Africans are less intelligent than Westerners

[Minority Observer84]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/15/AR2005121501728_pf.html

 

[#juan]

Read a history book world civilization did not begin in china . I'm not going to even make an argument to the rest of the thread because I don't see the point . This kind of wish full thinking science goes on all around us theories even dumber then this one (The trinity is in fact a symbol of some obscure math relating to particle vibration ) The common thread is people believing something and seeing evidence for their theory everywhere. The issue is the actual quantifying of intelligence . What is it and how to we define it . Key questions needing to be answered are left blank and what's worse is there is no evidence to support such a bigoted position . The sad thing is many people the world over have no problem believing in their own born superiority and don't need any evidence to be convinced of this . I don't hate him , I marvel at how a man can be so intelligent and yet a complete moron.
Also What exactly is a race ? As recently as 2005 a study was conducted and a white gene was found , this gene believed to have orginated from a mutation and we are yet unable to account for why it caught on and spread so sucessfully (In other words what did the first white people gain by being white?) keep in mind the newly found mutation involves a change of just one letter of DNA code out of the 3.1 billion letters in the human genome -- the complete instructions for making a human being. In other words there are more genetic diversions within any single race group then there are between that race group and another . Where do we draw the line between who is what race ?
Race is more of a political and social construct than a biological diving line many of you seem to forget this , like i said there are loads of people quick to buy into their own born greatness.

My argument had nothing to do with skin colour. Skin color has absolutely NOTHING to do with a determination of "race". There are differences in bone structure, the number of cranio-facial nerves, dominant types of muscle fiber, skull and jaw shape, and dentition, all of which enable forensic anthropologists to determine a person's race with no consideration of skin color whatsoever. In fact, The Masi tribe of Ethiopia (an extremely tall people with very fine features) are somatypically classified as caucasian.

A white kin color probably took less than 20,000 years to evolve. The real differences between the races may well extend back half a million years.

 

[gerryh]

The issue ends up very muddied in a search, because intolerance and alcoholism end up crisscrossing and people get the two mixed up constantly. Feel free to pick through google results yourself and read up on the issue.

Everything I've ever read on it places First Nations as having different alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) and aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) levels throughout the population than caucasians do, and asians do, and african americans do. These levels all effect the way your body metabolises alcohol. It's part of the reason many natives are protected from alcoholism by a literal intolerance, but it's also why their bodies react worse, more liver damage etc, if they do become alcoholics.

and that is a far cry from a pre-disposition towards alcoholism, which I KNOW is what Juan was getting at.

 

[gerryh]

I am still waiting for someone to tell me more or less Melanin has influence on the capacity of intellectual and intelligence measurements within a group.

Were we to take two babies of distinct ethnicities (or three or four to complete the study) and raise them from birth in a controlled setting (which is a horror in itself) but provide them with the exact familial upbringing, living in the same community, having the same influences, cultural practices unimpeded and learned by all, they would all develop in the same way as those of their peer group but of the same race. Neither better nor worse -

The same would apply if we studied four children from the same racial ancestry - they would approximate equality in cultural issues only and perhaps meet closely in intellectual capacity and congnitive learning but they would be no different than the four 'experimental' children.

The stereotypical differences arrive at initial learning from parental anecdotal teaching, then peer and school teaching (if they are fortunate to have schooling), then training to survive in their environment by work such as hunting for food, or growing food, or thievery or whatever the setting is, and finally upon reaching adulthood, more tests to measure their equality or differences and/or variety of issues.

It has nothing to do with brain development - the brains are the same - but what is fed into the brain.
By three generations - they are indistinguishable, having eraced all the basic differences from their learning process.

Didn't they use these arguments against women ages ago?

considering our history...I can't believe I'm about to say this...lol


Very well put.

 

[RomSpaceKnight]

This is similiar to the work of Philip Rushton the psycologist at UWO a few years ago. He was publically debated by David Suzuki.

In Rushton's work he also showed that asian are smarter than whites.

