Support NeoGAF

[Rookje]

Last year, the New York Times published an article about a group of scientists who have discovered 52 genes that were linked to intelligence. Less than a year later, you can now test your genetic code online to see what your IQ is based off those very same 52 genes published in that NYT article (though, its had mixed results). The debate about race and IQ is one of the most popular topics in the highbrow media this year and shows no signs of dying. Sam Harris had a heated debate with VOX editor Ezra Klein in March after he had Charles Murray on his podcast. In April, Slate published an article titled "Stop Talking About Race and IQ." Just last month, The Cut published an article "Yes, There Is a Genetic Component to Intelligence." So, what is the truth?

The fact is, we don't really know yet for sure. Most of the data on intelligence has to do with IQ tests, which experts and media like to dismiss. But we're racing closer and closer to having a real scientific explanation. I predict we'll have a definitive verdict within 5 years.

My question is: what will happen to society if we find out a link is in fact, real? Will racism come back with a vengeance? Will the world turn into Gattaca? What will happen to dating culture, which is already shit.

We like to talk about the future A.I. dystopia, but the science between intelligence and genetics will come way sooner than that. Of course, intelligence doesn't mean everything. Thomas Sowell discussed in his latest book Discrimination and Disparities, intelligence and success don't always go hand in hand. Children from the same parents and the same environment can have widely different intelligent/success outcomes, so it isn't all just about just race and environment.

 

[zumphry]

please, nobody go for this lol

 

[bitbydeath]

Hopefully everyone will accept it and move on like respectable human beings.

 

[Papa]

Try plotting two hypothetical normal distributions for a mean IQ difference of say 10 and look at the overlapping region. There will be many individuals in the distribution with the higher mean who are dumber than the average individual of the distribution with the lower mean.

Stop thinking in terms of group identity and treat people as individuals.

 

[JordanN]

The fact is, we don't really know yet for sure.

No, it's pretty much confirmed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Accomplishment

 

[oagboghi2]

I'm 30, what fucking good is it now?

 

[Liberty4all]

Try plotting two hypothetical normal distributions for a mean IQ difference of say 10 and look at the overlapping region. There will be many individuals in the distribution with the higher mean who are dumber than the average individual of the distribution with the lower mean.

Stop thinking in terms of group identity and treat people as individuals.

This X 100

Judge people on earned merit.

 

[Hotspurr]

It is a very taboo topic. It would mean that biology is inherently racist. No one seems to have a problem when all major athletes in basketball and football are of a particular race, but if we found out certain races had intelligence genes, well you better get ready if it's the "wrong" race.

Personally as a scientist it's a fascinating topic, one that I fear most people will turn into some race war, so for the good of society it is best left alone.

 

[JordanN]

It is a very taboo topic. It would mean that biology is inherently racist. No one seems to have a problem when all major athletes in basketball and football are of a particular race, but if we found out certain races had intelligence genes, well you better get ready if it's the "wrong" race.

Personally as a scientist it's a fascinating topic, one that I fear most people will turn into some race war, so for the good of society it is best left alone.

This part depresses me because I feel like leaving this subject alone is exactly what's going to cause future problems when we have the technology today to act on it.

I took the time to finally read a lot of IQ research and all of it begins to make sense when you put the pieces together. Ironically, it's always said this research is racist/dehumanizing, yet European Whites are still a few points below East Asians & Jews. So there is no biased selection going on that inherently says "IQ only cares about making Whites look good" but rather, how evolution impacted each geographically isolated group of humans.

 

[Rookje]

This X 100

Judge people on earned merit.

Nobody is arguing against that.

That is why the prospect of a correlation between race and intelligence would be so disruptive to society. My question is, what would we do as a society to counteract the belief that "you are this race, thus you are this intelligent" after a link between race and intelligence is hypothetically discovered?

Again, this is not intended to be a discussion if race and intelligence are linked at all. It's about the hypothetical scenario that one is discovered and what we should do as a society in response.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

'The Bell Curve' by Hernnstein and Murray.

Read it at your peril.

 

[Grinchy]

The average person is so dumb that I don't think it matters.

 

[Moneal]

We already know they are linked, but don't know if its biological or not. We need to figure out if its based on biology or circumstances(higher poverty rates causing lower IQ). If its biology, we don't do much and most people don't care since on the individual level averages doesn't matter. If its circumstances, we do what we have always done and try to combat poverty.

