IQ and Race

“3. Contradiction in the Tempers of some Southern Nations. The Indians[5] are naturally a pusillanimous people; even the children[6] of Europeans born in India lose the courage peculiar to their own climate.” Montesquieu “The Spirit of the Laws”

The effect of environment on temperament and culture has been being speculated upon as long as political philosophy has existed. In the absence of modern science the speculation has been consistently more clever or colorful than accurate.

Aristotle in his Politics also discusses the effects of climate on character,

Writers after Montesquieu rejected this theory that climate governed intelligence, courage, etc. They pointed out the difference between the characters of the French of Montesquieu’s day and that of the Gaul’s of Roman days. They doubted that the climate had changed though the character of the people certainly had.

When Linnaeus first invented modern scientific classification of organisms he classified feral children as a separate species from humans. Children who grow up in the wild in the absence of human company do not develop normal language skills. A number of cases of feral children being raised by wolves or growing up alone in the wild show the tremendous difference which environment can make in the Phenotype. Children raised by wolves in some cases cannot walk upright because their tendons have grown and adjusted to running on all fours. They do not show the normal range of human emotions, but can sometimes smell a lump of meat acres away. Descriptions of feral children can be accessed on the web at http://www.feralchildren.com/en/index.php. This is important because it graphically demonstrates the extreme effect that environment can have on phenotype.

The fact that people in different lands are different in ability in predictable ways has been observed throughout history. Isolating exactly what causes this difference has always been a problem, but modern science is doing a better job of measuring these differences. Not only from country to country but also through scientific records of previous measurements across time.

These observations have produced some tremendous surprises one of which is called the Flynn Effect. What is the Flynn Effect? The Flynn effect is a measurable increase in IQ scores in all groups tested over time. If you are white today your numerical score on an IQ test is about 30 points higher than your great-grandfathers one hundred years ago. This does not show up on IQ scores because they are normalized for each group. Your IQ is not measured against your great-grandfathers, but against your classmates. Your IQ score is adjusted to reflect the average in your group. The average raw score of blacks on IQ tests in the US has increased as much as that of whites. If you know anything about race and IQ this effect will be familiar to you. Advocates of the theory that average differences in IQ scores between races reflect some sort of genetically determined difference will maintain that the Flynn Effect is irrelevant.

This helps to put the question about racial differences in IQ in its proper context. First the history of the idea of race itself demonstrates a profound bias to attribute to inheritance differences that are cultural. Second it is known as a scientific fact that raw scores on IQ tests vary greatly between different groups even when one group is composed of the grandchildren of the other group. This makes the correlation of raw IQ scores by group with genetics extremely weak. IQ differences exist between various countries the lowest in Europe is France. The highest is Holland. The average difference between these two countries is 13.3. (From V. Buj, Person. & Individ. Diff., Vol. 2, pp. 168 to 169, 1981) This is about the same as the average difference between Whites and Blacks in the US. It is implausible given the history of race in general and the existence of the Flynn effect to attribute differences in IQ scores between races to genetic differences. Occam’s Razor requires that you accept a demonstrated plausible explanation for a phenomenon rather than inventing new causes just because they are emotionally attractive. The Flynn effect is a known proven and demonstrated effect. Never in history have genetic difference in IQ, courage, artistic sensitivity, between groups as large as races been successfully demonstrated. The default assumption should be that cultural differences are involved.

The history of these racial differences is frequently overlooked by people attempting to prove that such differences in test scores represent a genetic rather than a cultural difference. “The Bell Curve” sounds plausible until you read a few other books in the field and realize that TBC did not actually answer any of the criticism against the theory but just glossed over them. One of the biggest was also one of the earliest. When IQ testing was first done in the US, Blacks in the urban North scored higher average scores than Whites in the rural South. This difference was pointed out by Klineberg. Irish and Poles scored lower than other whites. The TBC types of the time attributed these differences to genetics. Opponents citing the higher scores of Blacks in the North said environment and attributed the low scores of Irish and Poles to the negative effects of Papism. Today the IQ scores of Irish and Poles are somehow not tabulated as separate from the IQ scores of other whites. It is worth noting that today the Poles score 3^rd highest in average IQ in Europe. The English score 6 points on average below them. This is the opposite of the difference in IQ’s of people of English and Polish descent at the time of WWI in the US. Clearly this difference is environmental not genetic.

