[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 33 KB, 329x499, 51iCoWIekpL._SX327_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13555277 No.13555277[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Now that the dust has settled... Is this book factually true or is it racist garbage?

>> No.13555421

>>13555277
Neither. It has some flaws but leftist brainlets blow them out of proportion because they can't physically cope with the concept of someone (anyone) saying anything they don't like. Ever. At all.

>> No.13555464

>>13555277
Facts are racist, so both

>> No.13555712

For it to be racist you'd have to prove that they worked backward from a racist premise. There is very little clarity on the issues described in this book mainly because many academics and pundits believe that social determinism/constructionism should be used as a "neutral" null hypothesis when in fact it is an extreme position

>> No.13556843

>>13555464
How are facts racist?

>> No.13556853

>>13555277
If his science is good, why would it be so controversial? You would think scientists would be okay with adopting some form of race realism, and instead working to overcome the obstacles low IQ might create. This leads me to believe his science must be flawed in some way, but of course very few people actually understand what goes into discovering information like this

>> No.13556886

>>13556853
Same as atheism or heliocentrism it's a fundamental threat to the dominant ideology.

>> No.13556911

>>13556853
>>13556886
Pretty much everyone who studies this topic comes to the hereditarian conclusion. It's not going to be taboo for long, we're already getting pretty far and genetic studies will settle the issue in less than 10 years.

>> No.13556919

>>13556911
The success of IQ research against the mainstream attempts to crush it is evidence of its validity.

>> No.13556963

>>13555277
Monitoring this thread just to see if it gets deleted again. Any bets?

>> No.13557040

>>13556853
ahahahah he thinks science is apolitical, that scientists are objective agents of truth

>> No.13557068

>>13557040
>science is only good for my side

>> No.13557082

Why are mods/jannies are deleting engaging threads and leaving the most boring ones.

If this continues couple more times I'll unironically find a way to communicate with admins so they turn their attention to here.
Because the admins/owners want is engagement and traffic, and whoever deletes these threads operates against the direct interests of the owners of the site.

As a leftist I cannot stand other leftists who act like they're in harry potter and mentioning "challenging" questions is like saying "Voldemord", what a garbage puritan shit-brain childish mental gymnastics bullshit.

>> No.13557103

>>13557082
This. I'm also leftist and i wholly agree with race and IQ. It's quite simply a fact we need to adress because as society becomes increasingly technological we're going to reach a phase not even your 100 IQ reasonably intelligent guy will have any space on the job market. We need to find ways to make high IQ people breed more or engineer genes as fast as possible. Honestly, i'm certain that in 300 years or so of careful ethical eugenics we can turn humanity's IQ to 110-115.

>> No.13557169

>>13557103
I think many leftists who deny genetics and intelligence link equivalent of theists who behave ethically ONLY because of fear of divine punishment.

In the sense those leftists are leftist only because they think everyone is the same and the moment they realize that's not the case they'll turn reactionary, I don't need these type of leftists in my team, they can fuck off.

We can acknowledge that people have different skills and still help everyone.

>> No.13557377

>>13555464
Yup. Nature is Racist.

>> No.13557378
File: 909 KB, 1500x1800, 1555334298462.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13557378

>>13557103
>300 years or so of careful ethical eugenics we can turn humanity's IQ to 110-115.
>only 115 in 300 years
that's a dark future friend

>> No.13557401

>>13557377
Lefties don’t believe in evolution.

>> No.13557420

>>13555277
I.Q. is a meme. There's no way you can possibly measure the intelligence of an individual and not only that, a high I.Q. doesn't guarantee said person will accomplish or contribute more than someone of a relatively low I.Q.

>> No.13557488

IQ is just a proxy for something else.

You just have to answer these simple questions:

1.Do different individuals have different levels of cognitive skills assuming similar education?

2.Is it significant enough? As in person A cannot do a job person B can? If a average person cannot create breakthroughs in mathematics then you automatically agree.

3.Do different populations have different levels of cognitive skills assuming similar education?

4.Would different populations have similar averages for cognitive skills?
Like how would you compare 1000 average somalians to 1000 average japenese people, assuming they get exactly the same education/life, would they be able to perform the same intellectual tasks with the same effectiveness and speed?

