|
|
Re: IQ, Race, and Rushton: Sorry what was the Question?JOHN WALDMANN (j.waldmann@AUCKLAND.AC.NZ)Fri, 21 Oct 1994 11:22:29 +1200
The Thread on rushton has focused for some reason on the relativly mute point of race. We all now that there is a miniscule and purely anecdotal relationship between race, genetics and culture. Genetics may play a part in intelligence as there is less room in small heads for ideas, concepts and coherent energy to get lost in, or distorted by dispersion. The really dumb question (I think Anthropology is about asking these at opportune moments) is: "WHAT DO ANTHROPOLOGISTS MEAN BY INTELLIGENCE?" *one or two postings implied some correlation between notions of IQ and culture. I personally feel that culture and environment is determinative of "success" (with genetics as an aspect of environment) so if IQ measures coorellate with success. ? Does this mean success in multiple cultural domains or in "White Euro- American" society alone? What do we mean by success, how do we measure it -is it reproductive, commercial/fiscal, political, or moral & societial? --If the last two,then in my opinion "white- Euro-Americans" society failed the global IQ test! (witness Central America, the War on Drugs, and the Gulf War for starters-High marks for technology (85%), low on resource management (33.3 %), zero for social responsability and moral prudence (well maybe the obligatory 5% for trying). ?? # The truth is not always offensive # But it more likely to be John Waldmann Auckland University # recognised when it offends.
|