Race and Intelligence: The Evidence
Scientific data show that the races differ in intelligence — dogma holds otherwise.
by Samuel Taylor
There is probably no greater intellectual crime than to point out that the average intelligence of blacks is significantly lower than that of other races. American society punishes those who publicly state this view almost as vigorously as Islamic republics punish anyone who defames the Prophet.
Indeed, in an increasingly secular America, the dogma of racial equality has become virtually a religion. Like early Christians under the Romans, or Russian dissidents under the Soviets, Americans who question the dogma keep their forbidden opinions to themselves or exchange them only in private.
Despite its strength, one of the most remarkable things about the racial dogma is how new it is. Until only a few decades ago, hardly anyone thought the races were equal. Kipling wrote of “lesser breeds without the law,” and the Encyclopedia Britannica noted matter-of-factly in its 1914 edition that “The Negro is intellectually inferior to the Caucasian.” Until only a generation or two ago, this was the view of virtually all Americans: Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, and Harry Truman, to cite only Presidents.
Something equally remarkable about the dogma of equality is that there is no evidence to support it. One would search the planet in vain to find a single group of blacks that has managed to build an advanced, civilized society. By whatever standard one chooses, blacks demonstrate at every opportunity that they are not equal to other races. The history of Africa and the status of blacks in the United States are roughly what we would expect if the races have different capacities. But if the races are equally intelligent, disciplined, and hard-working, then nothing about Africa or African-Americans makes sense. Every disparity, every failure, every moment in history must be painstakingly explained.
The 1914 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica noted that “The Negro is intellectually inferior to the caucasian.”
The egalitarian position is therefore not based on evidence — for there is no evidence for that position — but on excuse-making. It consists purely in excusing blacks from the conclusion to which all the evidence points.
In the United States, what little discussion there is about racial differences revolves around intelligence. Study after study has consistently shown that the average black IQ test score is 15 to 18 points lower than the white average. It appears that the gap starts at about 15 points in childhood and widens to as much as 20 points in adulthood. The gap has remained unchanged for 70 years — ever since IQ tests were first given to large numbers of Americans. Civil rights laws, greater social equality, and affirmative action have not reduced the difference.
Biased test maybe?- my title
At this point, the egalitarian defense claims that IQ tests are somehow biased against blacks. Common as this charge is, it is nothing more than an ex post facto explanation for results that displease the egalitarians, for no one can look through a well-designed intelligence test and explain what the bias is and where it is to be found.
In fact, many modern IQ tests, such as Raven’s Progressive Matrices, have no verbal or cultural content at all. They test a person’s understanding of shapes and patterns, and are routinely given to people who do not even speak English. Other varieties of IQ test do involve language and inevitably have some cultural content — and these are the very tests on which the black/white gap in scores is narrowest. The more culturally specific an intelligence test is, the narrower the black/white gap becomes. The most abstract, culture-free tests show the largest gap.
The theory of “test bias” is that unfair tests consistently underrate blacks’ abilities. If that were true, blacks who got the same test scores as whites would do better than the whites at the things test scores are supposed to measure: they would get better grades and do their jobs better. This does not happen; blacks do no better than the test scores predict. This raises a larger and different issue. Both the tests and the abilities they are supposed to measure may be biased against blacks. Some egalitarians actually make this argument, but it comes dangerously close to arguing that ability and intelligence themselves are somehow biased against blacks.
The “cultural bias” position is further weakened by the fact that newly-arrived Asian immigrants, for whom the United States really is an alien culture, outperform both blacks and whites on IQ tests. The assertion that the same tests that are culturally biased against blacks somehow favor Asians strains credibility.
If blacks are as intelligent as whites, there must be some way to demonstrate this. None has ever been devised. Are we to conclude that the intelligence of blacks remains forever hidden because every method for measuring it is faulty? Believers in test bias cannot explain why it is impossible to design an intelligence test — carefully eliminating all bias — on which blacks score as well as whites. The explanation is that there is no bias to eliminate. “Bias” is an imaginary culprit.
