Asia, here I come (back)

Generali

ninky wrote: »

is it to do with where you are born or IQ though? on average the IQ of chinese / asians tends to be higher than other groups and i think that is the case whether born in china or here. if china was more ethnically mixed would we see the same behaviours? higher IQ in females is linked to lower fertility as well as better assessment of risk, ability to defer gratification etc etc. i realise i am probably getting into dodgy territory here......

Doesn't that just show up the limitations of the IQ test? If it were a genuine test of intelligence rather than something else then you should get better at them with practice for a start.

Do you really believe that Chinese people are innately more intelligent than everyone else? It's pretty racist.

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

...
Do you really believe that Chinese people are innately more intelligent than everyone else? It's pretty racist.

To misquote a saying :-

The British invent it.
The Germans perfect it.
The Chinese make it cheaper.

This is a generalisation, but it may have some basis in truth in that different cultures have different strengths?

Loughton_Monkey

ninky wrote: »

...... higher IQ in females is linked to lower fertility as well as better assessment of risk, ability to defer gratification etc etc. i realise i am probably getting into dodgy territory here......

What do you mean here?

Interpretation 1: Females have a higher IQ than men (true) because they have lower fertility than men?

Interpretation 2: Within the female species, those with a higher IQ will tend to deliver fewer pregnancies per USE [Unprotected Sexual Encounter - I just made that up!]

If 1, then it is factual that girls have a slightly higher IQ than boys before puberty. So fertility doesn't really enter into it.

If 2, then I suspect you are getting confused with research that shows that higher IQ females have fewer children. To associate the two as a 'fertility' issue [as opposed to one of 'choice'] is where you are 'getting into dodgy territory'.

Ian_W

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

look at the race card

Someone had to play it

Generali wrote:

It's pretty racist.

There it goes again!

I always thought the Chinese were said to be inscrutable - perhaps I misheard? :question:

ninky_2

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Interpretation 2: Within the female species, those with a higher IQ will tend to deliver fewer pregnancies per USE [Unprotected Sexual Encounter - I just made that up!]

.

yes i meant higher IQ females tend to have fewer children. in china this may also become self fulfilling.

assuming intelligence to have a strong genetic factor (which i believe it does) this would see populations with no population control become lower in IQ over time whilst those with population checks (such as china 'one child') maintain IQ. i.e. in the first unchecked population the lower IQ pass genes on to more offspring whilst in the checked population there is far less difference in the number of offspring generated from the high and lower IQ members.

this stuff is only dodgy because we are talking about IQ. if it was another genetic factor such as straight or curly hair it would be seen as far less dodgy.

ninky_2

Generali wrote: »

Doesn't that just show up the limitations of the IQ test? If it were a genuine test of intelligence rather than something else then you should get better at them with practice for a start.

Do you really believe that Chinese people are innately more intelligent than everyone else? It's pretty racist.

yes IQ tests are limited. people argue over what intelligence is. i guess i'm referring to the sort of intelligence tested by IQ tests. of course that might not include things like emotional intelligence.

is it racist to think perhaps the chinese are more intelligent on average? i'm not sure. stats do indicate difference but factors such as diet may play a role. obviously i am discussing an average and specific cluster of genetics. those genetics could easily be spread to other humans if mixed with them just like other physical factors. obviously there will be a lot of people who fall outside the average so not all chinese will be more intelligent and not all europeans less intelligent. i think it would be racist to assume all chinese are more intelligent. just as it would be sexist to assume all men are physically stronger than women. i don't assume that.

Loughton_Monkey

ninky wrote: »

yes i meant higher IQ females tend to have fewer children. in china this may also become self fulfilling.

assuming intelligence to have a strong genetic factor (which i believe it does) this would see populations with no population control become lower in IQ over time whilst those with population checks (such as china 'one child') maintain IQ. i.e. in the first unchecked population the lower IQ pass genes on to more offspring whilst in the checked population there is far less difference in the number of offspring generated from the high and lower IQ members.

this stuff is only dodgy because we are talking about IQ. if it was another genetic factor such as straight or curly hair it would be seen as far less dodgy.

You are assuming IQ is genetic. Personally I don't think it is. Biochemists have been looking at it for a long time, now, and as far as I know, have found all sorts of genes about hair colour, eye colour, and diseases, but have yet to stumble across an Intelligence gene.

They say that behaviour by the parents within the first 3 years of birth is massively the deciding factor in a lot of things to do with the child's character and propensity to learn.

You could always write to Cameron. Never does any harm. Both parents, by law, to pass IQ test [140 each parent minimum] before being allowed to have children. Solves education and over-population in the same master-stroke.

Brilliant idea!

ninky_2

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

You are assuming IQ is genetic. Personally I don't think it is. Biochemists have been looking at it for a long time, now, and as far as I know, have found all sorts of genes about hair colour, eye colour, and diseases, but have yet to stumble across an Intelligence gene.

the general scientific consensus is that intelligence does have a strong genetic factor but not exclusively so. studies put it at 0.5 to 0.9 (the latter being a stronger genetic factor than height) on a scale of 0 to 1. even at 0.5 that's a trait that is strongly influenced by genetics. you say that parental influence is important but that's likely to be pretty genetically influenced also.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

ninky_2

some more interesting stuff on high IQ. note the fact that half our genes go into making our brains.....so how on earth could genetics not be linked to intelligence?

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2009/05/disadvantages-of-high-iq.html

bendix

ninky wrote: »

i would have thought bendix would be pleased that his lot are in charge now in the uk - albeit wearnig a blue suit with a yellow tie.

anyhow it can't be such a shithole or he wouldn't have come back to spend the last few years creaming a nice living in the city.

My lot will move things in the right direction, but it's like trying to redirect an ocean liner with a tug. They can't change 50 years of slippage. And yes, I blame the Tories pandering to electoral whims, as much as Labour on this.

It's not a shithole. It's just not for me.

Creaming? Well, if that's what you call making a living. So be it.

I suggest therapy to curb your resentment.