Northern populations are more intelligent because living conditions are harsher ?

Economics Economics Questions
101

Quote Southern" Well culture and ability are inseprable. The abilities of the people affect the culture. Culture cannot create great athletes, it augment the ability present but it cannot create the ability. Culture cannot create great intellects, it can augment the ability present but it cannot create ability.

I don’t think so. There’s nothing in my own family’s culture(Pakistani) about being on top of physical activity, my dad has a host of health problems because he never takes care of himself physically. But I developed that athleticism myself after hard work and being involved in a culture that did attribute importance to physical ability. I think this line of thinking really undervalues the time and work it takes to grow and create ability. Mike Tyson didn’t become a great fighter till after his training. He lived a rough life growing up which made him more interesting in learning how to fight than the average guy who gets into boxing- but if I were to go by your analysis, then all his hardwork and life experience simply augmented his genetic prowress. Which doesn’t make much sense to me seeing as if he didn’t put any of that hardwork into it, he would’ve been a nobody.

102

Why are you guys childishly playing with numbers? If it is scientific to assign cardinal IQ values to intellect, then it must also be scientific to assign cardinal util values to desires. All I have to do is to define a DQ (desire quotient) test and I can start doing scientifically valid econometrics.

“100 is average for whites. Eskimos are around 90, african blacks 67(US & Euro blacks 80ish), aboriginals 62, middle eastern also 90ish”

I thought the average IQ of all people on Earth is defined to be 100. I find it highly suspect if whites’ average IQ happens to be exactly equal to that, and not some other number.

Also, because the definition of IQ is inherently time-dependent, it is impossible to compare the IQ’s from two different people or even for the same person at two different times. It is not even possible to assign even a single IQ without first performing some number of measurements and some kind of modelling to choose what 100 means. IQ is clearly like economic utils where the actual units involved are undefiniable and the quantity is meaningless.

Also, how do you average two IQ’s. Should one use an arithmetic average? Or a geometric average? Why? When one averages two lengths, one uses the arithmetic average since lengths add naturally. But why should IQ’s add naturally? Is a 100 IQ-person plus another 100 IQ-person equal to a 200 IQ-person? Why?

Even with quantities that have actual units, like dollars, one cannot just compute an arithmetic average. Is the average of a $5 burger and a $10 steak going to be a $7.50 or a $7.07 piece of meat? You might want to check your answer with how official government inflation is computed. It’s clearly a subjective question, and official statistics are computed with the subjective goal of fudging the CPI in mind.

How can one scientifically compare the IQ between two people, or between two groups of people? Which is superior, a group with IQ’s 100, 100, and 100; or 60, 60, and 180? Is it better to have 80 IQ or 120 IQ? Why? Isn’t it just a subjective opinion?

103

Doesn’t follow. IQ tests were designed to somehow measure abstract reasoning ability. It has nothing to do with “cardinal values.”

104

There is nothing absurd or ludicrous about testing for intellegence.

No but it is absurd to claim your measurement is scientific and at the same time to reduce intelligence to a single number.

If one person excels at composing music, while another excels at performing mathematical calculations, who is more intelligent? Which aspect is to be assigned greater weight? It is a purely subjective question.

I can easily measure the WQ (weight quotient) of a dog, with a scientific and reliable device called a scale.How do you measure the IQ of a dog? Surely a dog has some intelligence. If you cannot measure it, then maybe you aren’t measuring intelligence, but rather something else, viz. the ability to solve a certain set of written puzzles.

105

Also, to clear up this whole “average IQ” fog, 100 is set as the overall average IQ. When you look at different population groups, 100 is the average for whites, 105 is average for Asian Americans, 119 is average for Jews, 90-ish is average for Latinos and mulattos (didn’t mean that in a racist way), 85 is average for African Americans.

106

“The scale, properly speaking, does not permit the measure of intelligence, because intellectual qualities are not superposable, and therefore cannot be measured as linear surfaces are measured.”—Binet, 1905

107

Obviously it was gradual and worked hand in hand. As dark skin was selected against on the outskirts of the northern areas settled by humans every next generation was paler and every next generation could move a little bit further north. I reversed nothing. It wasn’t one before the other. It was simultanous. There weren’t any black people walking around Europe.

