history…

    Again your ”differences” to supposedly prove that monarchies are mesmerizingly superior than any other political/ IDEOLOGICAL regimes seems are not proving your point as you are thinking…

    I

    • Replies: @AP
  309. @AP

    ”Since reality is not on your side you, naturally, provided no facts.”

    You’re pushing too much this little differences and in short period of european history, so sorry!1

  310. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    You’re comparing one tiny period of european history…

    I’m comparing a time period (90 years) when there were both monarchies and democracies to see which system had governments that made more wars.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  311. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    You made a false claim that Russia had a very unequal society, worse than in a democracy.

    I proved that your claim was false by providing facts showing that Russia under the Tsars was more equal than was England, or than modern Russia and USA.

    As usual, you provide no counter facts.

    The map you linked to shows more inequality in poorer countries.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  312. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    So, the facts support my claim and now you make excuses for why the main monarchies had greater growth than the main democracies.

    Maybe next you will make an excuse that it was because Germany spoke German that it had such high growth :-)

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  313. @AP

    Modern “Democracies” in their beginning you want to say …. With solid and well experienced monarchies.

    90 years… “Europe” have a millennial history. Monarchy?? Empires??

  314. @AP

    Err no

    I hope you re read my last comments to become aware about it, so sorry!

    • Replies: @AP
  315. @AP

    I already refute it and i will not repeat.

    Just read again and if you want refute point by point if you can.

    Errr yes

    But the map also have very poor country that are less unequal.

    Do you can see?? An?

    • Replies: @AP
  316. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    I already refute it and i will not repeat.

    Repeating a falsehood many times doe snot make it true.

    You claimed Russia was unequal. I proved it was not.

    Modern “Democracies” in their beginning you want to say …. With solid and well experienced monarchies.

    More excuses, which is a trick of intellectually dishonest people.

    And of course England, the leader in being in wars, had a solid and well developed parliamentary government.

    Elsewhere your excuse was that Germany was growing because it had only just united. But now the excuse for why it was in fewer wars was that it was “solid and well experienced.”

    I am more interested in facts, not excuses.

    Fact is, when democracies and monarchies coexisted, democracies were in more wars.

  317. EH says:

    Not to pick on him, but wishing the discussion were more relevant to the original topic – why do people even read Santoculto’s comments, let alone answer them? His posts are always verging on word salad and his arguments usually seem like a succession of non sequiturs, random emoting without much connection to the world outside his head. He seems basically nice, not a troll like The Wizard of Oz, but such posts tend to derail the discussion.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Daniel Chieh
  318. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    You made excuses.

    Here is a comparison of economic growth, 1890-1913, monarchies vs. democracies:

    ”Russia under the Tsar: 64% increase
    Germany under the Kaiser: 51% increase
    Austria-Hungary under the Kaiser: 34% increase

    Democratic France: 47% increase
    Democratic Netherlands: 27% increase
    Democratic England: 24% increase”

    Your excuses:

    Ok, ””’England””, the first industrialized nation in the world. France, the second.

    Germany, only recently reunified in that time.

    Russia, when you have nothing or little and you want increase it, growth tend to be higher, ;)

    But oh oh – Italy was a parliamentary democracy like England. It was recently united, like Germany.

    It’s growth was only 35.5% in those years – much lower than that of Russia and Germany, and barely higher than that of Austria-Hungary.

    So now you will have to invent an excuse just for Italy. :-) Another democracy with slower growth that that of monarchies.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  319. AaronB says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    I agree completely with this comment.

    I guess I was trying to look at it from the perspective of a perfect, eternal solution that will hold up under all conditions, but that itself is a pretty unintelligent thing of me to do and is the kind of rationalistic thinking I rail against so often.

    I suppose the cycle of birth and decay is inescapable, and aristocracies while not “the” solution are preferable in so many ways.