>>13557420

>> No.13557499

>>13557420
High iq does correlate with financial success

>> No.13557506

>>13556853
People call Jordan Peterson a nazi. Anyone who listened to him at all knows it isn't true. People don't care about facts.

>> No.13557845

>>13556919
yeah NYT of all places published an apologetic piece about hereditarianism being at least somewhat true. the professor that wrote it was trying to preemptively change their narrative about race from "race doesn't exist" to "race exists but we shouldn't discriminate anyways"
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/opinion/sunday/genetics-race.html

>> No.13557897

>>13557488
Their arguments are all unfalsifiable sophistry dude, no point in trying to reason with people that think you can't measure intelligence or who think that group averages are meaningless because there isn't total uniformity within groups. They just don't want the theoretical heart of egalitarianism to be torn away from them and they will stop at nothing to hold on to it, in fact I've seen some blue checkmarks on twitter saying they'd be willing to falsify studies to protect it lmao

>> No.13557996

>>13557499
sounds like some post hoc bullshit testing

>> No.13558023

>>13557996
You think iq goes up as your money goes up?

>> No.13558037

IQ testing attracts a very specific type of audience from the public. I would think that this audience consists of white supremacists because midwit whites feel accomplished and intelligent by identifying with this in-group, despite their lack of contribution. Unless you're a psychometrician, I see no reason for you to care so much about IQ. It's a an out-dated framework used for other, more practical types of tests (i.e. LSAT, SAT, ASVAB, etc.).

>> No.13558104
File: 29 KB, 276x315, 0d16be3c65e15fce5ff44dfdb0af5fffe8a0805998b0125c90fa309f6b649ac1.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13558104

>>13558037
https://theunsilencedscience.blogspot.com/2013/10/black-suits-gowns-skin-sat-scores-by.html?m=1

SATs tell us the same thing. Read the sources in this article.

>> No.13558121

>>13558104
I don't think you understood that post very well...try rereading it.

>> No.13558211

>>13558037
whites should care about this because the assumption that everyone is equal is what allows people to draw a line between inequality and injustice in white societies. IQ differences are a possible explanation for these inequalities, so naturally we should explore it so we can defend ourselves from unjust levelling measures by the state. your point is a dumb strawman and to your last point: let's use those instead of IQ tests and see what we get then ;)

>> No.13559338

>>13558023
it does

>> No.13559372

>>13558037
the LSAT and SAT correlate with IQ lmao. Though increasingly less as they add bullshit to them

>> No.13559377

>>13555421
lol pseud

>> No.13559431

>>13557103
And create freak beasts due to all of the externalities that are impossible to account for.

>> No.13559532

>>13559431
We already have freak beasts now.

Eugenics and some kind of population control is probably the only ethical solution if we want to preserve what's left of liberal democracies.
The alternative is a mass of dumb people who are easily manipulated by the people in power.

>> No.13559543

>>13558037
Don't play stupid. It's obvious why people care about IQ. You clearly care enough to come up with some bullshit about a measure not being valuable despite correlating with everything from socio-economic status to life satisfaction. But blahblah LSAT, ASVAB. Are these tests better at finding g than other functional IQ tests?

Setting aside this stereotype about a midwit skinhead, who you clearly have some sort of *racist* anger towards, most right-wingers obviously care about the IQ shit because it vindicates them of the charge that *they* caused blacks to suffer as they currently do. That if only they gave up their diners, their schools, their cities, their countries, then finally they would be purified and their debts repayed. The IQ shit is a proxy war that has implications as far-reaching as everything that g correlates with.

>> No.13559587

>>13559532
It's way too late for eugenics. Gene tech is around the corner.

>> No.13559589

>>13558104
Africans outperform whites academically

>> No.13559592
File: 29 KB, 640x483, educational-achievement-by-ethnicity.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13559592

>>13559589
Forgot pic

>> No.13559595

how will cumskins ever recover?

>> No.13559615

>>13559592
probably the h1b types outweigh the refugee types
it's the same with income in the US

>> No.13559618

>>13559592
>>13559589
Why do you assume that "Africans living in the UK" us representative of "Africans living in the US" or Africans in general?

