Weiss on relative racial homogeneity

Courtesy of Ron Unz you can now, for free, read Volkmar Weiss’ 1991 contemplation on a question that I have been asking. For both the neoeugenic and dysgenic folk the topic should be of some interest. The relative homogeneity in general mental ability suggests stabilizing environmental forces which moderate deviations from a golden mean. What are they?

WHY ARE RACIAL DIFFERENCES IN INTELLIGENCE NOT LARGER?

German Central Agency for Genealogy, Leipzig The gene of the ability to taste phenyhhiocarbamide (PTC), a psychophysiological trait, has (see Weiss, Lehrl, and Frank 1986, p. 142) a frequency of about 0.50 among Caucasoids, a frequency of about 0.38 among Japanese, of 0.13 among Navajo-Indians, and of 0.70 among Australian aborigines. The most impressive fact of Lynn’s review on race and population differences in intelligence is their smallness. Differences between social strata within one population are larger than between races. We all know that an occupational group with higher education, whether black, white or yellow, has a mean IQ of about 125, the social stratum of unskilled workers a mean of about 90. In view of such social differences it will be always controversial, to draw from a lower mean of the Blacks in the United States the conclusion that Negroids are generally less intelligent. At best, such an inference should be based on representative samples of Caucasoids compared with pure Negroids from Africa where all social ranks are filled by one and the same race. Lynn’s review showing a 30 IQ difference between Caucasoids and pure African Negroids is more persuasive evidence that this difference has a genetic basis than has hitherto been available.

Despite many thousand years of relatively independent evolution. Mongoloids in East Asia and Caucasoids in Europe (and in the New World) appear to have very similar gene frequencies of general intelligence….

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Weiss on relative racial homogeneity

  1. Kiwiguy says:

    That is an excellent resource Unz has provided. I’m just reading some of the old issues now. Michael Levin’s article on race is quite good at addressing the clines or continuous variation argument.

    http://www.unz.org/Pub/MankindQuarterly-2002q4-00413

    • Chuck says:

      Ya — I really just wanted to say: Hey you can read a bunch of MQ papers thanks to Ron! But I decided to be a bit more oblique.

      • Kiwiguy says:

        Even better than I thought, he’s also uploaded author material from other publications too. I just clicked on Michael Levin and see there are 52 pdf articles. I’d never seen Levin’s review in Policy of ‘The Mismeasure of Man’ & Arthur Jensen’s ‘Straight Talk about Mental Tests”. It is brilliant.

        http://www.unz.org/Pub/PolicyRev-1982q3-00173

  2. Steve Sailer says:

    Everything is relative. For example, consider the records in the men’s 100m dash by race:

    West African Diaspora: 9.58
    White: 9.92
    East Asian: 10.00
    South Asian: 10.30

    From some perspectives, those are huge differences. Yet, the difference between Usain Bolt and the fastest Indian is well under 10%. It’s a good idea to keep multiple perspectives in mind.

    • Chuck says:

      Ok…but relative to the amount of difference between random individuals, which last I checked was 2pi/sqrt(pi) or 1.13 SD…

      • Steve Sailer says:

        Sure. It’s a big deal if you are picking unknown kids for a flag football team — pick the blacks, not the South Asians. But it’s not a big deal from, say, the perspective of the tortoise or hare.

  3. las artes says:

    4. Why the white and Indian have bigger IO variants than East Asian? India case is easy to understand due to it caste system create a lot generic distinct subgroups. For European (the whites), Athough the generic lineage got blue and gone during last 200 years, there were two generic seperate subgroups, the aristocrate and common populance. There were very few inbreeding between them for > 1000 years. Given that the avg IQ for the whites is 100, one of the generic subgroup should have higher avg IQ and that explains the bigger variants for the white. This higher avg IQ subgroup of the white, together with Jews, explains why most of Noble Prize and most of modern inventions are by the white. Han Chinese do not have any generic subgroup among them. When first Chinese empiror unified China at 221BC, China abondoned its original aristocratic social structure. The Han dynast followed Chin dynast was established by a poor peasant. Although marriage usually went between families with similar wealth, there is no generic inbreeding subgroup since the poor and the wealthy would go up and down. Japan and Korea are pretty much same as China. => East Asian are much more homogenious and there is no seperated generic subgroup and so although East Asian have higher avg IQ, they have smaller variants. This explains the economy phenomina of East Asian too. Although Japan is a developed country and second largest economy, they have very few inventions. The missing of a higher IQ generic subgroup hinder them from as creative and inventive as European. But their high avg IQ means that there have a massive smart people can mimick European inventions quickly and make massive manufactures.This expalins that East Asian Japan, Taiwen, Korea, HongKong, Signapore and NOw China have been doing very well in manufactures but with few inventions themselves. This also explains that there are not many Noble Prize are from East Asian as European.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s