I asked for your source because most studies have been refuted and I was curious if you found a legitimate one. Pulling up a random link on Google is not helpful to the discussion.
>>> The concept of "race" is a social construct, and "intelligence" has no agreed-upon definition; the validity of IQ tests as a metric for general intelligence is itself disputed. In particular, there is no scientific evidence that the average IQ scores of different racial or ethnic population groups can be attributed to any claimed genetic differences between those groups.
I didn't say it was attributed to genetic differences, nor that IQ is a good measure of general intelligence. I didn't even use the word "race" that you're concerned about the definition of. You might be arguing a different point.
What are these most studies that have been refuted? Can you tell me the number or the percentage or a big list of refuted studies along with a shorter list of non-refuted ones, or anything to show that's a real fact and you're not just repeating what activists have told you. Make sure it's not a trick like counting mostly 100 year old studies which could be greater in number allowing you to ignore everything from the last couple of decades. That might make true but also misleading.
I am not concerned about the definition of race - that was a direct quote from the Wikipedia article that you pointed me to.
Somehow the goalposts got reversed and I am now responsible for disproving your theory.
Let's go back to the original post. You made an assertion and I asked for a source because I was genuinely curious where you were drawing conclusions from. You then linked me to Wikipedia and I stated that all of the studies on that page are refuted (not abstractly... directly refuted in the Wikipedia article).
The same article says "In the US, generally individuals identifying themselves as Asian tend to score higher on IQ tests than Caucasians" Where does it say that it's refuted?
"The IQ debate became worldwide in scope when it was shown that East
Asians scored higher on IQ tests than did Whites, both within the United States and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro American culture" https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jense... You might not like the author of that one but it's in term cited to someone else.
"The top 10 countries by average IQ are:
1. Hong Kong (108)
2. Singapore (108)
3. South Korea (106)
4. China (105)
5. Japan (105)
6. Taiwan (105)"
[7+ is where non-Asian countries appear.]
https://www.healthline.com/health/average-iq#average-iq
I can't actually find anything saying there are no such differences, whether for Asians or anyone. Can you? For something that's so refuted, why didn't even The Guardian bother to mention it when they're trying so hard to oppose that kind of idea?https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2018/may/02/why-gen...
Remember, your claim is that all of these are wrong and most of the studies they're based on have been refuted.
There is disagreement among researchers about the causes of the differences, but not about their existence. I think you're confusing the two.
No - I can't say that I agree with the way you are using this data.
Your original comment implied causation - that different races have different intelligences BECAUSE of their race. You are hiding behind a technicality of never explicitly saying "causes" in your posts.
The sources you posted are all correlational - and indeed each goes on to explain in great detail why they are not causal. You are literally using articled that disagree with your initial implication to try to prove some technicality and twist data.
It is no better than stating "black people are dangerous" and then providing articles that show per-capita crime rate. The data without context (socioeconomic forces, etc) is useless. Using it blindly hurts people.
So you do agree but just misunderstood me. You should have made this post about your assumptions up front instead of asking for evidence of the wrong claim.
You people really need to stop hunting for racists under every rock! It blocks your ability to think as well as everyone else's when they're at risk of being attacked for failing to write the equivalent of "praise the Lord" at the end of every sentence to demonstrate their faithfulness.
I never said that I misunderstood. I said that your comment was implying other things. You are hiding behind technicalities, knowing full well what you had implied.
Hypothetically, if I commented on a fashion blog "people that wear blue shirts are more intelligent" and then pointed to an article stating that doctors often wear scrubs and score higher on intelligence, my original comment - while technically true - is worthless - it adds nothing to the discussion. Worse, my comment implies the wrong thing - color of shirts is independent - the true causal variable is a person's profession
I asked for a source for your statement. Why was it so hard to provide that? Instead we had to go through this huge ordeal to discover that you were making a weak correlational observation. Was it because you knew that your articles didn't support the claim you made?
I was reluctant to provide a source because it was trivial to do so yourself. I found 7 just from the first page of a couple of quick Google searches.
But it turns out you didn't want a source for my claim, you wanted a source for a different claim that you didn't state. Your mind is so bogged down in racism that you can't read people's words objectively.
No, it's not like your blue shirt example. Many people credit race-IQ differences to fairly common differences in upbringing and treatment by others, not the existence of some small but very uniform sub-group. A better example would be "people wearing t-shirts are less intelligent than people wearing buttoned shirts". That might actually correlate with the jobs of a wide range of people.
But at the end of the day, it's very clear:
My claim: "those different ethnic groups have different average IQs"
Your interpretation: "different races have different intelligences BECAUSE of their race"
That is clearly a misunderstanding, so you misunderstood me. The difference between causation and correlation exists and you conflated the two.
The Wikipedia article that you point to refutes it on almost every point... Please point me to the section that supports your claims. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence
>>> The concept of "race" is a social construct, and "intelligence" has no agreed-upon definition; the validity of IQ tests as a metric for general intelligence is itself disputed. In particular, there is no scientific evidence that the average IQ scores of different racial or ethnic population groups can be attributed to any claimed genetic differences between those groups.