Also I think that is an extremely dumb measure of "academic performance", which tells you very little about the peak performers or even averages.
This just seems kinda meaninglessas you can not really derive anything from it, except that blacks in the okay are doing all right in school, which leads to the more interesting question.
Why aren't they doing all right in the US, does the US have racism and Britain doesn't, or what?

>> No.13559620

>>13559589
wow Nigerians selected from the absolute upper tier of their hundreds of millions large country 'succeed' in american universities due to affirmative action while still not contributing anything ever to the hard sciences that require indisputable intelligence.

That definitely means that their home countries, and well every single black population on earth, name a single one if you're feeling plucky, can even behave like fucking indians, let alone white or east asian people in terms of productivity or crime rates, or whatever metric you could choose.

What an amazing argument you've offered, definitely the killshot, and 4chan racism is forever btfod.

>> No.13559790

>>13559615
>>13559618
>>13559620
>evidence that suggest whites are smarter than blacks
Undisputable science, the matter is settled
>evidence to the contrary
Muh compile, socio economic factors
Absolute cope. It's the wrong type of Africans taking the tests, while other, hypothetical Africans, who don't take the tests, are certainly stupid

>> No.13559796

>>13559790
Black americans are a living experiment showing that africans in aggregate can't climb to the level of europeans. Some tainted data doesn't beat a hundred years of good evidence.

>> No.13559798

>>13555277
good

>> No.13559801

>>13559796
British African people are evidence to the contrary. The data cited is a government study across millions of children, and is much more robust than some iq tests
Is it possible there is more at play? Perhaps a less racist country changes things? Who can say

>> No.13559805

>>13559801
The data is tainted by the selective mechanisms in immigration. There is no evidence whatsoever that racism decreases any type of intellectual performance.

>> No.13559829

>>13559805
And there are no selective mechanisms at play in America? Come now.
I think you are clutching at straws to dismiss evidence that contradicts your worldview.
Looking at the UK data again, why do Black Caribbeans perform lower? Cultural factors or are they a more representative sample despite coming from small islands will very low populations. Why do Bangladeshis outperform Pakistanis?
Please don't tell me that all Bangladeshis are middle class immigrants or something.
It's clearly more complex than genetics=test scores

>> No.13559851

>>13559829
The selective mechanism for black americans was who they pointed a gun at and shoved on a boat. Caribbeans do worse because they were not subject to selective immigration. There's a whole history to that. Bangladeshis outperform pakistanis because they have a less tangled history of inbreeding. What explanation do you have for these different test scores? Why are you ignoring all evidence outside the worst place in the world in terms of confounding factors?

>> No.13559865
File: 214 KB, 1200x1200, uncle ted.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13559865

>>13555277
>>13555421
>>13557420
Modern leftish philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftish philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e., failed, inferior). The leftist’s feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual’s ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is “inferior” it is not his fault, but society’s, because he has not been brought up properly.

>> No.13559882

>>13559865
bro... seriously... how the FUCK is technocapital gonna collapse bro???

>> No.13559905

>>13559851
So when Somalians move to UK, that's selective immigration, but its not when Jamaicans do it? And the only reason for different test scores between Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and Indians (all part of the same country until 1949) is the rate of cousin marriage? When Indians have more cousin marriage yet perform better than Bangladeshis
So cultural reasons on the subcontinent, but not cultural reasons when it comes to black people.
I'll say again, I think you are trying to explain away stuff that contradicts your worldview.
I'm terms of confounding factors, surely the structural racism in America is the biggest confounding factor there could be

>> No.13559944

>>13559905
The reason there are so many jamaicans in the UK is because as a recently held colony they had free immigration. If you disaggregated african ethnicities you would start to see differences in which areas were sources of h1b type immigrants and which were sources of refugees. Somalia would perform poorly like in the danish data, Nigeria would perform way above the native UK level. Pakistan has a higher rate of cousin marriage than India or Bangladesh in addition to the spectrum of genetic difference between the three countries and within India. I never said cousin marriage was the only reason, I gave it as a strong factor. Racism does not affect test scores. You have no evidence that it does.

>> No.13559951

>>13555277
No single book has done more to ruin the credibility of the left.

>> No.13559953

>>13559851
You're arguing with a nut. He will never accept the reality in front him no matter how good your arguments are.