    Couldn’t agree more with your statement about excelling in some role in a fixed hierarchy so much more satisfying than the restless, never-satisfied, anxiety-ridden scramble for power and prestige in a fluid system where “excelling” often means the opposite of true excellence. So much restlessness, for what? Any kind of gracious living is utterly impossible. Buddhists call people like these “hungry ghosts” – restless, anxious, never satisfied, mere walking appetites, in the end.

    Yes, rule by consensus – groupthink – has also become a feature of science, as you know. We couldn’t figure out any intrinsically valid way of evaluating scientific claims, so we substituted group-think – “peer review”, we call it – as if this isn’t the corruption of true science.

  320. AaronB says:
    @AP

    Yes, its a “bug” that does indeed do credit to the goodness of this kind of social organization.

    But “good” will always, and I really do mean always, be vulnerable – and that is probably something that cannot be overcome, in the end. Which is why being “good” has always come together with being “unworldly” in all religious systems. Which means the attempt to set up a “good” system of governance will always, in the long run, fail, although it might produce happiness for several generations. This might still be worthwhile, you’re right, and certainly doesn’t mean something is “wrong” , but does mean it will not endure.

    Tolstoy thought that the worst people in every society inevitably rise to the top, and there is no escape from this. He may well be right.

    The only redeeming feature of “bad” people is that their appetites end up destroying themselves and their societies – in other words they don’t endure. The nightmare scenario that “bad” people can set up an oppressive system that endures for centuries doesn’t take into account the character of “bad” people – fear, insecurity, restless discontent, greed, and endless appetite. These are inherently unstable factors that end up devouring their possessors. “Bad” people cannot sit still and enjoy their wealth and power – they always want “more”, which is inherently destabilizing.

    Regarding psycopaths rising to the top, I’d say the difference is between the really good ones and the not so skilled ones. Some psycopaths cannot do impulse control, and are limited. Some psycopaths are utterly chilling and inhuman but are much smoother operators. Unless, of course, you wish to view poor impulse control as a defining feature of psycopathy. Either way, the people who rise to the top are very often without any humanity or capacity for happiness whatsoever.

    • Replies: @AP
  321. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_Spain

    Definitely an essay, summed up in the biography of one individual, on the drawbacks of a hereditary monarchy. The Spanish Hapsburgs became a by-word for inbreeding. Charles probably did not cause Spain’s decline in the late 17th century but he was clearly ill-equipped to reverse it, or even slow it down.

  322. Aron says:
    @rec1man

    First of all, the assumptions are false.

    You cannot simply compare test results in California to determine intelligence.

    If you look at population of California:-

    [MORE]

    Japanese: 1.1 million. 428,000 in California.

    Koreans: 1.7 million. 500,000 in California.

    Chinese: 3.9 million. 1.4 million in California.

    Hong Kong: 219,200. 96,000 in Singapore.

    Taiwanese : 358,000. 109,000 in California.

    Indians: 3.2 million. 590,000 in California.

    Pakistani: 360,00. 53,000 in California.

    Bangladeshi: 58,000. 10,000 in California.

    You have to adjust your calculations for “population of different ethnic groups.”

    Then secondly, Brahmans or upper castes don’t have significantly higher IQ than lower castes.

    IQ of India by caste:-

    There is no major differences between Indian castes and IQ results.

    https://books.google.co.in/books?id=9tZ4AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA16&lpg=PA16&dq=chopra+iq+difference+between+castes&source=bl&ots=mUJt4iGaiY&sig=K5__8u3gFJA4AG6yXxjnwnzm4Xk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUm83W_MbQAhUEQI8KHW–DpEQ6AEIOjAC#v=onepage&q=chopra%20iq%20difference%20between%20castes&f=false

    Page 16.

    This book covers several IQ samples of India by caste.

    There is no major differences between Indian castes. As per IQ tests done.

    On non-verbal IQ tests (Raven’s Progressive Matrices), there are no significant differences among Indian castes.

    As it is observed via IQ testing that Vaishyas have higher non-verbal IQ than Kshatriya who have higher non-verbal IQ than Brahmins followed by SCs.

    Rather the difference between Vaishyas and Brahmins on non-verbal IQ tests (as per IQ research) is same as the difference between Brahmins and Scheduled Castes.

