Human evolution, Females vs. Males

Post Reply New Topic

Certain groups of those people are, and northern Europeans have, in some studies, scored less well on intelligence tests. I've not argued any kind of white supremacy angle in this!


Well, my casual observations do indicate blacks often have a certain unpleasant attitude, but I suspect that's more a cultural thing. I don't come across too many ethnic minorities, but when I do the ones in a role requiring a few IQ points over the normal are usually Asian.

As for "differences" in intelligence, differences in IQ are a component of that. I think the same holds for the male/female thing. Like I said previously, I recall reading that females score better on average in certain subsections of IQ tests, and males in others.

I disagree with the original poster. Being a race or a gender does not make you superior or inferior. This preconceived notion that race and gender plays a role on statistical relevance minus the fact that there is clear evidence of suppression and oppression from groups that simply do not want their detestable group to prove their arrogance as flawed is wrong.

It's the ego at play once again and the over simplification based on prejudism that keeps people instantly judging a book by it's cover.

That sounds like an IQ test question.

In other words, it's inaccurate to say that employment depends on IQ scores alone, and employment statistics doesn't tell you whether or not a particular race is smarter than another. You will have to use a different set of stats to prove your point. However, IQ scores which involve answering questions of a more logical nature are irrelevant to using social skills which include understanding other people--something I might consider irrational, or doing something irrational in order to convince someone who thinks irrationally. There doesn't seem to be any logic in using social skills, at least not the same way IQ scores are based on logic, so I would think them irrelevant. Perhaps it might be easier for someone with higher IQ to realize that they have a problem with socializing, or that they don't know how to do it because people aren't logical, but that doesn't mean people with lower or average IQ scores don't have any kind of socializing skills; on the contrary; maybe their IQ scores are lower because they think like everyone else; with emotions, and possibly irrationally. And actually, there are quite a few people who have really high IQ scores, yet they're unemployed or don't have a good job.


[/quote]

That's not good enough for me. The principal I met at a high school was black, and I know several people who are black on my campus in a university, and I"ve seen several of them at my university as well. And the homeless people I see on the streets aren't all black either.

I never said it did. However, it is a contributory factor. I reckon if you formed two groups of people, one with members having an IQ around 80, the other of 120, then found the mean wage for each group, and the proportion of unemployed in each, then the lower IQ group would have more unemployed and earn significantly less than the higher IQ group. It stands to reason.


Not on their own. But they are part of the big picture, as it were.


But social skills are all about influencing people. The best people at that have to be smart enough to interpret and understand the complex interactions that contribute to the state of mind of the person they're trying to influence. A smart person will be better at communicating; he will have the vocabulary for the situation at hand, and be able to call on metaphor and analogy to demonstrate his point effectively. Those are just a few examples. If you spend some time thinking on it I'm sure you'll come up with some more.

Of course there are exceptions, like those with AS, but that doesn't detract from the overall significance of the correlation.


So what? If we have two groups of people, one more intelligent on average than the other, then that does not preclude many members of the group of lower average intelligence from being more intelligent than many members of the group of higher average intelligence.

How did I ever miss this?



Full of ourselves aren't we?