Cape Cod Institute
 
Behavior OnLine Forums  
The gathering place for Mental Health and
Applied Behavior Science Professionals.
 
Become a charter member of Behavior OnLine.

Go Back   Behavior OnLine Forums > BOL Forums > Evolutionary Psychology

Notices

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Unread March 30th, 2006, 04:22 PM
TomJrzk TomJrzk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas
Posts: 257
Default Re: Race Differences and Intelligence

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred H.
would never agree with
Never is a long, long time. I understand how uncomfortable my views are (if you don't fully understand them) and would not expect many to subscribe, for various reasons.

If you could fully understand it, you would see that it's not different from the obvious; there is a basis for what you call morality. It's not blind determinism nor morally blind, as I've explained in the past.

And I know how confused you could get, I meant that 'social instinct' is the only source. My bad.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Unread March 31st, 2006, 02:05 PM
Fred H. Fred H. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 483
Default Re: Race Differences and Intelligence

Quote:
MM to JimB: The main problem I find with both your [JimB's] and Murray's view is that you both confuse social exaltation with worth…. It reminds me of the attempts on the right not too long ago to have Ronald Reagan's likeness carved into Mt. Rushmore.
Margaret—

Undoubtedly the primitive, subconscious emotional and motivational mechanisms play a huge roll in our perceptions and cognitions, and obviously our behavior.

And I’ve generally thought that as we become more aware of that impact, the more likely we’re able to exercise some amount of “objective” thinking (and /or free will) in attempting to discern “reality,” and whether there even is an objective reality, and even some sort of objective morality, that we humans are capable of discerning, and to exercise LeDoux’s downward causation.

However, I’ve found interesting that, in your case, while you actually do seem to have acquired some appreciation for the impact of these primitive neural systems, that that understanding doesn’t seem to have been all that helpful in your own objective thinking when it comes to an admittedly provocative issue like intelligence differences. E.g., your own blatant and, as best I can tell, rather narrow ideology, despite the overwhelming science and evidence that speaks to the reality of intelligence differences, seems to have precluded you from truly accepting and/or acknowledging the reality of such differences; and seems to have resulted in your obsession with what you suppose are the “ideological ends” of the “right” and “conservatives,” which borders on paranoia.

Todd once said that “ideas have consequences,” and I’m inclined to agree. I think that your “ideas,” that we humans lack “free will,” (and therefore, inevitably, whether or not you’re able to acknowledge it, must also lack any kind of meaningful moral responsibility), and that “conservatives” and/or those that don’t share your ideology are somehow “backward,” greatly diminishes any objectivity in how you see things.

However, I remain hopeful that Pinker’s nice hair will have some positive impact on you . . . he seems to be a fairly moral guy, at least for an “atheist.” I don’t suppose that you and I will ever be buds—nevertheless, all the best,
Fred




P.S.—Margaret—I just read your interesting article, “Autogynephilia, a Narrative,” by Margaret McGhee, at http://www.geocities.com/margimcghee/Articles/AG.htm. I’m a bit irritated with myself—I should have paid more attention to your web site and referenced articles when you first started posting here—I’d have had a better appreciation for where you’re coming from. I’d almost certainly have argued differently, or perhaps not at all. My bad. Maybe I need to up my Ritalin dose.

Anywho, I now actually have some empathy for your POV, why you see things as you do, and perhaps even your contempt of “conservatives,” and/or the “right.” In your article under “Our Gender Narratives Become Our Controlling Beliefs,” you write:
Quote:
Trans-women on the female-essence side of this dispute generally hold the strong belief that they are in some sense female. I find myself in this group. We believe that in a better world we would have been born with the bodies of women and would have had lives to match our gender identity. That belief feels so right to us because it closely matches our emotional experience. Many of us also hold a high level belief that self-realization, as long as it doesn't hurt others, is every person’s right. We demand that right for ourselves.
I’m inclined to agree with much of what you say in this paragraph—I doubt that we humans have much “choice,” or free will, probably none, when it comes to this “gender identity” thing; and I'd think that it is more or less hardwired, or at the very least a propensity, at a subcortical emotional/motivational level.

Last edited by Fred H.; April 1st, 2006 at 08:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Unread March 31st, 2006, 03:00 PM
TomJrzk TomJrzk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas
Posts: 257
Default Re: Race Differences and Intelligence

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred H.
that we humans lack “free will,” (and therefore, inevitably, whether or not you’re able to acknowledge it, must also lack any kind of meaningful moral responsibility
Something has to be true before "whether or not you’re able to acknowledge it" has any meaning.