 

[King of Foxes]

Take a look at the the resetera thread about Asian Americans being discriminated against by universities for constantly scoring high in tests and you have your answer.

 

[Cato]

Nobody is arguing against that.

That is why the prospect of a correlation between race and intelligence would be so disruptive to society. My question is, what would we do as a society to counteract the belief that "you are this race, thus you are this intelligent" after a link between race and intelligence is hypothetically discovered?

Again, this is not intended to be a discussion if race and intelligence are linked at all. It's about the hypothetical scenario that one is discovered and what we should do as a society in response.

Well, it is fairly clear that at some stage there will be a proven correlation, just like there is correlation for pretty much every other trait.
My money is on the far east asians.

For normal people it will have zero effect. Normal people will be pretty much as intelligent as all other normal people, regarless of race.
Maybe the only real effect would be due to the bell curve that the winner race would have a higher number of super high intelligence geniuses/freaks than the others.

For society? I don't think there will be much difference.
Far left and far right already ignore any and all facts they disagree with and never hesitate to make up their own facts whenever they need as a weapon or prop up some ideological view.
Doesn't really matter if a link can be proven or not.

 

[Cato]

We already know they are linked, but don't know if its biological or not. We need to figure out if its based on biology or circumstances(higher poverty rates causing lower IQ). If its biology, we don't do much and most people don't care since on the individual level averages doesn't matter. If its circumstances, we do what we have always done and try to combat poverty.

I think the uncertainty is not whether it is biological or not but rather how much of the delta is due to biology.

 

[JordanN]

We already know they are linked, but don't know if its biological or not. We need to figure out if its based on biology or circumstances(higher poverty rates causing lower IQ). If its biology, we don't do much and most people don't care since on the individual level averages doesn't matter. If its circumstances, we do what we have always done and try to combat poverty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Twin_Family_Study
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0191886989902468

Even when environmental factors are considered, it does not drastically reduce the current observed IQ differences between major races.
For example, Black Africans score well around 60 ~ 75 points whereas U.S blacks the average is 85. Meanwhile, both European and American Whites still score consistently 100.

 

[AngularSaxophone]

God makes science looks even more stupid

 

[Red Crayon Aristocrat]

The sad thing is you'll never get a straight answer on this topic, it's just too damn tied into political agendas, either racist agendas or anti-racist agendas.

I mean the anti-racist crowd would never accept it no matter what the facts would be and on the flipside racists would be too quick to use it to justify hate and discrimination, which I think we can all agree that if there were biological differences between the races as applied to intelligence it wouldn't mean that everyone isn't still a human being worthy of equal treatment, but it would raise questions about the left's burning desire to see more "diversity" in certain fields.

I don't think there is at the end of the day a real link between race and intelligence, but I do wonder why when it comes to race the path we've chosen is "we're all equal!" as opposed to "it's ok to be different!"

We're all either equal or we are in fact different, wherever the truth lies we've picked one side that some people will vehemently defend literally to the death and I'm not sure if that was wise.

 

[JordanN]

The sad thing is you'll never get a straight answer on this topic, it's just too damn tied into political agendas, either racist agendas or anti-racist agendas.

The man who co-discovered DNA agrees with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watson

And honestly, that's all that should matter. Forget about far-right and far left and just treat it as science.
It reminds me when we had the discussion about genders a few weeks ago. I absolutely stated that men and women are not the same but I also stated both deserve rights.
This is important data that can help create a better world if we put feelings behind us. There have been opposition to past scientific ideas before and yet evidence only got stronger that people had no choice but to let it go or live in denial.

 

[Cato]

The man who co-discovered DNA agrees with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watson

And honestly, that's all that should matter. Forget about far-right and far left and just treat it as science.
It reminds me when we had the discussion about genders a few weeks ago. I absolutely stated that men and women are not the same but I also stated both deserve rights.
This is important data that can help create a better world if we put feelings behind us. There have been opposition to past scientific ideas before and yet evidence only got stronger that people had no choice but to let it go or live in denial.

I think it has been proven already that it does not matter and no one cares (except crazy left and white nationalists).
I think we have known for a long time there are differences between the races. What we do not know is whether and how much of it is due to environment and due to biology.
Studies suggest that genetics has a big part to explain the difference. But that is still just theories.
The ONLY thing that this discovery would change would be that it would be the first time there is hard proof that some ( a small amount) if it is definitely due to biology.