Black settlement area is wider than the tropics.

108

Obviously it was gradual and worked hand in hand. As dark skin was selected against on the outskirts of the northern areas settled by humans every next generation was paler and every next generation could move a little bit further north. I reversed nothing. It wasn’t one before the other. It was simultanous. There weren’t any black people walking around Europe.

Yes it is gradual. But the people who moved out of africa had black skin. Skin color had nothing to do with humanity being confined to africa. It was climate and technology. Interglacial periods when the glaciers retreated and the temprature warmed allowed us to move north. Once we moved north we began to loose skin pigment. What I am saying here is widely accepted, nothing controversial.

We are physically incapable of living in subtropical, temperate, and arctic environments without our technology.

Black settlement area is wider than the tropics.

I have never claimed that blacks were confined to the tropics and it is irrelevent to my point that you have refused to address directly. That we as human beings are incapable of living in cold climates with out technology. Do you dispute this?

109

I don’t think so. There’s nothing in my own family’s culture(Pakistani) about being on top of physical activity, my dad has a host of health problems because he never takes care of himself physically. But I developed that athleticism myself after hard work and being involved in a culture that did attribute importance to physical ability. I think this line of thinking really undervalues the time and work it takes to grow and create ability. Mike Tyson didn’t become a great fighter till after his training. He lived a rough life growing up which made him more interesting in learning how to fight than the average guy who gets into boxing- but if I were to go by your analysis, then all his hardwork and life experience simply augmented his genetic prowress. Which doesn’t make much sense to me seeing as if he didn’t put any of that hardwork into it, he would’ve been a nobody.

If you train like mike tyson will you become the same type of fighter? Maybe. If you have the physical tools neccessary. To claim that athleticism comes from training is simply wrong. Training can only augment what you have. If you compete in any sport at any level you would know this. Some people are natural born athletes and they train hard. This is where the elite athletes in the world come from. Not just hard work, but talent as well.

110

If one person excels at composing music, while another excels at performing mathematical calculations, who is more intelligent? Which aspect is to be assigned greater weight? It is a purely subjective question.

That is not what is being measured.

111

Because IQ tests are timed and the time is not enough to finish slowly most of what it tests is metabolism. Metabolism = quick thinking. Anything can change metabolism. Quick thinking also depends heavily on concentration.

Regarding chimps, take this memory test and find out first hand. I bet that nobody here can beat the chimp.

112

Quote Southern=“If you train like mike tyson will you become the same type of fighter? Maybe. If you have the physical tools neccessary. To claim that athleticism comes from training is simply wrong. Training can only augment what you have. If you compete in any sport at any level you would know this. Some people are natural born athletes and they train hard. This is where the elite athletes in the world come from. Not just hard work, but talent as well.”

If I had the will and dedication of mike tyson combined with his exact same experience then yes I don’t see why not. You get the physical tools from training. Building muscle and getting REALLY good at any athletic sport required hard WORK and time plain and simple. No one does 2 pushups and becomes swoll. Tyson didn’t have anything- you can watch that documentary he self narrates called “Tyson”. When he first wanted to learn to fight, there was a boxer who was offering a free sparring match to anybody that wanted it, Tyson being experienced in the streets with many fights under his belt at that young age thought he would take it easy but was floored the moment he fought that man and was punched in a way he never was before. He had absolutely nothing over him.(That man then referred him to his first and most important trainer). Without his training, Tyson would’ve been an absolute nobody that you never heard about. He knew boxing and how to intimidate your opponent very very well, he was a genius in that area. It wasn’t his genetics that gave him this- it was his entire life experience.

I never heard of anyone who’s a “natural born athlete” and sits around all day and performs amazing well. The elites in this world come from hard work plain and simple- that is everything. I think throwing people in the “oh he’s just a natural” category completely diminishes how hard they had to work to become the best. Its insulting, honestly.