Jensen in a paper “How much can we Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?” published in the Harvard Review in 1969 compares the environment of Negroes and Native Americans and their IQ scores. He points out that when looking at the environmental causes normally associated with poor IQ’s among Blacks, Native Americans are as much lower in standard of living than Blacks, as Blacks are lower than Whites. Yet, Native Americans score higher than Blacks on IQ. This is very useful work. It debunks to a large degree the popular Democratic attempt to equate gross social factors like money to IQ. It demonstrates fairly well that just throwing money at the problem will not fix it. In debunking the faulty scholarship of Politically Correct pseudo-science, Jensen does us all a favor. It is important in science to be right for the right reasons. If you are right for the wrong reasons then you will spend money doing the wrong things to improve the situation.

Jensen has his own blind spots. To believe that you prove your own theory by debunking other peoples work is to jump to a conclusion. It is possible to be as wrong as your opponent. Proving him wrong does not prove you right. Klineberg noted in his observation of Blacks that rhythm is not an inherited trait. He observed that Black Mothers at ball games would move their children’s hands and feet in time with the rhythm. This taught rhythm to Blacks before they even learned to speak or walk. Native Americans tend to confine their children in papooses or bundles. This confines the child’s arms and legs preventing them from moving. One nurturing behavior focuses early development on physical activity, the other focuses early development on physical inactivity and forces the developing mind to focus on seeing and hearing. It is plausible to suspect that such opposite nurturing behaviors at such an early stage focus development in opposite directions.

The cultural inheritance of Blacks and Native Americans are also almost opposite. Blacks were a servile population. Native Americans were conquered and sent to reservations, but never a servile population. One culture would force children to develop one way in subtle manners, the other in an opposite direction through equally subtle behaviors. Eliminating gross economic factors does not eliminate culture or environment as a cause for average IQ differences between groups.

Dr. Flynn, the discoverer of the Flynn effect has developed a remarkable model for integrating the genetic and cultural influences on IQ called reciprocal reinforcement which effectively explains why genetics rules IQ differences within a group and why culture rules IQ differences between groups. It appears to elegantly explain the data and will most probably be the real definitive refutation of “The Bell Curve”.

IQ is not the only thing about human beings that has been changing from generation to generation. Female breast size, average height, and even the size of the brain have all been increasing. During the period that IQ’s in the US increased by about 30 points average brain size increased by about 1 sigma of standard deviation. “(2) the head circumference norms for male and female children in the US have risen at equivalent rates (a full standard deviation) between the 1920's and 1970s (Ounstead, Moar & Scott 1985; Whitehead & Paul 1988; in England, the long-term increase in men's and women's brain weight has been at the same rate since the turn of the century (Miller & Corsellis 1977)." Storfer, Miles David responding to criticism of his article, “Myopia, Intelligence and the Expanding Neo-Cortex” 2001.

Such increases in physical brain size suggest that some of the Flynn effect apparent IQ increase is real. It demonstrates that IQ is closely related to environment. Studies of the growth of the brain have shown that the cerebellum is the last part of the brain to complete its growth and probably the most sensitive to environmental influences as found by Judith Rappaport of the National Institute of Mental Health. The cerebellum contains about 70% of the brains neurons. This same region of the brain has been shown to be about 5% larger in professional musicians than in non-musicians. This region of the brain also shows the greatest difference in development in identical twins. This region of the brain is also the region centrally concerned with muscular coordination and movement and therefore the part most likely to be effected by the differences in nurturing behavior between Blacks and Native Americans.

We know that IQ and brain size vary with the environment. We know that both have been increasing in all races for the past century. We know that Blacks today score higher in raw scores than Whites a century ago did. We know that at that time Blacks with a more enriched urban environment scored higher than rural Whites. It is a pretty good bet that Blacks a century from now will have higher raw scores on IQ tests than Whites do today.

Aristotle in the quote opening this section suggests that Greeks are a superior race because they represent the right balance between intellect and passion while Europeans are inferior because they are too passionate and Asians are inferior because they are too intelligent. This argument has been revived by an advocate of racial differences in IQ working in England. He maintains that Europeans are the superior race because they are the right balance of intelligence and passion. Blacks are too passionate and East Asians too intelligent. Leadership of the world calls for character blended with intellect, not too much passion and not too much intellect. Since there is evidence that some of the gain in IQ shown by the Flynn effect is real, this would mean that Blacks are the new Super Race. Whites have become too intelligent to be leaders of men while Blacks have advanced in IQ to the point where they represent the perfect blend of passion and intellect needed by a race that will lead the other races of the world.