"If tests cannot be shown to be biased, the next line of defense for egalitarians is to admit that, yes, IQ tests measure intelligence fairly and that blacks therefore may be less intelligent. They nevertheless insist that the difference is due to environment rather than genetics. "
"Blacks may have gotten as far in American society as their natural limitations permit."
"Average IQ’s may be as low as 80 in Uganda, 75 in Nigeria, and 65 in Zaire."
Race and Crime- JJT's title
Few people in America write more fearlessly and incisively about race than Professor Michael Levin of the City College of New York. His recent paper, “Responses to Race Differences in Crime,” published in the Journal of Social Philosophy, is a rigorous analysis of a question that most academics would not even think to raise: Should society draw conclusions about individuals based on race? Prof. Levin is writing specifically about crime, but his reasoning could be applied to education, employment, or any other area in which average behavior differs consistently by race.
Prof. Levin begins with the cold statistical facts: Blacks account for two-thirds of all arrests for robbery, and a young black is five times more likely than a young white to be a felon. Are individual whites therefore justified in avoiding young blacks and are police officers justified in keeping them under close scrutiny? The common sense answer is “of course,” but common sense is rare when the subject is race. Prof. Levin systematically refutes every standard (and some non-standard) objections to different treatment based on race.
Prof. Levin teaches philosophy at City College, and his arguments are subtle, thorough, and logical. For example, he launches a brilliant attack on the idea that categorization by race “stereotypes” blacks and causes yet more black deviance. Then he applies this argument to the kind of real-life decision real-life people must make. Imagine, he says, that you have just been mugged on the street by a black man. A policeman arrives just too late to prevent the attack and says this:
“I saw the black approach you and suspected he might attack, but I didn’t intercede even to the minimal extent of showing myself to discourage him because my belief that he might attack was race-based. I would have felt no impulse to intercede had your attacker been white. But I shouldn’t act on thoughts I shouldn’t think, and I shouldn’t think that way. I shouldn’t think that way because your attacker’s turn to crime was the result of his great-grandfather’s enslavement, his father’s inferior education and his own constricted opportunities, circumstances based on racial thinking. Doing anything because of his race is just the sort of thinking that caused him to attack you.”
Ridiculous as such a speech sounds, it is exactly the way Americans are supposed to think and behave. Obviously, many Americans do not; they would be fools to do so. But having argued that the police officer should take race into consideration, Prof. Levin does not shrink from tackling the next question: What other decisions should we base on race? “Suppose the presence of more than a threshold number of black children in a classroom impedes the intellectual development of white children,” he writes; “Here would be a utilitarian argument for school segregation …”
After pointing out that blacks rape a vastly disproportionate number of white women, Prof. Levin goes on to say:
“If separating black men from white women would sharply decrease the incidence of rape among white women without raising its incidence among black women correspondingly, the personal preference for white women to avoid rape would be utilitarian grounds for such separation.”
Hats off to Prof. Levin. Not only is his theoretical analysis impressive, he is willing to step out of the ivory tower and apply it to real American problems.
Please do read at least half the site, i will post other evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence- don't judge wikipedia, i bet it knows more than you do .
"To put matters bluntly, the question is not why anyone would believe the races are unequal in intelligence, but why anyone would believe them equal. When someone asserts that black intellectual performance would equal that of whites were society free of bias, the proper response is 'What makes you think so?' The burden of proof, usually placed on those who deny the intellectual equality of the races, rests squarely on those who assert it."
Honestly speaking, this is pretty common knowledge in America, the data is everywhere and consistent unlike some other so called data on another thread .
Speaking of which you know who inspired this thread and thus you know it is a parody.
Even so lets keep this discussion real, because if you look at the data, this can't be explain by simple bias, cultural factors, environmental factors, genetic factors, ect.
