<p>No. I don’t think that Asians are born smarter generally, or that Blacks are born stupid. I believe that all humans are capable of accomplishing the same things. Because of that, I think AA is some of the biggest bullcrap ever.</p>
<p>^ I agree with you on AA, but you have some serious lack of knowledge in biological sciences if you don’t know that I.Q. is largely a product of genetics. What you “think” to be fact regarding genetics is irrelevant.</p>
<p>It’s like saying is a person similar to their dad because they were born that way, or because of their environment? It’s really hard to differ between the two. </p>
<p>At the root of it right now there needs to be a change in the culture of minorities. The change needs to come from the minority communities to promote learning and success in school.</p>
<p>
Got to love CC. Person starts a thread and then doesn’t bother to check back on it or read the responses…but…wants to report the “main ideas”.</p>
<p>The Bell Curve is B.s. </p>
<hr>
<p>Note: In this post “Africans” means just black Africans and IQs are on a scale where Britain = 100 and America = 98 in 2006.</p>
<p>“The average African IQ is 70″ is something you hear on the Internet. It means that black Africans have an average IQ of 70. Some put it lower at 67. It has become an article of faith among HBDers and other scientific racists.</p>
<p>It is not just the Internet: it has appeared in at least 20 scientific papers and in several books and studies. It is what James Watson had in mind in 2007 when he said he was:</p>
<p>inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa [because] all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really.</p>
<p>The number comes from Richard Lynn, professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Ulster. He took some studies where IQ tests were given to Africans, took the average and got 67.</p>
<p>The number is suspect for a very simple reason: Africans do way better at school than you would expect from an average IQ of 67. Given their PISA scores and other measures of school achievement, you would expect an IQ somewhere near 82.</p>
<p>As it turns out, Lynn’s 67 is based in part on children who lost points because:</p>
<p>Some were not used to pencils and could not draw. One boy said it was the first time he ever drew a picture.
Some were not familiar with line drawings.
Some did not wear Western clothes and so did not draw people that way.
Many did not know about telephones, tennis, dollars, miles or other things common in America.
The main one: Most knew English only as a foreign language.</p>
<p>On top of that, Lynn marked down some scores and did not say why or how:</p>
<p>Boys in Uganda who averaged 86 Lynn marked down to 80.
Zulu children in South Africa who averaged 89 were marked down to 74.
From a study on Nigeria and Sierra Leone he took the two worst samples out of five. No reason given.
Of the 42 studies he could have used, Lynn used 11. They had an average IQ of 67. The studies he did not use had an average IQ of 80. He gave no reason for his choice (though he did not seem to know about those that appeared only in African journals).</p>
<p>There are good reasons to throw out some studies:</p>
<p>1.The test was not properly administered.
2.The test was not given in full.
3.The test takers were not a representative sample.
4.The test has known cultural biases.
5.The test has not been tried on a broad Western sample, making it hard to compare.
If you throw out all those you are left with 12 of the 42 studies. They have an average IQ of 81. Very close to the 82 expected from school achievement.</p>
<p>That is where the Netherlands was in the 1950s if you take into account the rising IQs of the Flynn Effect – which seems to have run its course in the West but not in Africa.</p>
<p>edit- btw I do not attribute this to mine own intelligence but that of a poster named abagond. Check his blog-- the man is brilliant.</p>
<p>“You are completely incorrect when equating Race to genetics in the study you are using. Your study is flawed. see my post.”</p>
<p>I wasn’t equating race to genetics? Race is a product of genetics.</p>
<p>And your response to my post merely indicated potential issues of one conducted study? The average reported I.Q. of Blacks varies between 67-82 (because of the degree of mix with other races); that is significantly lower than the averages for all other races. Minor discrepancies in the exact number are irrelevant. </p>
<p>I had presumed the premise of your argument was regarding the degree of heritability of I.Q.? When your response merely echoed potential flaws in one study? Have you now accepted and recognize that I.Q. is a product of genetics and are resorting to other measures of dismissing decades of evidence regarding race and I.Q.?</p>
<p>How are you measuring IQ? IQ tests are mostly a subjective scale and the IQ standard is based off of Caucasians (Who, by their own standards would have been mentally ■■■■■■■■ in the 1600s??). Also, how do you explain the FLynn effect if IQ is purely genetics? I was merely trying to rebuff the most common “proof” that AA were less intelligent. Also, can you tell me what IQs are average for other races? I sincerely don’t know.</p>
<p>Ugh. I had a point by point analysis of your study, but I took so long posting it. Oh, well, I can always refute your study later if you’d like. :)</p>