But again, no one cares about group averages (except crazy fringe elements on the right and left). Normal people moved on, seems they think their individual intelligence is much more important and they don't care about the group average.

 

[JordanN]

I think it has been proven already that it does not matter and no one cares (except crazy left and white nationalists).
I think we have known for a long time there are differences between the races. What we do not know is whether and how much of it is due to environment and due to biology.
Studies suggest that genetics has a big part to explain the difference. But that is still just theories.
The ONLY thing that this discovery would change would be that it would be the first time there is hard proof that some ( a small amount) if it is definitely due to biology.

Look at evolution. Since the beginning of time, when has environment not also pressured or had an affect on DNA?

That's exactly what the IQ studies are pointing to. We know Africans, Europeans, Asians, Amerindians, Aboriginals etc have all been isolated from each other for thousands of years. It's not a stretch to say that this type of separation lead to each group developing their own societies that was fit for their location.

It actually becomes harder to justify how are all humans equally intelligent, when you look at what each society produced on their own before they made contact with very distant races. We know Africa developed up to a certain point before European explorers arrived and yet they were still outmatched technologically. Same thing happen when before Europeans settled in the Americas, the Native Indians still didn't develop at the same rate as Europe or Asia did.

Genetics is just the final key saying it's not wealth/poverty that explains these massive differences away before poverty was a thing.

 

[TheShadowLord]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Twin_Family_Study
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0191886989902468

Even when environmental factors are considered, it does not drastically reduce the current observed IQ differences between major races.
For example, Black Africans score well around 60 ~ 75 points whereas U.S blacks the average is 85. Meanwhile, both European and American Whites still score consistently 100.

I am not sure how to read IQ but doesn't have a higher IQ make a person smarter over the other? Because from what I am looking at, it seems like Black Africans in America are very much well educated.

 

[Cato]

Look at evolution. Since the beginning of time, when has environment not also pressured or had an affect on DNA?

In this case Environment refers to the environment where the child/person grew up. That is way too short timescale to affect DNA
I.e. environment as "did the parents read a lot of books to the child", "did you go to a good school"
not as "due to harsh environment only super strong specimen survived to reproduce"

 

[Bluecondor]

Intelligence?

What do you mean by that? IQ?

IQ is really limited as a measure of intelligence:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121219133334.htm

Until someone can provide a comprehensive measure of "intelligence," the idea that race is correlated with "intelligence" is pure fantasy.

 

[Mohonky]

The average person is so dumb that I don't think it matters.

This

Also it would largely be irrelevant, even if any group was higher or lower on average, it wouldnt be enough that you can say that someone from a lower group is unable to grasp the majority of core concepts taught in modern society, nor would it suggest that those from a group of those more intelligent are far enough removed that they can grasp concepts others would never be able to.

 

[Cato]

Intelligence?

What do you mean by that? IQ?

IQ is really limited as a measure of intelligence:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121219133334.htm

Until someone can provide a comprehensive measure of "intelligence," the idea that race is correlated with "intelligence" is pure fantasy.

That is not what that study says at all.
The study says that one single test is not sufficient to fully measure IQ and that they need multiple tests to get a good and reliable measure.

IQ is widely recognized as a very reliable and accurate measurement of general intelligence.

 

[JordanN]

Intelligence?

What do you mean by that? IQ?

IQ is really limited as a measure of intelligence:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121219133334.htm

Until someone can provide a comprehensive measure of "intelligence," the idea that race is correlated with "intelligence" is pure fantasy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)

IQ can be broken down to verbal intelligence, spatial intelligence, emotional intelligence and memory.
It's not fantasy since there is a correlation between people with high IQ's and success in life. Now expand that on a national level (countries with high IQ's also produce the most wealth and contributions to the sciences).

In this case Environment refers to the environment where the child/person grew up. That is way too short timescale to affect DNA
I.e. environment as "did the parents read a lot of books to the child", "did you go to a good school"
not as "due to harsh environment only super strong specimen survived to reproduce"

I'm talking about Evolution in general.
Environmental pressures goes back millions of years. But not only that, we also have mutations.

When you put the two and two together, why wouldn't races that have been separated from each for thousands of years but grew up in different geographic locations, not have different DNA? Or why wouldn't those differences not also impact intellectual ability?

Europe for example, had an ice age. Those who couldn't plan for the harsh winter were more likely to be killed off.