There is nothing that proves that humans have free will and are not just following their social instincts.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Unread April 1st, 2006, 09:03 AM
Fred H. Fred H. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 483
Default Re: Race Differences and Intelligence

Quote:
TomJ: There is nothing that proves that humans have free will and are not just following their social instincts.
Tom—In case you’ve missed it, I’ve added a P.S. to my previous post to Margaret. I’m inclined to agree that regarding gender identity, it’s unlikely that there’s much “choice,” or free will involved, that it’s something that’s probably hard wired at a subcortical level.

A mass murderer, however, obviously “chooses” to be a mass murderer (except possibly in cases where the mass murderer is truly insane, or perhaps is a “child”). As best I can tell, there aren’t many “sane” “adults” that would argue, as you seem to, that a mass murderer is somehow not “morally responsible” or that mass murderers are “just following their social instincts.”
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Unread April 3rd, 2006, 08:47 AM
TomJrzk TomJrzk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dallas
Posts: 257
Default Re: Race Differences and Intelligence

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred H.
Tom—In case you’ve missed it, I’ve added a P.S. to my previous post to Margaret. I’m inclined to agree that regarding gender identity, it’s unlikely that there’s much “choice,” or free will involved, that it’s something that’s probably hard wired at a subcortical level.

A mass murderer, however, obviously “chooses” to be a mass murderer (except possibly in cases where the mass murderer is truly insane, or perhaps is a “child”). As best I can tell, there aren’t many “sane” “adults” that would argue, as you seem to, that a mass murderer is somehow not “morally responsible” or that mass murderers are “just following their social instincts.”
Great post, Fred. I've responded at http://www.behavior.net/bolforums/sh...0&postcount=26
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Unread April 17th, 2006, 06:32 AM
alexandra_k alexandra_k is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 106
Default Re: Race Differences and Intelligence

i don't know whether this is going to find the right place...

i'm responding to fred's 'wake up and smell your own ideological bullshit'

charming.

i have better things to do than try and talk to people who can't even be civil.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Unread August 23rd, 2006, 07:49 AM
bluecafe22 bluecafe22 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2
Default Re: Race Differences and Intelligence

IQ tests are not a valid measure of intelligence; they tend to ignore many aspects of human cognition and the cognitive process. Things like creatively, wisdom, ability to learn, ability to adapt and practical skills are not gauged by these tests in a meaningful way. IQ tests also fail to measure the same construct among all people to whom the tests are applied, the more culturally distinct the group (I.E. Truckers, and Musicians) the greater the discrepancy. To apply a single test to an entire population of distinct individuals from varying backgrounds is unbelievably biased unless used to gauge a particularly relevant skill. Example: Race horses are not gauged for their poker skills. - Just as Sociologists are not measured by their ability to paint.

The fact of the matter is intelligence does vary among humans, but this can be for many reasons: prenatal care, subjective interpretation, interest factors, differing environments, life circumstances etc. My concern is not with differences among individuals, but with claims that imply that group differences involving subjective and highly bias testing situations can amount to genetic differences in the traits being tested.

How does one compare the intelligence of a gifted painter with that of a mediocre Physicist? According to the narrow methods and perspectives used and held by many Psychometricians, the Mediocre Physicist is likely to be perceived the more intelligent. Why, because this is what the testing situation demands that they believe/think.

Psychometric tests do not and can not measure the number of years spent in practice, nor can they measure interest, motivation, interpretation, diet, home & social life, daily activities etc.; nor do they try! Despite these obvious and fundamental short comings this model is often presented as valid and unbiased by many practitioners.

Cole, Gay, Glick and Sharp (1971:233) made the following insightful observation: “ Cultural differences in cognition reside more in the situations to which particular cognitive processes are applied than in the existence of a process in one cultural group, and its absence in another.

Robert Sternberg and his colleagues ask the experts to define “intelligence” according to their beliefs. Each of the roughly two dozen definitions produced in each symposium was different. There were some common threads, such as the importance of adaptation to the environment and the ability to learn, but these constructs were not well specified. According to Sternberg, very few tests measure adaptation to environment and ability to learn; nor do any tests except dynamic tests involving learning at the time of the test measure ability to learn. Traditional tests focus much more on measuring past learning which can be the result of many factors, including motivation and available opportunities to learn (Sternberg,
Grigorenko, and Kidd, American Psychologist; 2005) This is because IQ test items are largely measures of achievement at various levels of competency (Sternberg, 1998,1999, 2003). Items requiring knowledge of the fundamentals of vocabulary, information, comprehension, and arithmetic problem solving (Cattell, 1971;Horn, 1994).

