5 ms·

Interesting. I did a few web searches, but they failed to find something as basic a the average IQ by race. The wikipedia article [1] admits differences were fo

Interesting. I did a few web searches, but they failed to find something as basic a the average IQ by race. The wikipedia article [1] admits differences were found (including by the APA), yet doesn't show the results, except for A 2001 meta-analysis of the results of 6,246,729 participants tested for cognitive ability or aptitude found a difference in average scores between black people and white people of 1.1 standard deviations. Nevertheless, the NCES published SAT scores [2] that seem consistent with those IQ scores. So if the results of The Bell Curve have been debunked, they're very discreet about it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#Test_scores https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#Test_sco... [2] https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171 https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171

8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y ago
Based on some recent reading I've done, I don't believe the results of the Bell Curve were ever genuinely disproven, were they? The Gould book was more of a political and cultural critique, not so much of a factual one. I'd be curious to see good faith counter-evidence to the data in the Bell Curve though. Disclaimer: I think research into IQ differences among populations in a multi-racial society is pointless, zero upside to it. Yes, data is data, but in this case we can make pretty good guesses about who's going to be most interested in it and why, unfortunately.
- runarberg 4y ago
  FWIW The Bell Curve is equally—if not more—political. the Bell Curve actually spends the most of the last part of the book listing policy proposals which are only loosely based on their “findings”. Mismeasure doesn’t list any policy proposals. But you are wrong about the Bell Curve not being disproven, or at least it has been thoroughly discredited as any sort of scientific literature. It is very bad science to say the least. Some of the main sources used in this book actually used forged data, others seriously mis-interpreted research findings. And if that wasn’t enough, in the 30 years since this book was published, IQ research hasn’t advanced one iota. Their whole premise seems to be a scientific dead end.
runarberg 4y ago
> The wikipedia article [1] admits differences were found (including by the APA), yet doesn't show the results Its because racial difference in IQ is pseudo science. There is no biological basis for the claim there is a difference in intelligence, the racial lines are arbitrary, and the metric used is biased, it is even disputed whether it is possible to use a single metric to assess something as broad and vague as intelligence. The wikipedia article doesn’t need to show specific data for such pseudo-science. It would be like showing specific data for how much more temperamental Scorpios are relative to Libras, using some arbitrary Venus score. Describing these results is giving this plenty credit, there is no need to give it any more, especially since it is used by bad people with nefarious agenda.
- kolinko 4y ago
  Of course there is a biological claim. Intelligence is hereditary, so certain populations may have higher average IQs than the others. Also we can see that in nature - every dog owner will tell you that certain races of dogs are of higher average intelligence than the others. We also know that many - if not most - character traits are also genetic. There has been a ton of twin studies and adoption studies proving that. A book "Blank Slate" has multiple examples. Having said that, I agree with keeping the research on race and intelligence/character a taboo. We know where such research leads to, and if there is a part of science better left unexplored, it would be this one.
  - quadhome 4y ago
    Between-breed variation is an order of magnitude higher than human genetic variation.
    - jfiwefwo 4y ago
      No it isn't, the human breeds are very different and africans have been separated from other humans for >50k years in very different environments. Even Darwin recognized the differences are massive and some populations seem like different species.

8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y ago

Based on some recent reading I've done, I don't believe the results of the Bell Curve were ever genuinely disproven, were they? The Gould book was more of a political and cultural critique, not so much of a factual one. I'd be curious to see good faith counter-evidence to the data in the Bell Curve though. Disclaimer: I think research into IQ differences among populations in a multi-racial society is pointless, zero upside to it. Yes, data is data, but in this case we can make pretty good guesses about who's going to be most interested in it and why, unfortunately.

runarberg 4y ago
FWIW The Bell Curve is equally—if not more—political. the Bell Curve actually spends the most of the last part of the book listing policy proposals which are only loosely based on their “findings”. Mismeasure doesn’t list any policy proposals. But you are wrong about the Bell Curve not being disproven, or at least it has been thoroughly discredited as any sort of scientific literature. It is very bad science to say the least. Some of the main sources used in this book actually used forged data, others seriously mis-interpreted research findings. And if that wasn’t enough, in the 30 years since this book was published, IQ research hasn’t advanced one iota. Their whole premise seems to be a scientific dead end.

runarberg 4y ago

> The wikipedia article [1] admits differences were found (including by the APA), yet doesn't show the results Its because racial difference in IQ is pseudo science. There is no biological basis for the claim there is a difference in intelligence, the racial lines are arbitrary, and the metric used is biased, it is even disputed whether it is possible to use a single metric to assess something as broad and vague as intelligence. The wikipedia article doesn’t need to show specific data for such pseudo-science. It would be like showing specific data for how much more temperamental Scorpios are relative to Libras, using some arbitrary Venus score. Describing these results is giving this plenty credit, there is no need to give it any more, especially since it is used by bad people with nefarious agenda.

kolinko 4y ago
Of course there is a biological claim. Intelligence is hereditary, so certain populations may have higher average IQs than the others. Also we can see that in nature - every dog owner will tell you that certain races of dogs are of higher average intelligence than the others. We also know that many - if not most - character traits are also genetic. There has been a ton of twin studies and adoption studies proving that. A book "Blank Slate" has multiple examples. Having said that, I agree with keeping the research on race and intelligence/character a taboo. We know where such research leads to, and if there is a part of science better left unexplored, it would be this one.
- quadhome 4y ago
  Between-breed variation is an order of magnitude higher than human genetic variation.
  - jfiwefwo 4y ago
    No it isn't, the human breeds are very different and africans have been separated from other humans for >50k years in very different environments. Even Darwin recognized the differences are massive and some populations seem like different species.