<p>@AustrianHayekian I am not saying that AA is perfect. No government run system ever is. Although the institution has the best intentions, not everyone is going to see it that way all of the time. I think that idea, of people being allowed to have ideas and express them, is what makes America great. However, race is not genetic. Many scientists have proven that no true genetic differences exist and that race is an institution of the mind.</p>
<p>[Science</a> Proves That Race Does Not Exist - Science Forums](<a href=“Science Proves That Race Does Not Exist - Biology - Science Forums”>Science Proves That Race Does Not Exist - Biology - Science Forums)</p>
<p>The above link is one such article on the issue. Personally, I don’t think IQ tests mean that much in terms of measuring a person’s actual intelligence, as there are other factors that can be linked to how a person performs on the IQ test. Here is an article on this issue as well as the Flynn Effect:</p>
<p>[Decline</a> or Increase in IQ Scores](<a href=“http://www.brainy-child.com/expert/iq-score.shtml]Decline”>http://www.brainy-child.com/expert/iq-score.shtml)</p>
<p>Like critics of the SAT about a decade ago, some tests do not always prove that a person is incapable of being intelligent, in fact it could just be an inability to take a test well.</p>
<p>Okay I am opening this debate up to a larger audience that will have more people involved… specifically if you are black and support AA, your thoughts are appreciated on the below link</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/1118519-affirmative-action-unfair-advantage-deserved-provision.html#post12334815[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/1118519-affirmative-action-unfair-advantage-deserved-provision.html#post12334815</a></p>
<p>Any “black” person who disagrees or wants to eliminate AA is a deluded moron.</p>
<p>I really hate AA because it is used by students with African parents to get into HYPSM and other Ivies over more qualified students of other races. But for students who really did have ancestors who were slaves, it is a fair and needed measure.</p>
<p>Actually thats false. It’s accurate to say that Africans have better work ethic than African Americans. Therefore perform better in HS. AA isnt trying to “correct” slavery or anything. Guess what? The kids with parents from Africa are just as disadvantaged as African Americans. All other ethnicities save white and Asian are disadvantage. I’m sure you’ve seen HS drop out rates, teen pregnancy rates, crime rates, college rates, etc.</p>
<p>@srcphoenix: Lol… just so you know… AA not only benefits students with “African parents”, but also Native Americans and Hispanics…</p>
<p>Plus. Just curious, but who are you to deem someone “qualified”? What’s your definition of “qualified”? Please enlighten us ignorant souls.</p>
<p>sigh.</p>
<p>just asking… if hispanics were not enslaved why do they receive it?</p>
<p>Saying that Africans have a better work ethic than African Americans is stereotyping. But MarinebioSax, you are right in that “qualified” is relative - no one application is absolutely better than any other. And CPUscientist3000, Africans are disadvantaged, but not as much as kids whose grandparents were sharecroppers.</p>
<p>AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS IN NO WAY TRYING TO CORRECT SLAVERY!</p>
<p>maybe you should pay attention in class because they were enslaved to some degree. scalped, exploited, etc. oh wait, america doesn’t wanna tell you about that.</p>
<p>EDIT: well everyone is stereotyping “blacks who are less qualified get accepted over more qualified white students” blah blah. and actually, some stereotypes are true. thats sorta why they exist. let’s try to take a survey of every single person of every race in america. i think we’d see the majority living up to the stereotypes.</p>
<p>Is affirmative action an accommodation for discrimination present in today’s society, or is it meant to make up for past actions? Is its purpose to “correct” for scalped Africans, sharecroppers, Native Americans who had their land taken, etc. (in the past), or to fight discrimination that minorities face today?</p>
<p>affirmative action is used to correct past discrimination of racism. blacks/asians/hispanics/na were all discriminated by whites… but then it leads to the asking, why are asians not included. just things to think about…</p>
<p>srcphoenix- present discrimination is linked to past discrimination. but i’d say it’s for the present.</p>
<p>ilikepizza- if blacks or hispanics had good HS succes rates, good college success rates, and weren’t largely lower class, etc like whites and asians are, then AA wouldn’t include them/us.</p>
<p>asians WERE discriminated against, and still are-- but look at their success rates. way higher than whites even (im assuming, or at least dangerously close.) when people joke about asians, its about how smart they are, not how stupid they are, how they only work at mcdonalds, and how they have “ghetto” names.</p>
<p>asians aren’t included because so many of them apply to top schools, and mostly all are “qualified” (as some AA-bashers here would say). you can’t admit them all.
the number of high-scoring, “qualified” (once again) blacks, hispanics and NAs in America are low and so are their success/graduation rates, therefor making them <em>gasp</em> underrepresented</p>
<p>BUT. asians are considered URMs at LACs and x number of Southern schools. so all is not lost</p>