I am not sure how to read IQ but doesn't have a higher IQ make a person smarter over the other? Because from what I am looking at, it seems like Black Africans in America are very much well educated.

U.S Blacks have ancestors that mixed with Europeans. That is the leading theory for why they score higher than just native Africans, even when you take education/money into equation. But they're still 15 points below Europeans and even farther behind East Asians and Jews.

 

[highrider]

Regardless I’ll continue to feel superior when I wear my reading glasses and fold my hands together.

 

[Bluecondor]

That is not what that study says at all.
The study says that one single test is not sufficient to fully measure IQ and that they need multiple tests to get a good and reliable measure.

IQ is widely recognized as a very reliable and accurate measurement of general intelligence.

Go back and read the article.

They clearly show in a study of 100,000 subjects that there are a wide range of cognitive tasks and abiltiies.

A single measure of general intelligence simply does not capture all of the relevant cognitive tasks and abilities, as they can widely vary in individuals.

IQ is not a valid and reliable measure of multiple forms of intelligence.

 

[Bluecondor]

"IQ can be broken down to verbal intelligence, spatial intelligence, emotional intelligence and memory.
It's not fantasy since there is a correlation between people with high IQ's and success in life. Now expand that on a national level (countries with high IQ's also produce the most wealth and contributions to the sciences)."

This is not an accurate statement. Read Howard Gardner's work and Robert Sternberg's work.

They have studied multiple forms of intelligence for decades and show that different forms of intelligence lead to different types of behavior and performance.

This isn't just me saying this. Companies use competency-based approaches to employee selection and talent development. It is far more complex than IQ:

https://trainingmag.com/competency-management-challenges-and-benefits/

 

[iBuzzati]

In regards to this topic, I often hear that people are worried about the implication that tax dollars will be less likely to go to lower class groups because it would do "no good". Alternatively, I think it has the potential to draw some compassion out of society. I have a brother who is much smarter than I - full ride to Harvard business school, and one of a handful of people in the country who got a perfect score on the GMAT in a certain year. He has always effortlessly excelled at academics, and never really stressed out at school or work. Much different experience than I. To him, without an acknowledged concept of genetic IQ, someone struggling in the inner city or trailer park might appear to be lazy, unfocused, impulsive, or non-serious. The idea that someone's success and failures are less a function of their own will and more some genetic determinism might lurch a society to be more compassionate with social security. Success and the raw value of a dollar are all relative - poor people are inflation protection, and those less genetically fortunate than you are contributing to a higher appraised value of your own worth. They contribute to why your life is so good. So pay your tax.

 

[JordanN]

"IQ can be broken down to verbal intelligence, spatial intelligence, emotional intelligence and memory.
It's not fantasy since there is a correlation between people with high IQ's and success in life. Now expand that on a national level (countries with high IQ's also produce the most wealth and contributions to the sciences)."

This is not an accurate statement. Read Howard Gardner's work and Robert Sternberg's work.

They have studied multiple forms of intelligence for decades and show that different forms of intelligence lead to different types of behavior and performance.

This isn't just me saying this. Companies use competency-based approaches to employee selection and talent development. It is far more complex than IQ:

https://trainingmag.com/competency-management-challenges-and-benefits/

Where is the contradiction that IQ cannot be used to predict success in life?
No one is saying there aren't different types of intelligence, but IQ has been studied and the correlation exists.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/20628656?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations

 

[Gun Animal]

How do you explain the testing differences between "Asians" and "Hispanics" when East-Asians and Amerindians are so closesly related? They're considered the same race according to archaic racial theory and even today genetic testing companies like 23&Me group them together and have difficulty fully distinguishing between them. Not to mention almost all Hispanics have Spanish (Southern European) heritage as well.

 

[Dunki]

Take a look at the the resetera thread about Asian Americans being discriminated against by universities for constantly scoring high in tests and you have your answer.

But this has nothing to do with their race in general but about the culture they were raised in. In terms of race or gender you should not generalize this. This is what racism means superiority over another race. Cultures are not races

 

[JordanN]

But this has nothing to do with their race in general but about the culture they were raised in. In terms of race or gender you should not generalize this. This is what racism means superiority over another race. Cultures are not races

Technically, it can be both.

Again, prior to when races were geographically separate and had not made contact with each other, they developed their own societies. Ancient Egypt looked completely different from Ancient Rome. Ancient Rome looked completely different from Vikings/Nordics. The Nordics looked completely different from China & Japan. And so forth.

