Why does Race & IQ differences make people angry, but Gender differences does not?

submitted by radicalcentristNational Centrism from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (37 children)

I think that the fact that it's wrong is why people get annoyed. Truth is a powerful defense.

Blacks are dumber than whites

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (36 children)

There's insufficient evidence to claim that. If you correct for confounders, the difference disappears into the margin of error.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

No

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

You appear to be mistaken about that:

Combining our estimates with results in prior literature, we show that a simple model with assortative mating fits our data well, implying that differences in children's environments between racial groups can fully explain gaps in intelligence.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

Without looking at your study and only the title of that link, whats the chance that your study isn't looking at adult iq? lol

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

That's generally what IQ is. Historically it was defined as mental age over chronological age.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but comparing Childhood IQ scores with Adults is typically flawed, because our brains still continue to develop until we're at least 25 years old.

HOWEVER, it's scientifically known that Black people reach their peak faster compared to other races. This should theoretically explain why the IQ gap actually gets BIGGER over time, because Whites & Asians completely surpass them at a given age.

We also have the transracial adoption studies as direct proof of this. Black kids at age 7 did ok, but once they hit adulthood, their IQ's return back to their racial average (83). Meanwhile, the White children, in every adopted scenario, still scored 100 points or 1 standard deviation higher than the Black kids in life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study#Results

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

HOWEVER, it's scientifically known that Black people reach their peak faster compared to other races.

I hadn't heard that. Do you have a source?

This should theoretically explain why the IQ gap actually gets BIGGER over time

I believe that's common for any IQ gap. Kids that are behind fall further behind as their education progresses, regardless of their race.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I hadn't heard that. Do you have a source?

Black people age faster

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0277953614004511

Black people are born quicker

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15075154/

Black children reach puberty faster than other races

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/puberty-starts-earlier-in-many-american-boys-201210225437

It actually all fits in with Rushton's theory of R/K selection in humans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race,_Evolution,_and_Behavior#Differential_K_theory

Species that are considered very intelligent, have the smallest amount offspring while also spending the most time raising them. Species that are considered less intelligent have the largest amounts offspring while spending very little time with them.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Do you have a source for the earlier peak in terms of IQ?

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

You're comparing two different groups with two different IQ/age curves. You don't even know the basics of this research and its really a waste of time when I can debunk your claims without even looking at your studies, just from the titles

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

You're comparing two different groups with two different IQ/age curves.

Google has these 125 papers citing that source. Can you point me to one of the ones that clarifies your objections?

Or is this something that you've worked out, but all the people who know about this have missed?

You don't even know the basics of this research and its really a waste of time when I can debunk your claims without even looking at your studies, just from the titles

Oh the irony.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I'm not going to do your work for you. It is pretty common practice for the dishonest to not use adult IQ but rather teenage or 7-year old IQ because it allows them to paint the picture they want to paint, knowing that using adult iq would give a different result that they don't want.

The irony here is your lack of knowledge and your arrogance. We have all been where you are, you are not unique.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I'm not going to do your work for you.

Okay, let me be clear then: You're wrong. The reason that there are no scholarly refutations of that paper in line with your argument is because your argument is not valid.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

We literally have the continent of Africa as proof they're dumb.

In fact, name one thing about Africa that makes them "smart"?

Do we drive African Cars? Do we use African Computers? Do we read African books like how we read Shakespeare in school?

Africa is completely irrelevant in everything.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

We literally have the continent of Africa as proof they're dumb.

How does the existence of a geographical region elucidate the confounding factors in human intelligence testing differences as they are correlated to racial background?

In fact, name one thing about Africa that makes them "smart"?

The were the seat of the hegemonic civilisation for thousands of years.

Do we drive African Cars? Do we use African Computers? Do we read African books like how we read Shakespeare in school?

We use the geometry derived there.

Shakespeare is easier to read for kids that know English. But people do study ancient Egyptian literature. https://www.worldhistory.org/Egyptian_Literature/

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

How does the existence of a geographical region elucidate the confounding factors in human intelligence testing differences as they are correlated to racial background?

Because if they were smart, they would have done what every other race with high IQ achieved, and left behind traces of evidence that display ingenuity.

It could have been the Coliseums from ancient times, or the Sistine Chapel from the Middle Ages. But when people tour Africa, all they find are... mud huts and.... more rocks....

The were the seat of the hegemonic civilisation for thousands of years.

If they were "hegemonic" why did they never actually explore the world? Like build a large ship and come back with proof that North America exists before Columbus did?

We use the geometry derived there.

Do you know who Pythagoras was? That's not an African name, that guy was Ancient Greek. I could say the same about many other mainstream mathematicians. Sir Isaac Newton, Leonhard Euler, Carl Friedrich Gauss, Johannes Kepler. Far too many Europeans to name, barely any African ones of any significant importance to mention.

Shakespeare is easier to read for kids that know English. But people do study ancient Egyptian literature.

Too bad Ancient Egypt is about as Black as a White American claiming to be Native Indian.

Blacks only ruled Egypt for 90 years, in its last dynasty. They did not pave the groundwork that existed before them.

Also, Shakespeare is known all around the world. His plays have been translated into 100 different languages.

https://www.britishcouncil.org/voices-magazine/fun-international-facts-about-shakespeare

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Because if they were smart, they would have done what every other race with high IQ achieved, and left behind traces of evidence that display ingenuity.

The great pyramid? The valley of the Kings? The Sphinx?

Do you know who Pythagoras was? That's not an African name, that guy was Ancient Greek.

Do you know who Euclid was? That's an Ancient Greek name too, but that guy was from Alexandra, in modern Egypt.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

The Ancient Egyptians are dead dude. Sorry to break it to you, but it was not a Black civilization. Which is what the intelligence discussion is focusing on.

Even in their own depictions, the Egyptians saw themselves as different. For example, here's Ramses II literally leading his caramel colored army against the clearly black skinned Nubians.

https://i.imgur.com/W6WPN7r.jpg

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

The Ancient Egyptians are dead dude.

So is Pythagoras.

Sorry to break it to you, but it was not a Black civilization.

It wasn't white. And it was African.

Ramses II literally leading his caramel colored army against the clearly black skinned Nubians.

They did tend to depict themselves as between black and white. And they didn't consider colour to differentiate races. But we have their mummies in some cases. Some of there were black, but certainly not all.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

So is Pythagoras.

Europeans still exist.

It wasn't white.

True. They were probably Caucasoid, like the other tribes that lived around the Levant.

They did tend to depict themselves as between black and white. And they didn't consider colour to differentiate races.

Which Pharaoh was ever depicted with black skin? It's actually amazing in Egyptian art, they still show the differences in racial skull shapes.

Like this depiction of Ramses II punishing a clearly Black prisoner.

https://i.imgur.com/PqZPiLN.jpg

Even thousands of years ago, they understood simple biology and that races differed in more than just skin.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Europeans still exist.

The descendants of Ancient Egyptians still exist.

True. They were probably Caucasoid, like the other tribes that lived around the Levant.

"Caucasoid" is an obsolete term. But the population of Ancient Egypt included individuals who would have been considered white today, and individuals who would have been considered black today.

Which Pharaoh was ever depicted with black skin?

The depiction by Egyptians is difficult to interpret as realistic, as the skin colours were based on sex. With females being white and males being brown.

But there were mummies of people that would have been considered black if they were in America today.

Even thousands of years ago, they understood simple biology and that races differed in more than just skin.

Ancient Egyptians identified as Egyptians. But skin colour wasn't part of that. It's important in modern USA because it comes with the class divide due to the vast majority of black people coming from a slave background. Ancient Egypt didn't have that.