    Secondly, the differences among Indian castes is estimated to be less than 3 IQ points on non-verbal IQ tests.

    However on verbal IQ tests, the difference is 11 IQ points.

    Cognitive test scores of India by caste:-

    Here are the results of cognitive test scores of India by region and caste. Class 5, 2012:-

    http://www.educationforallinindia.com/NAS_Class_V_Report_NCERT_2012.pdf

    If you look at the sampling method, it is similar to PISA. Maths and reading questions are also of advanced level, similar to PISA.

    Page 33:-

    Reading Scores:-
    SC: 245, ST: 240, OBC: 247, General: 253.

    That’s a gap of 4 IQ points between STs and General. However, many Indian castes will score up to 11 IQ points above lowest castes.

    Maths scores:-

    Page 56:-

    The gap is 10 points on test scores between lowest and highest. Or only 3 IQ.

    So, Indian castes having an IQ gap of 20-30 points is science fiction.

    Then, test scores are heavily dependent on iodine consumption.

    Tamil Nadu has only 18% households consuming iodized salt v/s 50% of rest of India.

    Source: http://www.ijph.in/article.asp?issn=0019-557X&year=2010&volume=54&issue=3&spage=120&epage=125&aulast=Pandav

    As a result, Tamil Nadu not only scores below “rest of the world” but also below average Indian. As evident in local test results.

    Andhra Pradesh has iodine consumption of 28 % and IQ data is also suggesting 82-83.

    High scoring states also have high iodine consumption.

    In the long term, this is the “IQ of India v/s iodine” based on IQ data on India (not adjusting for mal-nourishment):-

    76 for 15% iodine consumption.
    84 for 30% iodine consumption.
    88 for 50% iodine consumption.
    91 for 70% iodine consumption.
    95 for 100% iodine consumption.

    The IQ changes fast from 70-90 IQ due to non-linear IQ scales. And then IQ change is 0.136 IQ points/(1 percent of households consuming iodine).

    Uttar Pradesh is the only state of India that has 80% iodine consumption.

    Hence test scores of Uttar Pradesh are significantly above average. If you look at:-

    http://www.educationforallinindia.com/NAS_Class_V_Report_NCERT_2012.pdf

    Average maths score of Uttar Pradesh is 298 v/s 250 for India. (Page: 48)
    Average reading score of Uttar Pradesh is 284 v/s 250 for India.(Page: 31)

    That’s 15 IQ above India.

    Even if you look at score distribution, 50 percentile score in Uttar Pradesh is 310 on maths which is same as 90 percentile score in Average India.

    Even if you look at IQ test results on India, Uttar Pradesh is on top at 100-105 average IQ. For IQ samples, you can read my answers above by name of “Aron”.

    Secondly, Tamil Nadu is the next state in India where iodine consumption is 70-80%. Remaining states are below 60% mark.

    If you look at old iodine consumption stats from India, Tamil Nadu was at 18%.

    Old test scores in Tamil Nadu on older cohert:-

    http://www.educationforallinindia.com/National%20Summary%20Report%20NAS%20Class%20VIII-2012.pdf

    Tamil Nadu scores 220 on maths and 230 on reading. Meaning average IQ, 8 IQ below India.

    But now after implementing USI (universal salt iodization), test scores have increased. And:-

    http://www.educationforallinindia.com/NAS_Class_V_Report_NCERT_2012.pdf

    Tamil Nadu scores around 280 (9 IQ above India).

    Lastly, India is not the only nation where average IQ has increased by USI.

    In Shandong province of China (a high scoring area), average IQ increased from 88 to 111.

    Source:-

    http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-ZGYC200908012.htm

    https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/20093295905

    Iodine increases your IQ by 13.6 points. However as IQ scales are non-linear, meaning that “intelligence or brain size gap between a person with 70 IQ (1 percentile) and 90 IQ (25 percentile) is same as intelligence gap between a person with 90 IQ (25 percentile) and 100 IQ (50 percentile); the IQ changes faster in 70-90 IQ range.”
    Hence iodine can cause a IQ change by significant points.