Further more, IQ is not a fixed quantity; it can be raised (It is not as difficult to rise, as it is to maintain). This has been demonstrated numerously through studies involving environmental stimulation.

Examples of such studies:

In 1987 Wynand de Wet (now Dr. de Wet), did his practical research for an M.Ed. (Psychology) degree on the Audiblox program at a school for the deaf in South Africa. The subject of the research project concerned the optimization of intelligence actualization by using Audiblox.
Twenty-four children with learning problems participated in the study, and were divided into 3 groups.

The children in Group A received Audiblox tuition. The children were tutored simultaneously in a group by means of the Persepto for 27.5 hours between April 27 and August 27, 1987. The first edition of the group application of the Audiblox program was followed. No diagnostic testing was done beforehand.
The children in Group B received remedial education. They were tested beforehand and based on the diagnosis each child received individualized tuition on a one-on-one basis for 27.5 hours between April 27 and August 27, 1987.
The children in Group C were submitted to non-cognitive activities for 27.5 hours during this period.

All 24 children were tested before and after on the Starren Snijders-Oomen Non-verbal Scale (SSON), a non-verbal IQ test that can be used for deaf children.
Dr. de Wet reported that he could do nearly all the Audiblox exercises without adaptations, except the auditory exercises. Because he had to use sign-language, the children could not close their eyes.
The average scores of the three groups on the SSON test were as follows:

Average IQ's before intervention, after intervention, and general Increase

IQ scores
Group A (Audiblox group): 101.125 - - 112.750 - - 11.625
Group B (Remedial group): 107.125 - - 116.250 - - 9.125
Group C (Non-cognitive): 104.250 - - 108.875 - - 4.625

Reports received from the teachers indicated that the improvements achieved through remedial education and through Audiblox transferred to the general school performance of the children. The transfer scored through the Audiblox, however, was superior to that of the remedial education, says Dr. de Wet. Finally, because Audiblox can be applied in a group setting, it is much more cost effective that remedial education, he says.

Reference: De Wet, W., The Optimization of Intelligence Actualization by Using Audiblox (M.Ed. (Psychology) Thesis: University of Pretoria, 1989).

The Glenwood State School

A particularly interesting project on early intellectual stimulation involved twenty-five children in an orphanage. These children were seriously environmentally deprived because the orphanage was crowded and understaffed. Thirteen babies with an average age of nineteen months were transferred to the Glenwood State School for retarded adult women and each baby was put in the personal care of a woman. Skeels, who conducted the experiment, deliberately chose the most deficient of the orphans to be placed in the Glenwood School. Their average IQ was 64, while the average IQ of the twelve who stayed behind in the orphanage was 87.

In the Glenwood State School the children were placed in open, active wards with the older and relatively bright women. Their substitute mothers overwhelmed them with love and cuddling. Toys were available, they were taken on outings and they were talked to a lot. The women were taught how to stimulate the babies intellectually and how to elicit language from them.
After eighteen months, the dramatic findings were that the children who had been placed with substitute mothers, and had therefore received additional stimulation, on average showed an increase of 29 IQ points! A follow-up study was conducted two and a half years later. Eleven of the thirteen children originally transferred to the Glenwood home had been adopted and their average IQ was now 101. The two children who had not been adopted were reinstitutionalized and lost their initial gain. The control group, the twelve children who had not been transferred to Glenwood, had remained in institution wards and now had an average IQ of 66 (an average decrease of 21 points). Although the value of IQ tests is grossly exaggerated today, this astounding difference between these two groups is hard to ignore.

More telling than the increase or decrease in IQ, however, is the difference in the quality of life these two groups enjoyed. When these children reached young adulthood, another follow-up study brought the following to light: ┨e experimental group had become productive, functioning adults, while the control group, for the most part, had been institutionalized as mentally retarded.⼢r> Other Examples of IQ Increase

Other examples of IQ increase through early enrichment projects can be found in Israel, where children with a European Jewish heritage have an average IQ of 105 while those with a Middle Eastern Jewish heritage have an average IQ of only 85. Yet when raised on a kibbutz, children from both groups have an average IQ of 115.

In another home-based early enrichment program, conducted in Nassua County, New York, an instructor made only two half-hour visits a week for only seven months over a period of two years. He spent time showing parents participating in the program how best to teach their children at home. The children in the program had initial IQⳠin the low 90s, but by the time they went to school they averaged IQⳠof 107 or 108. In addition, they have consistently demonstrated superior ability on school achievement tests.