Even today, race & culture is highly intertwined. Japanese people mostly speak their own language, reside in their country, follow their own religion. You might have a few foreigners who move there and try to assimilate, but at the end of the day, Japanese culture is still defined by the natives who lived there.

 

[Greedings]

Nothing.

Even if the median is different, the median doesn't account for everyone. The median will not be massively different anyway, humans are incredibly variable in almost every aspect, even within ethnicity or sex.

 

[2AdEPT]

No offence to the OP but people who understand science know there is no such thing as a "race", people only identify as them; and though you mention "there are problems with the study" you continue? Its impossible to nail down only 50 genes that comprise "intelligence", which can't be universally defined. Furthermore, even if you did enable yourself to go back 40 generations, which is how far back our genes carry "memory", you won't know where your 52 genes for intelligence came from. Were they the genes that your great great great great grandparents on your mothers fathers mothers fathers Scandinavian heritage side, or your fathers mothers fathers mothers Ukrainian side contributed? BUt wait, people from Africa and Iran lived in Scandinavia let alone Ukraine back then? What "race" were they and what was their 40 generation historical make up? Everyone has all 4 corners of the globe carried around with them and those whom have done the math know that 40 generations go back further than when we were even human, so better to just say intelligence comes from humans and be done with it. Your own siblings can have vastly differing IQ scores, so it's no big surprise that IQ averages out faster than you can go back in history to track your genetics. Albert Einsteins kids weren't geniuses, nor were any of his ancestors, no big surprise because they were drawing on hoardes of ancestors and genius is rare so it doesn't happen over and over the next genertion in any family, let alone some fictious grand population, which are all mixed and carry genes from all over themselves.

Furthermore, the environment has been proven to turn on genes and also turn them off, epigenetics is new on the scene so again no scientific literate individual who studies genetics would touch that statement with a ten foot pole when environment is becoming more not less important in determining things like "Intelligence."

The only problem is too few few people understand genetics and hence why these topics surface over and over. Now you know why people say stop talking about race, it's not just the PC correct crowd its anyone that researches the topic of genetics; there simply isn't a homogeneous population of anyone; skin colour and how you look is three or four genes out of 20000, and I suggest intligence, whatever the definition, is much more than 50. Impossible to correlate. Case closed.

Technically, it can be both.

Again, prior to when races were geographically separate and had not made contact with each other, they developed their own societies. Ancient Egypt looked completely different from Ancient Rome. Ancient Rome looked completely different from Vikings/Nordics. The Nordics looked completely different from China & Japan. And so forth.

Even today, race & culture is highly intertwined. Japanese people mostly speak their own language, reside in their country, follow their own religion. You might hyave a few foreigners who move there and try to assimilate, but at the end of the day, Japanese culture is still defined by the natives who lived there.

Actually you are wrong. There has been grand mixing of genes in all cultures and Japan isn't a good example of an ancient homogeneous population. There were indigenous people there before any boats came from China and there are ancestors in China to this day that didn't sail. They were all mixed people from Eurasia remixing with Eurasians. The only populations that haven't been mixing as much are those from central Africa (although that's where everyone came from 100k ago) and aboriginal north and south america at least until the 1400's had less mixing than Eurasia for about 10k of that. But there was still mixing then even more now...so no point in validating your claims. There never were, nor ever will be distinct "races", "cultures" , or any such imaginary thing when genes are concerned. These topics only serve to make things simpler than they actually are for people that can't comprehend genetics, time,and evolution.

 

[JordanN]

Nothing.

Even if the median is different, the median doesn't account for everyone.

This again, misses the point of IQ studies.
Even if you assume everyone is different, how you pass down your genes are highly influenced by race.
And this applies for more than just intelligence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongolian_spot
This is a condition that disproportionately affects people of Asian descent (although interestingly enough, black babies have a high rate of it too).

The median will not be massively different anyway humans are incredibly variable in almost every aspect, even within ethnicity or sex.

Only if you ignore that science can isolate specific race/gender differences with 100% accuracy.
For example:

No offence to the OP but people who understand science know there is no such thing as a "race", people only identify as them

All races are born with different skull features.

 

[Hoya Destroyer]

The issue of race is so taboo, that I dont think broad Western society would ever widely acknowledge a link between it and intelligence - irrespective of how strong scientific evidence may be.