Yes, i know this topic is taboo. Its like a religion in America, so i will tred VERY carefully and not give my viewpoints until much later.
So for now, you answer the BIG question- WHY?
NOTE TO MODS : Yesterday we had a misunderstanding about the rules of the forum. So I would like to take this oppertunity to remind everyone of the rules. For some odd reason my thread was closed and the reason stated was none of the following:
1. The kind of threads that go in here are ones on serious and intelligent issues. News articles, debates, religious discussions, scientific discussions, issues on morality/ethics, etc. There is already a section for drama, anime, music, games, etc. I'm sorry if you think discussing the newest Naruto episode is "serious and intelligent", but it doesn't belong here.
2. Threads that can be answered with "yes" or "no" are to be avoided. Any thread that can be answered with "Yes" or "No" MUST answer to the question "Why?"
3. Posts must offer significant content. If you have no opinion on something, DON'T post. "I don't know." or "Yeah I think so too." is not enough. The section is called "extended" for a reason. Longer posts, but more real discussion. This includes the first post by the thread creator. If you don't provide enough information/starting discussion for someone to reply, your thread will be closed.
4. Posts must have clear points, decent typing ("u" and "r" are fine, but pLeAZe DuN tYpe LyK DiZ" (please don't type like this). If you do your post will be deleted.
5. If you notice the thread you're discussing in is starting to go in another direction than the original topic make new specific thread for your discussion, or quote the person and post in the appropriate thread.
6. If in doubt... don't post.
And lastly, since this section will most likely include some topics that are sensitive to some people, always respect one another. You don't have to agree, or even like each other, but do NOT ruin some else's thread/discussion with your temper.
7. Don't make quotation pyramids or double post.
1. If my thread isnt a serious and intelligent issue, then please tell me because i am of the opinion that it is. I'm sure many people will agree with me as well.
2.The quesion WHY is/was clearly stated at the bottom of the data.
3. Everyone knows i have an opinion, and i even stated i would share it as this thread matures. There just isn't a reason for me to debunk/support my own thread in the very first post. This IS extended disscussion mind you.
4. If my points are not clear, let me know i will clear them for you. You can just ask me in the thread and we can discuss it.
5.This thread wasn't even given a full day.
6.I am always respectful, I know this topic is sensitive. The study says it is, which is why i won't give my opinion until later.
And yes, my thread was ruined by someone else's temper because they didn't like what the data was saying. I don't find it appropiate for....some people to stop other people from posting in a thread via threat of ban.
I realize trolls will be trolls, but they get out of hand when...nevermind.
7. I admit i am still working on this, im just now learning how to edit. Unfortunatly this thread didn't last long enough for me to even make a decent double post.
I am not trying to be a smartass, I'm just saying im am utterly confused as to what happened with my thread.It's not like these types of threads are not allowed, because i know of "another" so called contriversal thread. I believe my thread deserves the same respect as that one. I have broken no rules to my knowledge and i have made no claims what-so-ever, let alone baseless. If this thread is to be closed a second time, i will not re-create it. But please do add to the rule list topics that are to be avoided so i do not make the same mistake again. Thank you for your time. peace over war
Oh, boy. Here we go again.
New profile: Northerner
i thought they locked this
I have resoultions!
Do you know why we lock threads like these?
Because they have the potential of becoming spam threads and are always filled with racial intolerance and especially flame wars, which is something you cannot contain by reciting the forum rules. I allowed your old thread to stay open for a period of 1 day before closing it. If this thread is not locked by me, it will be by another moderator, I can guarantee that. To me, you have no excuses or justified reasons to keep this thread opened.
Until I have a talk with an admin, your thread will stay locked until further notice.
Update: I've spoken with an admin, and he agrees that your thread should no longer be open. Next time, if a moderator locks your thread it is likely due to you violating forum rules. I should not have to remind you of them for it should be common knowledge and ignorance is no excuse.