Re: Slate.com on race and IQ
[ QUOTE ]
Nice, but let's take it a bit further.
Imagine there are two groups with a billion people each. One group has 10,000,000 people with IQs above 130. The other group has 100,000 people with IQs above 130. Does the subject become relevant?
Now go to 150. One group has 1,000,000 people with IQs above 150. The other group has 1000 people with IQs above 150. Relevant?
Go the other way. One group has 500 million people with IQs below 75. The other group has 20 million people with IQs below 75. Relevant?
Nice, but let's take it a bit further.
Imagine there are two groups with a billion people each. One group has 10,000,000 people with IQs above 130. The other group has 100,000 people with IQs above 130. Does the subject become relevant?
Now go to 150. One group has 1,000,000 people with IQs above 150. The other group has 1000 people with IQs above 150. Relevant?
Go the other way. One group has 500 million people with IQs below 75. The other group has 20 million people with IQs below 75. Relevant?
If I was to put these two groups in identical starting conditions at the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago, what do you think their respective societies, technologies, literature & philosophies would look like today?
[/ QUOTE ]
I would expect the high IQ folks to be more technologically advanced then the lower IQ folks, but I could be wrong. Are you suggesting that American Indians, who are genetically the same as Asians, must be genetically inferior IQ wise to the rest of the civilized world because they were easily conquered by Europeans and in the 1500's on forward to modern times didn’t have the literary and technological advances of the Europeans?
|