Average IQ by country?

[Redress]

For the record, if you believe the OP is true...

...you are either racist and/or staggeringly ignorant on this or both.


Not maybe...100% for sure.

And don't bother responding to this post, because if you think I am wasting my time with anyone you would actually vote in the affirmative on this poll...you are as 'lacking' as the poll thinks Africans are.


Have a nice day.

What if you believe some one who said it was not racial factors was engaging in racial stereotypes?

 

[Taylor]

IQ isn't an adequate measure of intelligence, especially when not controlled for external variables (education, nutrition etc)

That's a bit like saying rulers aren't adequate measures for height because they don't account for his tall someone might have been had they eaten the right foods.

 

[Nilly]

That's a bit like saying rulers aren't adequate measures for height because they don't account for his tall someone might have been had they eaten the right foods.

1. Height is objective, intelligence isn't.
2. Someone might be taller had they not been malnourished, just like how someone might have a higher IQ had they not been malnourished. That doesn't mean that you can come to the conclusion that the taller/smarter person has superior genetics. It's just that they ate better...

 

[rcart76]

So what is the point of this thread ???? Are you trying to say blacks are inferior intellectually without being labeled a racist ???

 

[Taylor]

1. Height is objective, intelligence isn't.

Intelligence is a hypothetical construct that can't be observed directly, as height can - but intelligence tests are objective measures of intelligence.

Someone might be taller had they not been malnourished, just like how someone might have a higher IQ had they not been malnourished. That doesn't mean that you can come to the conclusion that the taller/smarter person has superior genetics. It's just that they ate better...

Right. And intelligence tests do not purport to measure genetic potential for intelligence any more than rulers pretend to measure your genetic potential for height - so I still take issue with the earlier claim that IQ tests aren't adequate measures for intelligence.

 

[Bodi]

One kind of goes with the other, does it not?

To a degree but then that is not a real IQ. IQ is an innate ability to problem solve... not an ability to problem solve that you were taught in school.

 

[Nilly]

Intelligence is a hypothetical construct that can't be observed directly, as height can - but intelligence tests are objective measures of intelligence.

An objective measure of something that can't be measured objectively? Almost like using a ruler to answer the question: How long's a piece of string?

Right. And intelligence tests do not purport to measure genetic potential for intelligence any more than rulers pretend to measure your genetic potential for height - so I still take issue with the earlier claim that IQ tests aren't adequate measures for intelligence.

Except plenty of people (e.g. OP) do use these as a measure of genetic potential. Many such people go on to claim genetic superiority, and wish for real world action to take place because of it. If you're not using IQ tests in such a fashion, then good for you.

 

[Bodi]

So what is the point of this thread ???? Are you trying to say blacks are inferior intellectually without being labeled a racist ???

What I see is that it misses the point that school taught problem solving skills do not actually measure IQ of the individual... but the school systems ability to teach problem solving skills.

 

[Redress]

Intelligence is a hypothetical construct that can't be observed directly, as height can - but intelligence tests are objective measures of intelligence.

Close. An IQ test is an objective measure of the ability to take an IQ test. IQ does correlate with intelligence, but it s not perfect.

 

[Taylor]

To a degree but then that is not a real IQ. IQ is an innate ability to problem solve... not an ability to problem solve that you were taught in school.

"IQ" typically refers to many intellectual abilities related to learning, including such things as knowledge and vocabulary in addition to the ability to problem solve. Looking just at the latter, any such "innate ability" is heavily influenced by environment and education.

 

[mbig]

heres another map theres hundreds of them all different results, their about as scientific and useful as measuring IQ by astrological symbols, which like racial science was also considered a legitimate science too at one point

now who wants to see a map of average penis size by country? :2razz:

Wrong again Fidel.
While the OP should have labeled/contexted his map as current National IQs, in addition to that being assumed, You Screwed up even worse than the OP, and UNWITtingly helped confirm Race/IQ correlation.
Google is your/my friend.

Your map is 'indigenous peoples'/Races and is why, ie, North America dropped from 100 to 85/90, and why Australia dropped from 100 to 60. Your map is measuring the indigenous Aboriginal population.

Your map can be found With context/description here:
Image - AverageIQ-Map-World.png - Psychology Wiki - Wikia

Content
"Values from Race Differences in Intelligence by Richard Lynn, based on a similar but non-identical map in the book. Values are average IQ scores for the indigenous peoples of each region. For example, the values for Australia are for Indigenous Australians, Not the immigrants of European ancestry that Now make up the majority of the Australian population."
​

:^)
We're having our own IQ contest right here.
And guess what?
YOU need some 'safe space, but you won't find it here.
Splat #3 for you and DA60. (DA50/40/30/20/10/0)

 

[Risky Thicket]

So what is the point of this thread ???? Are you trying to say blacks are inferior intellectually without being labeled a racist ???

Often the purpose of bait threads is to cause others to respond in such a manner that the responders become sanctioned by board moderators. Someone who posts nothing but racist bait threads hopes to be called a racist or worse. It is the sole intent of an agent provocateur.

 

[Taylor]

Close. An IQ test is an objective measure of the ability to take an IQ test. IQ does correlate with intelligence, but it s not perfect.

Objective does not imply perfect. All measurements have error, it doesn't matter whether you're measuring height or intelligence.

 

[mbig]

Objective does not imply perfect. All measurements have error, it doesn't matter whether you're measuring height or intelligence.

Redress, as always, has a language/logic/usage problem.
IQ tests DO measure IQ, NOT just 'correlate' with it!#^*(*%
Just because no test is perfect doesn't mean, ie, Math Tests don't measure math ability.
A correct usage would be to say, ie, SAT scores (or life outcomes) 'Correlate' with IQ scores.
Just one reason I have the Redress entity on Ignore.

