Prisoner at War
2007-11-19 21:12:29 UTC
Now this is a sensible liberal! Instead of reacting to knee-jerk
political correctness -- the same knee-jerk reaction that conservative
reactionary racists have, only towards different stimuli -- Mr.
Saletan tackles the data head-on, no holds barred.
My own opinion is that humanity will indeed one day be "truly" one
"race." However, until that far-off future where each race
contributes its strengths and dilutes out weaknesses, we must
investigate why racial differences exist!
http://www.slate.com/id/2178122/entry/2178123/nav/tap3/
EXCERPTS
Last month, James Watson, the legendary biologist, was condemned and
forced into retirement after claiming that African intelligence wasn't
"the same as ours." "Racist, vicious and unsupported by science," said
the Federation of American Scientists. "Utterly unsupported by
scientific evidence," declared the U.S. government's supervisor of
genetic research. The New York Times told readers that when Watson
implied "that black Africans are less intelligent than whites, he
hadn't a scientific leg to stand on."
...
Evolution forced Christians to bend or break. They could insist on the
Bible's literal truth and deny the facts, as Bryan did. Or they could
seek a subtler account of creation and human dignity. Today, the
dilemma is yours. You can try to reconcile evidence of racial
differences with a more sophisticated understanding of equality and
opportunity. Or you can fight the evidence and hope it doesn't break
your faith.
...
Among white Americans, the average IQ, as of a decade or so ago, was
103. Among Asian-Americans, it was 106. Among Jewish Americans, it was
113. Among Latino Americans, it was 89. Among African-Americans, it
was 85. Around the world, studies find the same general pattern:
whites 100, East Asians 106, sub-Sarahan Africans 70. One IQ table
shows 113 in Hong Kong, 110 in Japan, and 100 in Britain. White
populations in Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, South Africa,
and the United States score closer to one another than to the
worldwide black average. It's been that way for at least a century.
...
So, what should we make of the difference in averages?
We don't like to think IQ is mostly inherited. But we've all known
families who are smarter than others. Twin and sibling studies, which
can sort genetic from environmental factors, suggest more than half
the variation in IQ scores is genetic. A task force report from the
American Psychological Association indicates it might be even higher.
The report doesn't conclude that genes explain racial gaps in IQ. But
the tests on which racial gaps are biggest happen to be the tests on
which genes, as measured by comparative sibling performance, exert the
biggest influence.
..
How could genes cause an IQ advantage? The simplest pathway is head
size. I thought head measurement had been discredited as Eurocentric
pseudoscience. I was wrong. In fact, it's been bolstered by MRI. On
average, Asian-American kids have bigger brains than white American
kids, who in turn have bigger brains than black American kids. This is
true even though the order of body size and weight runs in the other
direction. The pattern holds true throughout the world and persists at
death, as measured by brain weight.
According to twin studies, 50 percent to 90 percent of variation in
head size and brain volume is genetic. And when it comes to IQ, size
matters. The old science of head measurements found a 20 percent
correlation of head size with IQ. The new science of MRI finds at
least a 40 percent correlation of brain size with IQ. One analysis
calculates that brain size could easily account for five points of the
black-white IQ gap.
I know, it sounds crazy. But if you approach the data from other
directions, you get the same results. The more black and white scores
differ on a test, the more performance on that test correlates with
head size and "g," a measure of the test's emphasis on general
intelligence. You can debate the reality of g, but you can't debate
the reality of head size. And when you compare black and white kids
who score the same on IQ tests, their average difference in head
circumference is zero.
Scientists have already identified genes that influence brain size and
vary by continent. Whether these play a role in racial IQ gaps, nobody
knows. But we should welcome this research, because any genetic
hypothesis about intelligence ought to be clarified and tested.
Critics think IQ tests are relative--i.e., they measure fitness for
success in our society, not in other societies. "In a hunter-gatherer
society, IQ will still be important, but if a hunter cannot shoot
straight, IQ will not bring food to the table," argues psychologist
Robert Sternberg. "In a warrior society ... physical prowess may be
equally necessary to stay alive." It's a good point, but it bolsters
the case for a genetic theory. Nature isn't stupid. If Africans,
Asians, and Europeans evolved different genes, the reason is that
their respective genes were suited to their respective environments.
In fact, there's a mountain of evidence that differential evolution
has left each population with a balance of traits that could be
advantageous or disadvantageous, depending on circumstances. The list
of differences is long and intricate. On average, compared with
whites, blacks mature more quickly in the womb, are born earlier, and
develop teeth, strength, and dexterity earlier. They sit, crawl, walk,
and dress themselves earlier. They reach sexual maturity faster, and
they have better eyesight. On each of these measures, East Asians lag
whites and blacks. In exchange, East Asians get longer lives and
bigger brains.
How this happened isn't clear. Everyone agrees that the three
populations separated 40,000 to 100,000 years ago. Even critics of
racial IQ genetics accept the idea that through natural selection,
environmental differences may have caused abilities such as distance
running to become more common in some populations than in others.
Possibly, genes for cognitive complexity became so crucial in some
places that nature favored them over genes for developmental speed and
vision. If so, fitness for today's world is mostly dumb luck. If we
lived in a savannah, kids programmed to mature slowly and grow big
brains would be toast. Instead, we live in a world of zoos,
supermarkets, pediatricians, pharmaceuticals, and information
technology. Genetic advantages, in other words, are culturally
created.
political correctness -- the same knee-jerk reaction that conservative
reactionary racists have, only towards different stimuli -- Mr.