>> No.13559956

>>13559951
And the funniest part of it is that they did it to themselves.

>> No.13559979
File: 19 KB, 579x367, Chart-2-Obesity-rates-and-BMI.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13559979

The fervor of contemporary racists (race realists) is legit, in the sense that their knowledge is indeed being suppressed--not by some particular group, but by the powers of free market capitalism plus the social state, which favor individualist consumers over organized collectives.

But racism in the political sense is weak nowadays, because it relies too much on nationalism, which is kind of an obsolete strategy.

If the ultimate goal is to create some kind of "master race" then you need to admit that we're more thoroughly fucked. There is no one race or nation right now which you could say is actually and unironically 'good'. So what's the point of saying "whites are smarter than blacks" or whatever the fuck? Other than trolling people online, I guess.
Pic related, for example. This is almost just as bad as (in some ways worse than) having a bunch of "lower races" among you. Both are symptoms of the same fundamental weakness. And don't get me started on the cultural/spiritual issues, the fact that the US president is pretty much a clown and so on.

If you want to create a master race (really just a 'good society') you need to take a holistic approach, with a spiritual component that pushes people towards every greater goals. You don't need to be explicit in your message, but you need to have a message that resonates with people on an emotional level. All that "race realist" arguing will just become so obvious then that it will be irrelevant.

>> No.13559995
File: 74 KB, 900x662, jones-iq-gdp-per-capita.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13559995

>>13559979
I don't quite know what you are trying to say, but IQ does correlate with a nation GDP per capita. A decrease in your nations average IQ is not something to be taken lightly.

>> No.13560034
File: 108 KB, 798x1197, cover.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13560034

>>13559979
cont.

Obviously, nationalism isn't quite dead and will never be completely dead, but it will almost certainly keep losing power.

So the better strategy is to just be unironically supremacist. Not in the sense of antagonizing this or that group (I know some of you would want it, but resist the temptation), but in the sense of elevating the whole humanity to a higher standard (starting with your local community, I suppose). You will inevitably be racist in the process (and "ableist", "lookist", "IQist"...), but at least you're being honest and have a clear long term plan.


>>13559995
Sure, I agree, I guess. But this is all pretty boring to me at this point.
I wasn't very clear, but effectively I'm more future oriented. I think we can still play this game of sovereign nation states with their rational (racist) immigration policies and so on, but I don't know if this is viable long term.
People are migrating all the time to get better standards of living. Not just 3rd worlders, but even smart 1st-ish worlders from white countries. We haven't even seen the final form yet, once every single person speaks English we'll see even more globalization effects.

>A decrease in your nations average IQ is not something to be taken lightly.
Even "white people" alone are becoming dumber, without taking immigration into account.
https://www.newsweek.com/iq-scores-are-declining-and-researchers-point-school-media-973040
This is basically my point. We're fucked unless we develop different attitudes.
Pic related. I don't know if Dutton is right, but he makes a lot of sense. We've been on a dysgenic path for a long time now. We've all benefited from it in some way (many of us would be dead without modern medicine by now), but do we really want to go on this way?

>> No.13560090
File: 957 KB, 1000x1744, IMG_9807.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13560090

>>13559979
The final objective.
Cuck.

>> No.13560094

>>13559995
Italy's mean is 102 In all well done studies. On par with germany, Austria etc.
Amerimut fantasies as usual fail to concretize.

>> No.13560369

>>13555277
I think there’s a lot of social science poseuring in Murray’s work that would not be accepted in a real, technical discipline. What makes it sad is that it obscures and makes it easier for his enemies to dismiss his real, and worthy point that meritocracy is tearing the rich world apart and creating massive dysfunction at all levels that can only end badly for everyone.

>> No.13560393

>>13560369
>I think there’s a lot of social science poseuring in Murray’s work that would not be accepted in a real, technical discipline.
That's true for pretty much all social science. Controversial topics just get scrutinized more thoroughly.

>> No.13560433

>>13560393
I agree. In Murray’s case it’s completely unnecessary for him to resort to it, his point stands in its own without its cod-scientific, veneer. The race-IQ stuff especially is a complete own goal. For this reason, I don’t have much sympathy for him. It makes it much harder for people like me who would like to draw attention to the problems he raises in his book from a non-liberal perspective.