    In Tamil Nadu, when median iodine consumption was 18% IQ was 9 points below average India. Now with 75% iodine consumption, average IQ is 9 IQ above average Indian.

    Similarly, in Madhya Pradesh the iodine consumption has fallen drastically. This can be read:-

    http://www.ijph.in/article.asp?issn=0019-557X&year=2010&volume=54&issue=3&spage=120&epage=125&aulast=Pandav

    “More worryingly over last few years, there is the stagnation (NFHS-2, 1998-1999 to NFHS-3, 2005-2006) in percentage of households using adequately iodized salt, with few states such as Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh reporting actual decline.”

    So, test score in Madhya Pradesh have collapsed.

    Source: http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER%20TOT/fullasertrendsovertimereport.pdf

    In MP, the (% of class 3/5 kids that can subtract/divide) have declined from 66% in 2007 (much above national average and among top 5) to 13% in 2014 (bottom 5).

    An IQ change by -13 IQ points.

  323. @EH

    uuum, no

    I’m much less chrystallized in cognitive style than you guys, but it’s unfair to accuse to give low-quality comments, again, people need to be blind to deny i’m right about this stuff.

    Only if you are interested about monarchy too.

    Seems very dishonest people who want to remain their UNFAIR privileges intact (if you are personally interested) OR that slave-mind people.

    So, when you say ”word salad” i think you are exposing your own incapacity to read and understand a unusual and more sophisticated way to write than your conventional english.

    [MORE]

    AGAIN

    AGAIN

    AND

    AGAIN

    If you want to debate, ok, expose your

    personal opinions

    AND

    arguments

    By now it’s just a personal opinion.

    AP is using statistical facts, ok, but he is trying to prove their points based on this facts, and it’s not working.

    So, the next comment explain why do you think i no have solid arguments…

    Interestingly how common this pseudo-thinkers, pretend to be philosophers, tend to be so petulant and make self-projection all the time.

    And yes, most part of time, i’m debating with ”master race”…period.

  324. @AP

    It’s not excuses DUDE

    I’m explaining politely to you YOUR FACTS

    Man….

    [MORE]

    It’s growth was only 35.5% in those years – much lower than that of Russia and Germany, and barely higher than that of Austria-Hungary.

    Dude,

    You just can’t reduce everything happened in Europe or in any other place as

    ”aristocracy did better, aristocracy is better”

    so sorry for you.

    So now you will have to invent an excuse just for Italy. :-) Another democracy with slower growth that that of monarchies.

    You’re dumb, sorry.

    Again, it’s not a ”excuse”

    I just complete ”your statistical facts” explaining to you why some euro countries have more economic growth than others.

    Italy was even poorer than other big european nations, again, in XIX century democracies still are in their childhood. Italy have showed their ethnic character: very good on arts, not so good on social and economic organization, never was, still this days.

    Seems you’re negleting everything [less monarchy-democracy] to explain why some countries did and do better than others, even ethnic ones, even cousin marriage also is interesting to explain, levels of urbanization.

    Aristocracy/monarchy is a kind of DICTATORSHIP.

    Yes a prince or a king can incentive [or not] a ECONOMIC development as well happen in militar dictatorship.

    Democracy is very new in the history, namely modern ones, so everything is recent tend to have less experience. No doubt democracy is, even very imperfect, the best political/ideological regime.

    Democracy is so good that a lot of very bad people exploit it to their own benefit, while in monarchy only a ”royal” family and other few people will exploit a work of others and with zero meritocracy, just because hereditarian reasons.

  325. @Daniel Chieh

    Hierarchy is a skeletal structure of any society, it’s impossible to avoid it. But very rigid hierarchy never was healthy.