Einstein once said that the definition of stupidity is to do the same thing and expect a different result. Differences between groups have been attributed to heredity throughout history, and history has always without exception demonstrated that attribution to be false. Stephen Jay Gould the famous evolutionary theorist who invented punctuated evolution theory wrote a book “The Mismeasure of Man”. It is sometimes called the definitive refutation of “The Bell Curve”. In it he exhaustively documents the long history of scientific thought that attempted to prove that differences between races are hereditary and how new discoveries in succeeding generations proved each previous theory false. The history of this kind of ‘scientific’ work duplicates that of creation ‘science’. In every generation brilliant thinkers set out to prove evolution is wrong and creationism right. Based on the science of their day they develop brilliant interpretations of the data which support their point of view. New discoveries refute their explanations and a new generation of creationists invent brilliant new sophistries to explain away the evidence for evolution. In every generation the previous version of race science is proved false and brilliant new minds invent brilliant new ways to believe that race differences are due to genetics. Men doing such work today must confidently expect that their theories will join the theories of all who did the same in the past in the dustbin of discarded science. If they don’t, well we all know what Einstein said about that. (Gould also attempts to prove that G, the general IQ factor, does not exist. He should have simply stuck to discussing the fossil history of science in which his experience as a paleontologist served him well. It is unlikely that G will be debunked, and if it were it would make no difference to persons doing race science. They would simply shift their arguments to multiple factors or whatever current science uses. Debunking G is a fruitless side issue in the debate on racial differences, and it is almost certain that G is real in a scientific sense.)

(As you will have noted in the section entitled A Brave Experiment, I have a high IQ. Most of my family has qualified for membership in Mensa at one time or another. A fair number of my relatives have been college professors. My IQ has always been exceptional and I have always been able to apply it in anything I attempted to accomplish. A couple of anecdotes may be of interest here. The Army is not an intellectually demanding environment. There is a greater emphasis on various physical abilities. I used to joke that there must be some regulation requiring at least one misspelled word on every page of an Army pub. As I was approaching retirement I reached that point where the young men coming in had been born after I joined the service. Every day I had to do physical training with these young men and set a leadership example. When PT tests would come along I would go among the members of my platoon and tell them that I was going to pass the PT test to the standards set for a 17 year old, the youngest among them while making a big thing of my arthritis, bad knees and back. This would motivate them to do well and I almost never had PT test failures. After retiring it took some time to get my brain back up to Nerd standards. I remember picking up Mill’s “On Liberty” and finding it difficult reading. After I finished the three years reading that prefaced the writing of this book, after training by reading about half the Great Books of the Western World, Mill’s came up in my reading schedule and I found him rather easy. This is the difference that training and preparedness can make in intellectual tasks even in a person with a consistently proven extremely high IQ. Another story. When I was a fighter in the SCA (where I had a completely undeserved reputation for hitting people too hard and not paying enough attention when they hit me) the mores of the group required fighters to practice other skills like chess, music, heraldry, etc. I had been playing chess intensely since I was about 6 years old. For several years my brothers and I would spend hours after school killing each other over the chess board. I can just about play chess in my sleep. Naturally I signed up to compete in the Chess tournament while also fighting in about 80 pounds of plate mail in that sort of tournament. I would fight a match on the field and then come in and play an opponent at chess. The first time I attempted to make the transition from that intense concentrated physical exertion to the intense concentrated mental exertion of the chessboard, it took an effort that was literally painful. If I who had such an extreme familiarity with chess should have that much difficulty making the transition, how much more difficult it must be for people who have only done the physical things and never the mental. It would probably be difficult enough to cause most to simply stop trying. Given my experience of how my intelligence seems to move from one activity to another and be needed for either, it is impossible for me to observe the athletic excellence which blacks display and not see a potential for intellectual excellence. Any person attempting to excel in an athletic contest must understand a great many things, interpret a great deal of data, mostly nonverbal and act/react with enormous speed. I think it must require some G to be world class in any endeavor. I cannot believe that the majority of world class athletes are not above average in G. Though it is not likely to show up in tests of verbal or mathematical ability.)

Common sense and the history of ideas of this kind, of racial differences in talent and ability should predispose reasonable people to assume that such differences are the product of environment not genetics.

Political necessity also leads us to assume that the difference is environmental not genetic. If you assume it is genetic you assume that it is insoluble. If you assume it is environmental then it is quite plausible that a solution can be found. As a general rule people who assume a problem can be solved are more successful at solving it than people who assume it is impossible to solve. If the evidence did not actually favor assuming it was environmental, (as the historical evidence clearly does and as the scientific evidence increasingly does) if the evidence were merely equivocal, it would still be the correct political decision to assume it was environmental.

Hobbes established the political principle of equality in “Leviathan”,