Talk:Race and intelligence/Archive 62

message: In the article it says for example:
"Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza has sought to fight racism. On several occasions he publicly debated Arthur Jensen and William Shockley arguing that environmental factors could explain the black-white IQ gap."
Do environment problems cause a gap or does the gap cause environment problems? Or do environment problems not improve because of a gap? --Jagz 14:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see the problem here. Are you making a specific suggestion or just observing the nature of the debate?  Deepening on who you talk to the notion that "a gap causes environmental problems" is considered anything from "remotely possible" to "flat out racist." To put it in stark terms: what you're saying is that we need to seriously consider the idea that  the impacts on health with respect to race the poor quality of public schools in minority neighborhoods etc. are caused by black people having low IQ.   Someone like R. Lynn might take such an idea seriously... but, in most academic circles, it'll get you laughed out of the room. (As happened to Watson) ...Or am I misunderstanding your point? futurebird 14:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The word "environment" here does not specifically refer to pollution or health problems. What it means is: do impoverished conditions lead to a lower IQ, or does a lower IQ tend to lead to poverty? Also, does an innately lower IQ tend to keep people from rising out of the impoverished conditions that they may have been born into? If you are going to comment, try not to be overcome by your emotions. --Jagz 17:58, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's exactly what I'm talking about. Bad schools an inequalities in health care area function of poverty and in some cases racism. These are also forces that make it hard for people to get out of poverty. Maybe I still don't understand what you're getting at here... What are "impoverished conditions" if not conditions with a bad environment with bad schools, pollution and at times racism? futurebird 18:06, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Futurebird, is it "racism" that has caused black Africa to remain underdeveloped since "time immemorial"? Is it only because of poverty that they have failed to achieve anything of lasting value, such as inventing the wheel or written language? If so, then the question is, why are they poor? Why are they poor now, and why were they 2000 years ago, or 100 000 years ago? They've had all the time in the world to rise above poverty (even more so than other races, as they supposedly evolved from migrating Africans), yet they haven't. They surely didn't before the white man came to Africa. The only traces of civilization in black Africa today is where the white man has built schools, hospitals, roads, wells, etc.. Electric Eye 01:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds like you understand what I mean by "environment". Also, I am not necessarily focusing on the United States. --Jagz 19:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm.  Back in the day, explorers used to say that Japanese man will never amount to anything.  "They conform themselves with too little" they said.  Today, they say that the Japanese are rich because they save a lot, "they conform themselves with little..." so they can save!  The problem with these explanations is that they are biased.  The explanations rely on cultural prejudices.  There is really no clear mechanism (to say it nicely) that would imply simultaneous causality between these variables. Brusegadi 22:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I disagree that this topic is humorous. --Jagz 18:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Humorous?? what? How...? futurebird 18:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I changed the title of this discussion because it's not about which came first, its about what causes what. Sorry I couldn't think of a better analogy. See Circular cause and consequence. Also see Nature versus nurture in the IQ debate. --Jagz 19:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I got that aspect of what you were saying. I don't think the nature nurture debate has much relevance, since we're talking about such small differences between groups-- and those groups have different environments. If you wanted to answer the nature nurture question you'd need to somehow create a study absent the influence of racism. I mean even controlling for poverty can't do that.  The real question is how does this relate to changes for the article? futurebird 19:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe this discussion will indicate that there needs to be a change to the article. The quote I included above only addresses one side of the issue. --Jagz 20:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't know yet. I'll take a look at the article after the rewrite. --Jagz 21:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nature/Nurture is considered outmoded scientifically; although, I am sure the history of the debate would make for a decent article on its own.
131.104.235.213 22:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you saying that an IQ gap cannot cause differences in economic prosperity? --Jagz 22:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Jagz, if you mean a gap between two people, yeah, that could happen, but for a whole "race" ? Not so much. Though, how will we ever know as long as there is racism? JJJamal 23:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Aside from the fact that JJJamal is right, it is a commonplace in quantitative analsysis that correlation does not indicate causation.  One would need separate evidence to make a causal argument. Slrubenstein   |  Talk 03:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Correlation often does not mean causation, however if socioeconomic status is strongly correlated to IQ on the individual level it will also be strongly correlated for any group containing the individuals as long as there is not significant overlap.  There have been numerous studies showing that race and intelligence correlate in many different communities around the world.  Numerous studies have also been done that establish a strong correlation between genetics and intelligence (I can look up and specify studies if needed).  These studies include twin studies in which identical twins were raised apart.  If you believe in either evolution or even microevolution to the degree that intelligent design theorists believe, then you would have to acknowledge that genetics play some role in the traits of the offspring and traits that favor individuals in a population will influence the average occurance of the trait in the entire population.  Saying race does not correlate to IQ in many communities would be like saying it does not correlate to skin color in many communities.  Myrik (talk) 16:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Environment causes IQ gap? 

message: Does this take into account recent immigration from Africa? Hundreds of thousands of people have come from sub-Saharan Africa in recent decades, just over the time period that this graph shows the 'gap closing'. The people who came tended to be very well educated, and probably very high average IQs. Asian Americans are listed as having average IQ around 105 but recent African immigrants have even higher education levels. Top universities estimate that most of their black students are actually recent immigrants or descended from recent immigrants, rather than long term native blacks (see Nigerian American ) Peoplesunionpro (talk) 21:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a source to support your theory?futurebird (talk) 23:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Theory? I asked a question, explaining factual reasons why it was worth clarifying. If you're looking for sources on the statements I made about recent immigration, just look on wikipedia. No theorizing needed. Peoplesunionpro (talk) 09:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to add something to the article you can't do your own original research and synthesis of data, you need to quote some scientists writing in a respectable journal who has this theory. If it is your own invention, then you need to get published in a respectable journal first. Personally, I think your theory is bunk. The number of immigrants from Africa is far to low of have an impact. Test score gains occur even in cities with no immigration. So, I guess you'll need to find another way to prove that black people are inferior. I don't understand why this topic makes some people so desperate. The science just isn't there. futurebird (talk) 14:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "blacks have gained 5 or 6 IQ points on non-Hispanic whites between 1972 and 2002"