This so-called science failed to take in to consideration economic situationand cultural influences. How can anyone expect a socially disadvantaged people to have the same level of education as those more privileged. If a culture puts more emphasis on education as a means to get ahead they are also bound to do better in "intelligence" scores than sedentary couch potatoe Seinfeld watchers. What about the generations of starvation and despair which have racked Africa for decades. Lack of nutrition at an early age can have negative effects on the brain in later years.

I can say the sun will rise in the east tomorrow but this does not grant me tenure at UWO or make me professor emeritus ofastrophysics. I have only the foggiest idea why the sun rises in the east. To state meaningless facts is not science.

 

[#juan]

and that is a far cry from a pre-disposition towards alcoholism, which I KNOW is what Juan was getting at.

I made one reference to the "undeniable lack of alcohol tolerance in First Nations people". I see no reason to change anything.

 

[gerryh]

I made one reference to the "undeniable lack of alcohol tolerance in First Nations people". I see no reason to change anything.

and I see that you are not denying my "interpretation" of your statement either.

 

[#juan]

and I see that you are not denying my "interpretation" of your statement either.

I know nothing about any predisposition to alcoholism. That is a related but different subject.

 

[lone wolf]

I know nothing about any predisposition to alcoholism. That is a related but different subject.

First nations have not the built-in tolerance for alcohol as their culture was not introduced to it until the coming of Europeans. Naturally, it's going to have a more toxic (intoxicating) effect on a people not culturally acclimated to its use. It's a genetic thing - not a racial slur.

My $0.02
Wolf

 

[hermanntrude]

basically in summary:

is intelligence nature or nurture? if it is nature can it be genetic and does this mean that some races are predetermined to be on average more intelligent than others?

not one source can be said to prove the first question, and therefore none of the others can be answered.

 

[karrie]

basically in summary:

is intelligence nature or nurture? if it is nature can it be genetic and does this mean that some races are predetermined to be on average more intelligent than others?

not one source can be said to prove the first question, and therefore none of the others can be answered.

The last text I read on the subject, placed intellect as a genetically defined scale, and discussed the ability of environment to affect where our intellect will be realized upon that defined scale.

A nature AND nurture issue.

 

[lone wolf]

Take your brilliant university graduate - one preferrably who has earned his doctorate in the study of lions - and strap him into a parachute alongside an African bushman who's lived among lions. Drop them into lion country and place your bets. Who is the most intelligent?

Wolf

 

[hermanntrude]

The last text I read on the subject, placed intellect as a genetically defined scale, and discussed the ability of environment to affect where our intellect will be realized upon that defined scale.

A nature AND nurture issue.

can it be definitely proven that there is a genetic element to intelligence? or is it just a supposition?

 

[hermanntrude]

Take your brilliant university graduate - one preferrably who has earned his doctorate in the study of lions - and strap him into a parachute alongside an African bushman who's lived among lions. Drop then into lion country and place your bets. Who is the most intelligent?

Wolf

you're confusing "educated" and "likely to survive" with "intelligent"

 

[karrie]

can it be definitely proven that there is a genetic element to intelligence? or is it just a supposition?

As the OP states, it can't be solidly proven.

 

[lone wolf]

Does it matter?

 

[hermanntrude]

OK so my statement still stands. I think

 

[lone wolf]

OK so my statement still stands. I think

Provided the lion doesn't understand semantics.... :lol:

Wolf

 

[gerryh]

The last text I read on the subject, placed intellect as a genetically defined scale, and discussed the ability of environment to affect where our intellect will be realized upon that defined scale.

A nature AND nurture issue.

again I call BS..you can't site a reliable citation to collaborate this assertion, therefore all it is is fodder for the racist's to grab onto and run with. In other words you are supporting the racist rhetoric by giving unproven crap even a small measure of acceptability.

 

[hermanntrude]

Provided the lion doesn't understand semantics.... :lol:

Wolf

i think that's probably a given. Lions don't often study language as far as i know