 

[Greedings]

This again, misses the point of IQ studies.
Even if you assume everyone is different, how you pass down your genes are highly influenced by race.
And this applies for more than just intelligence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongolian_spot
This is a condition that disproportionately affects people of Asian descent (although interestingly enough, black babies have a high rate of it too).

No clue what that has to do with the question at hand. What would change?

Maybe I misunderstand what you said, or maybe you're replying to something you think I said. Genetic inheritance is one potential cause of differences in intelligence, it has nothing to do with what would change if we found a difference.

 

[llien]

We are veeeeeery far from understanding genes impact on intelligence, as the latter itself is quite elusive
Any research on the subject is met with a shitstorm.

I recall reading about ethnic Chinese finding out that Europeans are more prone to mutations (5 mutations per person, I recall), than Asians (lower number, don't remember). I'll link the article once I find it (if I find it :S)).

It is interesting to note, however, that more mutations > less mutations (you adapt faster), yet it's Asians' having 80 point lead over whites in the US and dominating at Google (35% of the workforce, while being 6% of the population). So, there is theory, and there are nuances that show how limited it is.

He was forced to stop research after getting death threats.

'The Bell Curve' by Hernnstein and Murray.
Read it at your peril.

I believe producers of this movie did:
Idiocracy (2006)

 

[Dunki]

Technically, it can be both.

Again, prior to when races were geographically separate and had not made contact with each other, they developed their own societies. Ancient Egypt looked completely different from Ancient Rome. Ancient Rome looked completely different from Vikings/Nordics. The Nordics looked completely different from China & Japan. And so forth.

Even today, race & culture is highly intertwined. Japanese people mostly speak their own language, reside in their country, follow their own religion. You might have a few foreigners who move there and try to assimilate, but at the end of the day, Japanese culture is still defined by the natives who lived there.

I also think that we know that different races have different advantages the most important part is that we should not use these facts to claim superiority but rather that we are different but equal. But to me there is a difference between identity , culture and race. And that Japanese people are like that is not because they are Asian but because hw they were raised, and in which kind of culture they grew up.

 

[2AdEPT]

Please people, what part of the idea that you can't pin down "races" don't you understand?? Its an outdated term! The fact that people concomitantly have black skin and also sickle cell enemia is working with only a few genes, not the multiple you need to consider for intelligence. Regardless, do we even know how sickle cell enemia works? Are there epigenetic factors? Is it a mutated gene? The problem with the original sickle cell enemia studies is that people identify as some imaginary race for the study because they look "Black" but they themselves didn't realize they were also Hispanic and Eurasian, and whoops forgot askenazi Jewish and the other 40 "races" that are listed on today's genetic tests. Have you read one of these!?!! The disclaimer on most genetics tests reads as follows:

"Despite that there is no longer an ability to say any one individual is a certain "race" we can however give you an approximated percentage chance your ancestors were in a particular area of the earth at a particular time."

That's it. That's all you can do folks, and guess what? Despite your ancestors were in a particular place at a particular time, they were much more mixed than they would have admitted, just like people today who sue the genetics testers because they came out Morrocan when they "know" they are Irish because they have red hair. Boy are the testers ever dumb! Their lawsuit goes nowhere fast when a scientist testifies that the area of the world that is now considered Ireland was indigenous to people from Morrocco prior to any red haired Scandinavians started coming in significant numbers. You get the picture? People from Peurto Rico attempted to sue the genetic tester company I chose because they were obviously black, not Eurasian or Aboriginal, the other two popular "choices" there. They didn't realize that just because people look black with 3 genes contributing, that their brains, bones and muscles were a mix of the other ancestral paths of the area. Genetic tests are going a long way fast to dispel the myth of "race"...but some refuse to accept being mixed and unsuccessfully sue the company for "getting wrong what is obvious to me".

That picture of the skulls further proves my point...despite that there are slight variations, there really aren't that many genes contributing to bone structure and all the variants are virtually equal in ability to house a brain etc. The remnants of Neanderthal, Homo habilus, and even ape and orangutan brow ridges, means nothing. To make it even more obvious, we all have two arms and two legs (always exceptions) but you wouldn't say it was a racial trait to have two arms and two legs....it goes back much further, same for skulls, and same for intelligence.

The current wAy to speak of specific genetic linked traitss like sickle cell anemia is to say, "Person A has at least one ancestor who lived in a region of the world (Africa) where the first known case of sickle cell anemia was recorded. Its not PC correct, it is proven reality.