    What i’m trying to say

    In monarchies kings tend to govern, whatever their capacities, their characters, their wisdom or practical/convergent creativity. If he do a bad choice, few people will be AUTHORIZED to comunicate him their mistakes, and i’m talking about a ideal and perfect world where kings are just sporadically inescrupulous. Kings don’t govern because merit, even they can born smarter and [vaguely] skilled to govern. Kings govern because they born in the ”right/royal family”. It’s not merit anyway, because there are people who are more naturally skilled to govern than [maybe] most people with ”blue blood”.

    In perfect, ideal society, first, inevitably we will have a psycho-cognitive castes, the best people to do certain tasks will be always selected, WHATEVER their social classes. If you have a very skilled untouchable dalit [to work for certain task] he will be selected.

    Psycho-castes inevitably will create a solid hierarchy, stable BUT internally dynamic, why*

    Because the right people to the certain tasks will be always selected whatever their social position. Maybe during this processes, psycho-cognitive classes will replacing social classes itself.

    There are a natural ”upper class” of governors, people who are highly naturally skilled to govern, to drive a nation, and they are spread by all social classes even i believe will be a over-representation of them among … upper classes**

    not exactly, among middle classes… specially ”high-middle classes”.

  326. ”say non sequitur”

    I know s/he’s a pseudo-intellectual, ;)

    Unfortunately because anonymity so many DISHONEST people appear to try to manipulate reality. I already know that one of the commentators is personally interested in the return of the monarchy. I think it’s honest of him to have communicated this. I also have personal reasons to be against the monarchist regime, because we always have personal reasons. But we have to search for rational reasons, which are independent of our personal motivations.

    So we were supposed to be tied, but the history, full facts (not just statistical data of a century and explained in an extremely vague way, without regard to everything that happened at that time), morality and rationality are at my side.

    It is not rational to put people in power because of their name rather than to place those who have a natural talent for governing, no matter their social class;

    It is not moral to justify gross errors [numerous and constant in space / time] of an ideological / political regime. That’s why I’m fair to all regimes. Yes, democracy is the best we have, very imperfect, yet it is the best. And yes, history bears witness to the grave defects …. of democracy *** Not necessarily, but of the junction of democracy or any other regime, with morally vague ideologies.

    It is possible to be democratic and stable. In fact, most of the Western nations before Leftism were moving toward this end.

    Monarchist systems have existed for centuries and have legitimized all sorts of human exploitation: slavery, significant social inequalities, appearance of ‘stability’ or better, lack of progress, supremacist ideology (blue blood).

    Sometimes good kings have appeared. Coincidentally when the bourgeoisie began to grow in numbers that Europe finally began to unleash (terribly, it is said). Okay, when the bourgeoisie and the nobility joined Europe it became very powerful and dangerous.

  327. And don’t confuse

    wisdom/capacity to judge correctly/to govern

    with

    social ”intelligence”, ;)

    Most leaders are charismatic, but not very wise.

    Kings tend to ”learn’ more how to behave to THEIR people

    than

    how to govern wisely.

    This explain partially why ”traditions” is so important to the social agenda of ”royalties”.

  328. And

    Austria-Hungary and Tzarist Russia have sad destinations during the first half of XX century, ;)

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @AP
  329. AP says:
    @AaronB

    I basically agree with all of your thoughtful post.

    Unless, of course, you wish to view poor impulse control as a defining feature of psycopathy.

    Clinically speaking, it is. Also, utter lack of loyalty, which eventually prevents a psychopath from rising to the top. Among criminals, for example, psychopaths typically are the first to turn on their peers in exchange for lenient treatment (they are also most likely to be granted parole because they will without hesitation and smoothly go along with whatever needs to be said in order to obtain parole). Such behaviors mean they are most likely to be out on the streets again, but they also preclude one from rising to the top in a criminal organization. In military situations, psychopaths are bold and ice-cold killers, but often behave recklessly and have a reputation for not taking risks for others and putting themselves and their peers in harms way with reckless behavior – so they don’t do well in that setting either. In business, they can get far but eventually their bold schemes if illegal get found out (Madoff) or if not, the constant betrayal of others eventually leads to management catching on and getting rid of them. Often it takes a year or two for them to be found out, and often they get good references just to be gotten rid of, so they do cause a lot of damage.