Further References:
• Clark, B., Growing Up Gifted (3rd ed.), (Columbus: Merrill, 1988).
• Dworetzky, J. P., Introduction to Child Development (St. Paul: West Publishing Company, 1981).
• Skeels, H. M., et al., “A study of environmental stimulation: An orphanage preschool project,” University of Iowa Studies in Child Welfare, 1938, vol. 15(4).

Leon J. Kamin (Bell Curve Wars, 1995 p.92): extensive practice at reading and calculating does affect, very directly, one's IQ score.⼢r>

Robert Sternberg on the matter of IQ gains (Interview with Skeptic magazine): "I think it's hard to maintain the IQ gains. But if you think environment is important in the development of intelligence, and you put people in a really good program and you raise their IQ, and then take them out of the program and put them back in the poor environment in which they started, chances are you are going to lose a lot of the beneficial effect. If you give someone antibiotics for a disease, cure them, then put them back in the original septic environment, the disease will return. We've seen this when we work with children with parasitic infections. We can give them Albendazol and it will cure their parasitic infection. But if you put them back in the environment in which they acquired the infection, they will just acquire it again."

I personally do not agree with his comparing of IQ with disease or infection, but his point is valid; I am sure the same can be said for a good music program or art school. I think the main problem here is maintenance. Example: If a body builder does not exercise for some time his muscle mass will decrease. Or, if an artist does not paint for some years his/her skill will diminish. In other words, “use it or loose it.”

There are many other studies that prove IQ to be a non static phenomenon and/or none genetic trait, one of the most notable and well known being the Flynn effect: this study of IQ tests scores for different populations over the past sixty years, James R. Flynn discovered that IQ scores increased from one generation to the next for all of the countries for which data existed (Flynn, 1994). This interesting phenomenon has been called "the Flynn Effect."

”Research shows that IQ gains have been mixed for different countries. In general, countries have seen generational increases between 5 and 25 points. The largest gains appear to occur on tests that measure fluid intelligence (Gf) rather than crystallized intelligence (Gc).”⼢r>

http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/flynneffect.shtml

This being said, how well do IQ tests predict real world success? - According to Stephen J. Gould the only thing an IQ test can predict is how well a person scores on the test. Many others have made similar statements

Robert Sternberg on the matter of intelligence etc: "My first set of interests is in higher mental functions, including intelligence, creativity, and wisdom.- I have proposed a triarchic theory of successful intelligence, and much of the work we do at the PACE Center is in validations of this theory. The theory suggests that successfully intelligent people are those who have the ability to achieve success according to their own definition of success, within their sociocultural context. They do so by identifying and capitalizing on their strengths, and identifying and correcting or compensating for their weaknesses in order to adapt to, shape, and select environments. Such attunement to the environment uses a balance of analytical, creative, and practical skills. The theory views intelligence as a form of developing competencies, and competencies as forms of developing expertise. In other words, intelligence is modifiable rather than fixed."

We use a variety of converging operations to test the triarchic theory--componential (information-processing) analyses, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, cultural and cross-cultural studies, instructional studies, and field studies in the workplace. The results of all of these kinds of studies have been encouraging.

Key References:
Sternberg, R. J. (1977). Intelligence, information processing, and analogical reasoning: The componential analysis of human abilities.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J. (1990). Metaphors of mind: Conceptions of the nature of intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Successful intelligence. New York: Plume.
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). The theory of successful intelligence. Review of General Psychology, 3, 292-316.
Sternberg, R. J., Forsythe, G. B., Hedlund, J., Horvath, J., Snook, S., Williams, W. M., Wagner, R. K., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2000).Practical intelligence in everyday life. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2000). Teaching for successful intelligence. Arlington Heights, IL: Skyligh

Robert J. Sternberg (b. 8 December 1949) is a psychologist and psychometrician and the Dean of Arts and Sciences at Tufts University. He was formerly IBM Professor of Psychology and Education at Yale University and the President of the American Psychological Association

- Also see work by Howard Gardener.


Sternberg on Psychometric G (a quote from his interview with skeptic magazine): “What I found at that time was that if you use the kinds of tasks that are used in intelligence tests, then you will get the g factor. That statement reflected analyses we did that instead of using individual difference analysis used process analysis. Even using process analysis, we got a general factor. So if you were to ask me, "Do I think that there is general factor in the kinds of tests that psychometricians use?" I would say "Yes." That is a different question from, "If you define intelligence, not just as IQ, but as involving more than what the IQ tests in fact test, is there then a general factor?" then I would say the answer is "No." So the way psychometricians operationalize it, you get a g factor.”