>> No.13560461

>>13559543
>t. seething midwit skinhead

>> No.13560530
File: 9 KB, 184x184, eef5abb3fde153125c7222f118d476c977f9749f_full.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13560530

>doesn't support his claims with any sort of scientific data
>doesn't account for any other factor
>got it wrong several times (when he claimed southern Italians, southern asians, southern japan are dumber than their northern counterpart when statistics show no difference even higher iq scores in southern areas)
>had this pseudoscientific idea that skin color is the determinant for intelligence. (he abandoned it later)
his Dysgenics and eugenics book seems to examine this much better and he has a more sensible approach

>> No.13560549

White supremacist literature. Seriously, if you think that IQ measures anything meaningful, then post the scientific data in this thread. You alt-right nutjobs are memeing this shit into reality.

>> No.13560658

>>13557420
High IQ as measured with modern IQ tests correlates strongly with academic, financial and work related success. Therein lies its validity, regardless of how the concept was originally operationalized.

>> No.13560662

>>13555277
IQ is stupid. To judge intelligence by only testing a few cognitive functions and expecting it to be a perfectly accurate measure of intelligence is foolish. They should divide the tests by whatever cognitive function it is testing, for example Raven's Matrices will be renamed as "Pattern Recognition Quotient," as opposed to Intelligence Quotient. I do understand how pattern recognition is a flexible form of intelligence that applies to all fields of study, but it's ignorant to deny that there are 130 IQs who outperform 140 IQs in all walks of life.
Anyway, IQ posting goes to >>>/sci/
>>13557082
Your so called "engaging threads" are all off-topic bait threads. It's clear that you have no appreciation for true literature, otherwise you would find the other threads that are actually about literature to be valuable. Go to another board and discuss your interests in their respective boards. Politics go to /pol/, IQ goes to /sci/, videogames go to /v/ and television goes to /tv/.

>> No.13560710

>>13560662
No one serious uses an isolated Raven's Matrices test as a measure of IQ as a whole. As usual IQ critics dont know what they are talking about because they saw a pattern recognition "Mensa IQ test" on the internet and wrongfully conclude thats how IQ is measured clinically, judicially and in the work place.

Real IQ testing is pretty much exactly what you say in your post that intelligence testing should be.

>> No.13560720

>>13560710
>No one serious uses an isolated Raven's Matrices test as a measure of IQ as a whole. As usual IQ critics dont know what they are talking about because they saw a pattern recognition "Mensa IQ test" on the internet and wrongfully conclude thats how IQ is measured clinically, judicially and in the work place.
I never claimed any of this. You're counterarguing against points that were never made.

>> No.13560730

>>13559882
have you seen the economy?

>> No.13560746

>>13560530
we get it, you're a nigger who can't read

>> No.13560758

>>13560549
>>13560530
>>13560461
>>13559801
>>13559589

>>13557103
>ethical eugenics
>i construct my perception of 'ethical' by what pleases my personal emotions

you are totally intellectually and philosophically bankrupt

This is the absolute definition of a leftist - some one who denies evolution (in humans)

>> No.13560760

>>13556911
>It's not going to be taboo for long
in what world do you live? this requires war to settle. Have you literally never read anything about history?

Every time an impassable question arises there is war.

>> No.13560764

>>13560758
>>i construct my perception of 'ethical' by what pleases my personal emotions
And how do you construct it?

>> No.13560784

>>13560720
You used Raven's Matrices as a measure of IQ to show why "IQ is stupid" (your words) because it "only tests a few cognitive functions and expects to be a perfectly accurate measure of intelligence"

In reality, IQ tests ARE divided into whatever cognitive function its testing, like how Raven's Matrices is a form of nonverbal, spatial ability testing. IQ as a whole is seldom used in an official report, you will get different subscales of IQ that tell a lot more about an individual's functioning than the full scale IQ score. Its apparent you have no clue how IQ tests are used in real life.