113

Speed is one thing that is very “talent” oriented. I did a 100m time of 14.1s when I was 9 y/o. My dad could barely pass me in a race. My grandmother on his side was a sprint champ in school. Boxing doesn’t strike me so much as talent heavy.

114

You ever heard of http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Bounce/Matthew-Syed/e/9780061723759/ ? What do you think of it if you have? Here’s an article you could read that sums up what he says in there http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/features/Natural-talent-or-hard-work.6279092.jp

115

I never heard of anyone who’s a “natural born athlete” and sits around all day and performs amazing well. The elites in this world come from hard work plain and simple- that is everything. I think throwing people in the “oh he’s just a natural” category completely diminishes how hard they had to work to become the best. Its insulting, honestly.

Reread my post. Elites require both hard work and talent. Anyone who claims that the only thing needed to become an elite athlete is hard work knows nothing of athletics. Why we are even having to debate this… I have no idea.

And yes boxing does take a great deal of talent to become good at. The hand quickness and reflexes of top notch boxers are very much a physical talent you have to be born with. No amount of hard work can compensate.

116

Quote Southern:“And yes boxing does take a great deal of talent to become good at. The hand quickness and reflexes of top notch boxers are very much a physical talent you have to be born with. No amount of hard work can compensate.”

Sorry I think that’s nonsense. You can definitely train hand quickness and reflexes. Hard work can definitely compensate, what’s the point of boxing training at all if hard work couldn’t compensate. That’s the entire point. Even if this mystical talent was a factor I’d say it pales in comparison to the thousands of hours of practicing that is undertaken to get good at any athletic endeavor.

117

You ever heard of http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Bounce/Matthew-Syed/e/9780061723759/ ? What do you think of it if you have? Here’s an article you could read that sums up what he says in there http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/features/Natural-talent-or-hard-work.6279092.jp

Very interesting. I guess I just didnt work hard enought to grow another 4 inches, gain 60lbs, and run half second faster so that I could be an NFL linebacker. Do you have to work hard… yes. Can hard work overcome physical difficiencies? No. If you are a 98lb weakling you will never be a noseguard for the NFL. There are physical requirements for every athletic pursuit. If you dont have the genes for them you will never achieve them.

118

Sorry I think that’s nonsense. You can definitely train hand quickness and reflexes. Hard work can definitely compensate, what’s the point of boxing training at all if hard work couldn’t compensate. That’s the entire point. Even if this mystical talent was a factor I’d say it pales in comparison to the thousands of hours of practicing that is undertaken to get good at any athletic endeavor.

Its not nonsense. training can improve your quickness and reflexes, but some will improve more and faster than others. If you deny this then you are the one full of nonsense.

There is nothing mystical about this. I can tell that you have never competed in athletics.

119

Quote Southern:“Very interesting. I guess I just didnt work hard enought to grow another 4 inches, gain 60lbs, and run half second faster so that I could be an NFL linebacker. Do you have to work hard… yes. Can hard work overcome physical difficiencies? No. If you are a 98lb weakling you will never be a noseguard for the NFL. There are physical requirements for every athletic pursuit. If you dont have the genes for them you will never achieve them.”

Well duh if you’re a 98 pound weakling you can’t be a noseguard for the NFL. But being skinny isn’t a disease or genetic disorder, a skinny person isn’t stuck at that weight forever they CAN gain lots of muscle mass if they wanted to, it requires specific training and a complete change in diet, which is hard work. Hard work can’t overcome height but that’s about it.(and even then someone like Muggsy Bogues exists)

120

Quote Southern:"Its not nonsense. training can improve your quickness and reflexes, but some will improve more and faster than others. If you deny this then you are the one full of nonsense.

There is nothing mystical about this. I can tell that you have never competed in athletics."

Ok, I know a lot of black kids who are absolutely terrible at physical sports. How can they possibly exist? Are they just anomalies?

Sure some will improve faster than others, I take that to mostly come from their activities and experience before they began training. Do some people gain muscle faster than others? Yes. Do some people learn a bit quicker than others, yes. But is any of it something that the proper training and mindset can’t fix? no.