Saletan tackles the data head-on, no holds barred.
My own opinion is that humanity will indeed one day be "truly" one
"race." However, until that far-off future where each race
contributes its strengths and dilutes out weaknesses, we must
investigate why racial differences exist!
http://www.slate.com/id/2178122/entry/2178123/nav/tap3/
EXCERPTS
Last month, James Watson, the legendary biologist, was condemned and
forced into retirement after claiming that African intelligence wasn't
"the same as ours." "Racist, vicious and unsupported by science," said
the Federation of American Scientists. "Utterly unsupported by
scientific evidence," declared the U.S. government's supervisor of
genetic research. The New York Times told readers that when Watson
implied "that black Africans are less intelligent than whites, he
hadn't a scientific leg to stand on."
...
Evolution forced Christians to bend or break. They could insist on the
Bible's literal truth and deny the facts, as Bryan did. Or they could
seek a subtler account of creation and human dignity. Today, the
dilemma is yours. You can try to reconcile evidence of racial
differences with a more sophisticated understanding of equality and
opportunity. Or you can fight the evidence and hope it doesn't break
your faith.
...
Among white Americans, the average IQ, as of a decade or so ago, was
103. Among Asian-Americans, it was 106. Among Jewish Americans, it was
113. Among Latino Americans, it was 89. Among African-Americans, it
was 85. Around the world, studies find the same general pattern:
whites 100, East Asians 106, sub-Sarahan Africans 70. One IQ table
shows 113 in Hong Kong, 110 in Japan, and 100 in Britain. White
populations in Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, South Africa,
and the United States score closer to one another than to the
worldwide black average. It's been that way for at least a century.
...
So, what should we make of the difference in averages?
We don't like to think IQ is mostly inherited. But we've all known
families who are smarter than others. Twin and sibling studies, which
can sort genetic from environmental factors, suggest more than half
the variation in IQ scores is genetic. A task force report from the
American Psychological Association indicates it might be even higher.
The report doesn't conclude that genes explain racial gaps in IQ. But
the tests on which racial gaps are biggest happen to be the tests on
which genes, as measured by comparative sibling performance, exert the
biggest influence.
..
How could genes cause an IQ advantage? The simplest pathway is head
size. I thought head measurement had been discredited as Eurocentric
pseudoscience. I was wrong. In fact, it's been bolstered by MRI. On
average, Asian-American kids have bigger brains than white American
kids, who in turn have bigger brains than black American kids. This is
true even though the order of body size and weight runs in the other
direction. The pattern holds true throughout the world and persists at
death, as measured by brain weight.
According to twin studies, 50 percent to 90 percent of variation in
head size and brain volume is genetic. And when it comes to IQ, size
matters. The old science of head measurements found a 20 percent
correlation of head size with IQ. The new science of MRI finds at
least a 40 percent correlation of brain size with IQ. One analysis
calculates that brain size could easily account for five points of the
black-white IQ gap.
I know, it sounds crazy. But if you approach the data from other
directions, you get the same results. The more black and white scores
differ on a test, the more performance on that test correlates with
head size and "g," a measure of the test's emphasis on general
intelligence. You can debate the reality of g, but you can't debate
the reality of head size. And when you compare black and white kids
who score the same on IQ tests, their average difference in head
circumference is zero.
Scientists have already identified genes that influence brain size and
vary by continent. Whether these play a role in racial IQ gaps, nobody
knows. But we should welcome this research, because any genetic
hypothesis about intelligence ought to be clarified and tested.
Critics think IQ tests are relative--i.e., they measure fitness for
success in our society, not in other societies. "In a hunter-gatherer
society, IQ will still be important, but if a hunter cannot shoot
straight, IQ will not bring food to the table," argues psychologist
Robert Sternberg. "In a warrior society ... physical prowess may be
equally necessary to stay alive." It's a good point, but it bolsters
the case for a genetic theory. Nature isn't stupid. If Africans,
Asians, and Europeans evolved different genes, the reason is that
their respective genes were suited to their respective environments.
In fact, there's a mountain of evidence that differential evolution
has left each population with a balance of traits that could be
advantageous or disadvantageous, depending on circumstances. The list
of differences is long and intricate. On average, compared with
whites, blacks mature more quickly in the womb, are born earlier, and
develop teeth, strength, and dexterity earlier. They sit, crawl, walk,
and dress themselves earlier. They reach sexual maturity faster, and
they have better eyesight. On each of these measures, East Asians lag
whites and blacks. In exchange, East Asians get longer lives and
bigger brains.
How this happened isn't clear. Everyone agrees that the three
populations separated 40,000 to 100,000 years ago. Even critics of
racial IQ genetics accept the idea that through natural selection,
environmental differences may have caused abilities such as distance
running to become more common in some populations than in others.
Possibly, genes for cognitive complexity became so crucial in some
places that nature favored them over genes for developmental speed and
vision. If so, fitness for today's world is mostly dumb luck. If we
lived in a savannah, kids programmed to mature slowly and grow big
brains would be toast. Instead, we live in a world of zoos,
supermarkets, pediatricians, pharmaceuticals, and information
technology. Genetic advantages, in other words, are culturally
created.