>> No.13560796

>>13560764
by what yields survival, what follows from the philosophy that yields prosperity

there is no such thing as ethical genetic engineering.
lf life is to change, it cannot only change itself, it must the other forms of life around it.
If you make a unilateral instantaneous jerk of change, it will throw everything that interfaces with it in the ecosystem for a loop

eventually the instability will cause collapse of either the life form or even of its ecosystem

tl;dr Top down change is not efficient or effective.
You can't just wave away what you wish wasn't real, you have to labor and consider every point.
You know

EVOLUTION

>> No.13560802

IQ was invented by literal Nazis. It was literally invented and used by the Nazis to justify the superiority of the aryan race and the gassing of black Africans (they used different reasoning for the Jews). There's a reason why socialist countries, even faulty ones like the USSR, ban IQ testing. It's because IQ is an invention of capitalism. Marx even predicated things like intelligence testing being manufactured to justify capitalist actions in volume one of Das Kapital.

>> No.13560813

>>13560796
take your meds retard

>> No.13560819

>>13560802
not only did nazi germany not gas blacks (there were too few of them), but hitler rejected iq as a jewish invention, scared of the low germanic IQ compared to the jewish.

>> No.13560890

>>13560784
Quoting my post doesn't mean you understand what is being said. You should understand what is being said before you attack an argument, otherwise you look like a fool.
I admit that my original point wasn't clear enough, but you are claiming things that were never mentioned at all. If you don't understand the point then ask for clarification as opposed to attacking a point that you do not understand to begin with. My mistake was a lack of clarification, your mistake was assumption.
My belief is that combining spatial intelligence, analytic reasoning, mathematics, and literary intelligence into one number isn't an entirely accurate representation of intelligence and shouldn't be taken as such. This is obvious to most people, but not to some of the people on this website. I believe it's more accurate to be more specific and say "my mathematical intelligence quotient is higher than yours," as opposed to saying "I am more intelligent than you in every way because my sum of 5 measurements is higher than your sum," the latter is a leap in logic and is how the people of /sci/ seem to treat IQ.

>> No.13561033

>>13559979
>If the ultimate goal is to create some kind of "master race" then you need to admit that we're more thoroughly fucked.
That's a strawman. For Jared Taylor the purpose seems to be:
1. Deconstruct and destroy racial oppression narratives. The reasoning is that most of them are either incorrect or become minimal when controlled for IQ(The Bell Curve's most controversial parts are exactly about it).
2. Making whites more racially aware and stop making in-group preference among them seem pathological.
3. Allow for addressing the problems of non-white(mostly black and latino) communities in a more effective manner(so for example racial profiling).
4. Reduce immigration in the US, particularly non-white immigration.
5. Stop vilifying voluntary segregation schemes.

The creating of the superman is a matter of eugenics and while most "racists" seem to be for them, but there are some that are heavily against them - I mean abortion can be quite obviously used as eugenic method - and it does this exact job in the US, as it sharply reduces the effective fertility rate of African Americans. And yet a lot of the "right" is against it. Then there's an argument whether the traits that we're selecting for/against socially are actually useful/harmful. Neoreactionaries for instance have long been calling some Europeans "obsolete farming equipment" as they've realised that certain characteristics, selected for in Western and Northern Europe were very helpful in 1800 but are becoming less and less so in age of automation.

>> No.13561214
File: 20 KB, 842x595, WqcTn4V.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13561214

>>13555277
It's garbage, for the simple reason that Murray conflates correlation with causation. See below.

>>13559995
Correlation =/= causation.

You seem to be implying that IQ determines GDP (and a number of other things), but the opposite seems more likely.

High GDP means high income from taxes, which in return results in more resources for childcare and schooling. I'd bet that good early education does more to raise IQ than high IQ does to raise GDP (or any other economic metric).

I'd also argue an even stronger point —that IQ has little to do with economic factors, and much more to do with the sort of community to which one belongs.

Keep in mind that philosophy majors have a higher average IQ than any engineering major, but make significantly less money long-term.

A civilization of philosophers would make much less money than a civilization of engineers, but it would produce a higher average IQ.

The person who truly cares about raising IQ, then, would abandon arguments from economics, and would instead push for allocating resources towards education that includes both the humanities and the hard sciences.

Note that these metrics also give us racial insights, since minority families typically have less access to educational resources (especially education in the humanities) than Asian and white families.

The solution is clearly education. You're putting the cart before the horse.