    In a fluid society such as ours, there is a “sweet spot” for success in which someone who gets far has many psychopathic traits but is not, clinically speaking, an actual psychopath. Someone who is bold and unconventional, catching others by surprise, but not reckless. Someone who is manipulative and capable of occasional strategic betrayal but who is not universal in such behavior, to the extent that he is found out and ultimately rejected. Someone who can, without much guilt, overlook occasional harm done by himself but who doesn’t harm others all the time.

  330. @Santoculto

    So in the same way ”aristocracy was[sliiiiiiiiiightly] better in XIX century” or ”causal” as you are saying,

    So aristocracy/monarchy was responsible to their own ruin in the beggining of XX century**

    It was causal too**

  331. @EH

    I suspect that he has communication difficulties over text, but his heart is in the right place, and that counts for a lot, honestly. I do find his thought process interesting, even though I rarely agree with him on much.

    • Agree: res
    • Replies: @Santoculto
  332. @Daniel Chieh

    Again manipulators EVERYWHERE..

    ”I suspect that he has communication difficulties over text”

    I see very clearly when someone manipulate their data, poorly…

    it’s difficult to have some intellectual honesty**

    ”even though I rarely agree with him on much.”

    Why*

    ”but his heart is in the right place”

    And my mind too, period.

  333. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    It was even sadder for the peoples who lived in those countries once their monarchies disappeared.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  334. @AP

    Really???

    Pan slavism, Hungarians, tchecoslovaks, “Yugoslavians” etc… have different feelings about it.

    Do you are personally interested in monarchy/aristocracy??

    • Replies: @AP
  335. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @JackOH

    “How should we use our knowledge of intelligence to create a better-ordered society?”

    the current well-ordered societies are the high IQ ones so the first step is to stop them becoming low IQ

    the second is to find out what other factors – also mostly genetic imo – influence that orderliness (factors that relate to cooperation, corruption, free riding etc)

    third step is beam that knowledge to the less well-ordered societies from behind a nice big wall

  336. AP says:
    @Santoculto

    Remind yourself of the death tolls in the years following the monarchies, as a result of those monarchies no longer being around.

    You are familiar with 20th century history, I hope ;-)

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  337. @AP

    I hope you explain me or at least develop more what you are want to say ;)

  338. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @attilathehen

    I’m English and Welsh, and don’t have any black/Jewish/Asian family members. What are you? Whatever you are, go back home. Europe is on the other side of the Atlantic.

  339. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Exchange between high-school student and high-IQ woman with successful career:

    The student:

    I scored 110-115 on an IQ test, what does this really mean for me?
    I’ve been told that its impossible for me to achieve anything worthwhile in science, and that graduate school is a stupid idea for someone with my range, I know these questions get old, but are there any scientists out there with a range like mine? The things I was told really kind of shook me…

    The woman:

    Excuse me, but….what the hell? How absurd!! Who are these people saying you can’t achieve anything worthwhile in science with this IQ? They are definitely sorely mistaken and callous, and they are possibly malicious!
    Your IQ level (it’s above average!) makes you perfectly capable of learning the basics (and advanced!) of any science discipline. The rest takes DILIGENCE, PERSISTENCE, and CREATIVITY—none of which is measured by an IQ test.

    Did this woman good? Wrong?
    Is she making the world and this student’s life better — assuming the two objects be compatible –?

    For many too longer time I used to be fully sincere in my responses to such people. I finally came to doubt that I was making anything, either the world or the asker’s life, better. But as I hate to act, now I just keep silent and avoid commenting.

  340. Louis says:

    Can someone explain why the nations with people with higher IQ (100 or more as average) and with great technological advantages, (weapons, Army, planes, tanks, bombs , missiles , money etc are being beaten and conquered by nations of primitive people with low IQ (lower than 85) and poors , weak Army, no scientists, etc?

  341. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @attilathehen

    Well, to be perfectly accurate, “Daniel” is Jewish.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All James Thompson Comments via RSS