 

[Taylor]

An objective measure of something that can't be measured objectively? Almost like using a ruler to answer the question: How long's a piece of string?

It can be measured objectively. That's the whole purpose of an IQ test.

Except plenty of people (e.g. OP) do use these as a measure of genetic potential. Many such people go on to claim genetic superiority, and wish for real world action to take place because of it. If you're not using IQ tests in such a fashion, then good for you.

We don't have the tools available at the moment to reliably predict a person's raw potential.

 

[Grand Mal]

Often the purpose of bait threads is to cause others to respond in such a manner that the responders become sanctioned by board moderators. Someone who posts nothing but racist bait threads hopes to be called a racist or worse. It is the sole intent of an agent provocateur.

'Agent provocateur'! Damn, I see Inspector Poirot, I see the steam escaping from a train in the station, I hear the conductor, speaking French...
You're right about that dude, I just want to find a less attractive term for him.

 

[Riveroaks]

This chart only tells you were all the average people are -- the ones around 100 -- or otherwise known as the 1.00 quotient median.

It does not tell you where the geniuses are.

Probably Israel and Germany would score highest on that kind of a chart.

Remember ... the Aryan thing and the Jewish thing.

 

[Risky Thicket]

'Agent provocateur'! Damn, I see Inspector Poirot, I see the steam escaping from a train in the station, I hear the conductor, speaking French...
You're right about that dude, I just want to find a less attractive term for him.

There are much less attractive terms that easily come to mind, none of which I am permitted to use here. No problem. Stormfronters have no idea what agent provocateur means. It's as if we are speaking in code. N'est-ce pas?

 

[Infinite Chaos]

It can be measured objectively. That's the whole purpose of an IQ test.


We don't have the tools available at the moment to reliably predict a person's raw potential.

The problem with an incomplete test is when people apply assumptions from those tests onto whole groups of people. The problem is when the testing methodology has been shown to be flawed, the testing methodology has been used by people (Lynn, Murray, Herrnstein etc) paid by white supremacist funds to produce research that supports a viewpoint. The problem comes when those people doing the testing don't use reliably repeatable techniques that an objective separate observer could repeat.
Those tests repeatedly target groups and then make claims about those groups ability and likely standing - ability which is denied by the real world where those people become pilots, artists, musicians, Presidents, leaders, businesspeople, mathematicians, scientists etc etc.

"IQ" is affected by education, environment, nutrition, friends, genetics etc etc and is a constantly changing measure. As Bhodi said a few pages back - it's a measure of education you received; nothing more.

 

[Taylor]

The problem with an incomplete test is when people apply assumptions from those tests onto whole groups of people. The problem is when the testing methodology has been shown to be flawed, the testing methodology has been used by people (Lynn, Murray, Herrnstein etc) paid by white supremacist funds to produce research that supports a viewpoint. The problem comes when those people doing the testing don't use reliably repeatable techniques that an objective separate observer could repeat.
Those tests repeatedly target groups and then make claims about those groups ability and likely standing - ability which is denied by the real world where those people become pilots, artists, musicians, Presidents, leaders, businesspeople, mathematicians, scientists etc etc.

The problem with Hernstein & Murray's book was not the research so much as their interpretation of the results.

"IQ" is affected by education, environment, nutrition, friends, genetics etc etc and is a constantly changing measure. As Bhodi said a few pages back - it's a measure of education you received; nothing more.

It's much more than that. Two people can receive the same education and one may get much more out of it than the other, or will pick up the same material much more quickly, etc. Such a definition also leads to the misperception that intelligence increases throughout life as you "receive more education" - although this is somewhat true for certain aspects of intelligence (e.g. verbal ability) - most people's abstract reasoning and problem solving ability (~raw processing power) begins to steadily decline just after they reach adulthood.

 

[Orly?]

Look at the vast amount of science deniers here at DP.. lol

 

[Infinite Chaos]

The problem with Hernstein & Murray's book was not the research so much as their interpretation of the results.

You going on the record to say Richard Lynn's data (which they relied on for much of their evidence) was accurate and reliably sourced?

~ Such a definition also leads to the misperception that intelligence increases throughout life as you "receive more education" - although this is somewhat true for certain aspects of intelligence (e.g. verbal ability) - most people's abstract reasoning and problem solving ability (~raw processing power) begins to steadily decline just after they reach adulthood.

It's been shown IQ if you use that as a measure increases as you age (to a point obviously) as well as from your food.

Nevertheless, if IQ in the US really shows that white people have suddenly gone from an average of 67 to 100+ then this should be heralded as a new development or stage of evolution in the (white) human species. Strangely, there are no scientists claiming this - not even the race realists.

 

[Ahlevah]

It was suggested that the lower IQ back then (and today in less developed regions) was/is at least partly due to malnutrition and infections during fetal development and early childhood, which have been mostly eliminated in the industrialized countries by now.

So what's the deal with China? Eating bucketloads of rice makes you smart or what? If I'd known that I would have eaten more Rice Krispies instead of the fun cereals like Fruit Loops and Cap'n Crunch.

 

[Bodi]

"IQ" typically refers to many intellectual abilities related to learning, including such things as knowledge and vocabulary in addition to the ability to problem solve. Looking just at the latter, any such "innate ability" is heavily influenced by environment and education.

I don't remember any knowledge questions nor vocab questions... they ask things like a zurt is to a mog as a mog is to a _______ , though.
IQ Tests are visual, spatial, logical, pattern oriented, sequence based, analogy based, etc.

 

[SocialD]

I bet if you compared educational level and education opportunities as a map it would be fairly equivalent.
in places where the average person only gets a rudimentary education you wouldn't expect high IQ scores as IQ tests are often related to academic knowledge.