Note: There are three major schools of psychometric interpretation and only one supports the view of g and IQ.


Race and Genetics:

- Osbonre and Suddick (1971, as reported in Loehlin, 1975) attempted to use 16 blood-groups genes known to have come from European ancestors. Testing two samples the authors found that the correlation over the 16 genes and IQ scores was not highly positive as would have been predicted if European genes in Blacks increased IQ scores. In Fact, the correlations were -.38 and +.01. Because the results were not significant, the authors concluded that European genes lower IQ scores.

- Zuckerman (1990) demonstrated the dubiousness of results obtained through race premises. He found much more variation within groups designated, and, like many other species, humans showed considerable geographical variation in morphology (p.1134). Yee, et al. (1993) further concludes this. Also see

- A study conducted Tizard and colleagues involving Caribbean children showed that there was no genetic basis for IQ differences between black & whites. The IQ of the children at the Orphanage was: Blacks 108, Mixed 106, and White 103 (Flynn, 1980; also see Richard E. Nisbett, Race, Genetics and IQ; The Bell Curve wars, 1995).

- Adjustments for socioeconomic conditions almost completely eliminate differences in IQ scores between black and white children.Co-investigators include Jeanne Brooks-Gunn and Pamela Klebanov of Columbia's Teachers College, and Greg Duncan of the Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research at Northwestern University.

- According to most geneticists human populations have never been separated long enough for anything but the most superficial traits to have developed; human psychical traits over lap and graduate into one another. As well, there is as much or more diversity and genetic difference within any "racial" group as there is between people of different racial groups. Traits like height and body shape offer much more genetic information than anything we use to designate the racial groups found here in North America and elsewhere. Also, what is considered black America could be considered white in Africa; that is, social ideas involving race differ from population to population."

- Also, IQ differences in the U.S are not as drastic as some might have you believe. Many researchers put the difference between 7-10 points (Richard Nisbett, 2005; Vincent, 1991; Thorndike et al, 1986; Leon J. Kamin, The Bell curve wars, 1995). As well, this conclusion is only reached after lumping the entire population to together as a single body. The truth is, blacks from the southern, western, Northern, Eastern (etc) regions of the U.S differ markedly in culture and achievement.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Unread August 23rd, 2006, 09:21 AM
bluecafe22 bluecafe22 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2
Default Re: Race Differences and Intelligence

- I am reposting a section of my last post, this time with references. Mind you, some of the cited references are Psychologists and not Geneticists; however, they are still great/reputable references. Enjoy*


According to most geneticists human populations have never been separated long enough for anything but the most superficial traits to have developed; human psychical traits over lap and graduate into one another. As well, there is as much or more diversity and genetic difference within any "racial" group as there is between people of different racial groups. Traits like height and body shape offer much more genetic information than anything we use to designate the racial groups found here in North America and elsewhere. Also, what is considered black America could be considered white in Africa; that is, social ideas involving race differ from population to population." (See Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi, Piazza, 1994 & 2000; Davis, 1991; Allen & Adams, 1992. Yee, Fairchild, Weizmann and Wyatt, 1993; Also see Dryna, D.Manichaikul, De Lange, Snieder, and Spector, 2001; Holden, 2001; Also, see Flynn 1999; Neisser et al, 1996)
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Unread August 23rd, 2006, 10:17 AM
Fred H. Fred H. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 483
Default Re: Race Differences and Intelligence

Quote:
Also, what is considered black America could be considered white in Africa;
IOW, all the best NFL running backs—really, virtually all the NFL running backs—really aren’t black after all . . . they’re all white, just like all the owners . . . yeah, that’s the ticket.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Unread August 25th, 2006, 05:18 PM
James Brody James Brody is offline
Forum Leader
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia area
Posts: 1,143
Default Race Differences and Intelligence: BlueCafe 22

This may be an instance of only reading things that you already believe (for reasons of genomic conflict, maternal investment, and relative estrogen dominance)...

I used to believe as you do, at least until I got out of school.

I also used to believe that you, as "responsible scholar" might consider the orderly structure of data from as wide, and as gifted, a set of observers as those whom you cite. If there is, however, a significant heritability for beliefs such as yours, then you have found the right place in academia where many, including Leon Kamin, have graveyards to defend...

JimB

Last edited by James Brody; August 25th, 2006 at 05:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.