 

[JordanN]

That picture of the skulls further proves my point...despite that there are slight variations, there really aren't that many genes contributing to bone structure and all the variants are virtually equal in ability to house a brain etc. The remnants of Neanderthal, Homo habilus, and even ape and orangutan brow ridges, means nothing. To make it even more obvious, we all have two arms and two legs (always exceptions) but you wouldn't say it was a racial trait to have two arms and two legs....it goes back much further, same for skulls, and same for intelligence.

The skull shapes are pretty specific to the regions/people they originate from. In addition, the Neanderthals showed up much later and and only mixed with the other European Homo Sapiens (native Africans are the only group who do not have Neanderthal admixture but some other extinct Hominid).

 

[Red Crayon Aristocrat]

The man who co-discovered DNA agrees with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watson

I'm not an expert on DNA, but isn't there like a 99% DNA similarity between humans and chimpanzees? So clearly small DNA differences can lead to big differences in observable reality.

I just feel like race is one of those things about life in which you'll have to rely on your own judgement for an answer, like say the existence of the soul or even extraterrestrial life, if there really was concrete evidence for those things it would be suppressed because it would just have too radical an effect on society.

 

[Dontero]

Tough nut to crack imo.

Meritocracy system would be fair and imho best way to handle it but at the same time it would hurt a lot of people at bottom level, especially at ever increasing complexity of life.
On other hand "fairness" system would be really tought to sell to other people. Also i can't see it reasonably being implemented.

IMHO best answer for that would be for IQ science to come up with IQ pill which unlike some people claims is possible as human brain is just bionic hardware it is just that we need to find a way to tune it or modify it at gene level.

Next question would be what standard would people seek and what level of IQ should be put as norm. Secondly does anyone then would have right to have more IQ ?

Overall it is philosophical problem about redistribution of wealth with even tougher subject of equalism vs individualism.

Being poor outside of absolute poverty is completely subjective with standards changing as we go. So it is either acceptance of equalism in which case everyone gets same stuff and no one is worse or better than each other which i can't see happening or problem isn't "problem" as our need for individualism trumps needs of lowest class of society.

No offence to the OP but people who understand science know there is no such thing as a "race"

Tell that to your kid which needs marrow transplantation and since he is mixed child both you (black) and your wife (white) can't be donors (or chances for that are close to 0%) and you need to find people who are mixed same as your kid in same way (which is very very very very very very very very hard to find close to 0%).

Races are real. Everything that is living separately from each other will sooner or later became its own race then its own species then its own tree.
This is literally how life works.

Human races are not that far from each other but that doesn't mean there are no differences, i mean skin color is like in your face proof of that.

The average person is so dumb that I don't think it matters.

That is problem mostly of education rather than IQ. IQ is just the statistic for showing difference is cognitive general ability compared to other people who take the test.
So it is kind of like limiting factor of how high you can go not how low you can go.

People with 80IQ have real problems with basic life tasks that is not just being "dumb" that is severe disability that makes you life hell, especially now that we live in word where you need to be computer afluent in almost every part of live.
Having 80IQ was probably not that important even 50 years ago where you had ample amount of work that mostly required muscles than brain but now it becomes a problem.

Right now to have decent job you need to finish decent schools and this only increases with time. What if in next 50 years jobs will became so complex that person with 100IQ will have hard time like that with 80IQ now ?

 

[Tumle]

God makes science looks even more stupid

I think you missplaced god and science in that sentence..

 

[Dunki]

I'm not an expert on DNA, but isn't there like a 99% DNA similarity between humans and chimpanzees? So clearly small DNA differences can lead to big differences in observable reality.

I just feel like race is one of those things about life in which you'll have to rely on your own judgement for an answer, like say the existence of the soul or even extraterrestrial life, if there really was concrete evidence for those things it would be suppressed because it would just have too radical an effect on society.

Race should really only matter in terms of medical issues. For example there is special heart medicine for black people because otherwise they have a high risk of dying by using the one for white people" Also science. But race should not be used or matter in social aspects, about ethics, morals etc. IT should not be used on a common basis like it is now. To normal people it should be something totally unimportant. Just like you wear a black suit while another person wears a white suit. Race should NEVER define a person or his/her identity

 

[llien]

I'm not an expert on DNA, but isn't there like a 99% DNA similarity between humans and chimpanzees?

97.5% DNA similarity between humans and mice.