From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Subject: Re: RACE vs. INTELLIGENCE (theory)
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 15:02:51 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.091950.6118@tfs.com> ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>"Rodney Adams" <RADAMS@BNR.CA> writes:
>>Yes, I do believe that certain races are, on average, less intelligent than
>>others, but as you say, I cannot yet KNOW the truth.

>Observations such as these - how much social-science is involved in them?
>If we can't know for sure in advance, we will have to do testing - over the
>objections of people who call even the hypothesis racist. If it's true, it's
>true, so let's just find out.

I have always believed that the theory of several intelligences comes into
play here. Each individual strain of intelligence can develop independent of
the others, and develops from various sources:

a) finite capacity (what is your absolute ceiling of potential in this field?
b) environmental impact (what have you been exposed to, and has it had
   a beneficial, or an adverse affect on your sociological development
c) education (Regardless of your potential, how much exposure have you had
   to this field or realm of intelligence?)

Now, when determining the average intelligences of specific "races" or
strains of individuals, we must consider these three elements before we come
to any rash conclusions. The difficuly in doing this now, rather than 200
years ago, is that there is no such thing as specific races any more. Many
socio-economic influences have come into play that would affect one's
assessment of any race/color/ethnicity.

If we can discuss option a) first:
   The finite capacity of any specific race was confronted during a recent
phsyiological and psychological study that received widespread acceptance
and media. This theory presented a "ranking order" so to speak between the
three major strains of human races: indo-asian, caucasian, and "african"
individuals. Now, realize that none of these labels refers purely to their
regions as such, but generalizes various groups into their closest
counterpart. (at this point I must emphasize that I neither condone or
ignore this theory, yet present the underlying theme to you).
   The argument emphasized that each group broke off of the inward
evolutionary thrust of homo sapien at different times in our history, and
consequently developed in different ways. If I remember correctly, the
african decent supposedly broke off 200 millenia ago, with the caucasian
faction branching off 150 millenia ago. As well, the indo-asian group "broke
off" so to speak 100 millenia ago. Now, defining "breaking off" in itself is
an interesting and lengthy definition, but it could be defined as the
progression towards homo sapien sapien status, and civilized habituation.
   Now, the interesting trend we have here is tha there is a sorted order
now, from first to last within humanity
1) african decent
2) caucasian
3) indo-asian
   The argument introduces the notioin that athleticism and physical
potential will be an african asset, and a weakness of the indo-asians. As
well, intelligence will be an asset of the indo-asian, and a weakness of the
africans. (damn, I wish I could think of a better regional description than
"african". too early in the morning I guess. My apologies ensue for being
too regional bounded)
   There is also the argument presented that this coul be a biased
propoganda-motivated study, because notice: the caucasians have no
weakness... both times they come in second place. never last - 2nd position
is the only way not to come last within this theory.
   Also realize that there is always a distribution curve. This theory does
not suggest that all indo-asians have IQ's of 150, or any other preposterous
suggestion. It does suggest that the mean of each race's intelligence will
be ranked as such. The justifications of this concern intricacies which I
neither care to unweave or describe. It's in lots of advanced psychology
books if you're interested. It may be a worthless theory, but it certainly
provokes thought...

Now, if I can confront option b):

   In fact, I can tie b and c together for most general instances... You
see, regardless of the carryin capacity of a glass, if there is no water
present, then the glass will remain empty and devoid of contents. The
environment within which one is nurtured is arguably the most important
factor in nourishing the mental capacity of an individual. Literally, we see
how brain damage occurs with malnourishment, or insufficient diets. However,
if one is starved of intellectual trivia and supplement, then arguably they
will never be given the opportunity to see their potential either. Some
would say that this is the major hitch of other races, and the boon of the
caucasian or indo-asian society. It's a poverty thing. But, it's more than
that. The indo-asian society has an element of discipline that none of us
understand, and would be impossible to implement or mimic within our
capitolistic and "american" society (realize I'm from canada).
   The discipline within indo-asian societies on the whole, is not only
enviable, but absolutely mind-boggling. Somehow, they have been able to
forego the "me" generation so wide spread within North American culture, and
consequently have not staved off their financial, economic, and intellectual
growth as I fear we are now doing. 
   Some argue that the largest per capita of poverty in North America exists
within the non-white populations of America. I do not believe that this has
much to do with the aforementioned theory a) concerning intelligence
potential. Clearly this is a problem tied to education, motivation, and
financial implications. These individuals have never been presented with
reasons to stretch their minds. they have never been given sufficient
motivation to push themselves to solve, analyze, or inspect. Consequently,
they do not pursue such goals, and inadvertently, starve their mental
intellect. I have met many fascinating and brilliant non-white individuals,
easily surpassing my potential, and many of my peers. However, their success
is a consequent product of their environment. They have seen what is out
there to achieve, and as a result, hav chosen to pursue it from a young age. 
   Another argument against theory a) is that many "non-white" individuals
have been placed in affluent and "caucasian" homes. Once being placed in a
mentally provoking environment, they have excelled well within the margins
of the caucasian distribution, and often surpassed the mean easily.

The theories and notions are countless, but realizing the small bandwidth of
this group, and the lack of response my mundane and shallow posts receive, I
don't think this article merits anymore time, save a conclusion.
   Personally, I believe that the hugest rift between any group of
individuals within a society has now become economic and scholastical. There
is not such a concept of individual races within the human race anymore, as
a result of inter-racial marriage, the pollution of other societies by the
American-capitalistic-wester-levis-generation, and through natural
compromise. The finite limit humans meet is not physical or psycholigical,
but financial and social. Proper education is a powerful tool in developing
our young students minds, but encouragement is equally valuable if no
necessary. Perhaps 500 years ago, theory a) would have merited more
discussion, but now, the socio-economic influences easily outweigh the
physical limits from one "color" to another. 
   I have always had my suspicions that the only answer lies through
assimilation. Towards which strain of lifestyle, I do not know. many would
suspect that Western civilization is the ultimate constant that civilization
will meet. I certainly hope not. Being a reasonally morally equipped
individual, I often find some of the values and concepts that I encounter
day to day within this culture of ours to be degrading, disappointing, and
certainly anti-evolutionary. I do not believe that cultures can truly
coexist as long as there are ritualistic and linguistic differences. Until
we can find more common ground, there will be no significant mediation
between different societies. However, knowing how weak human nature
potentially is, I realize that once we find mediation between one culture
and another, we will inevitably fight against ourselves. 

Steve Franklin
-- 
aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa