FROM MY POST ON QUORA
There is absolutely no dispute any longer over race, class, and gender differences in IQ and personality within the field – and we know the structural, chemical, and genetic causes. We also know that the counter-arguments are produced by people outside the field, or marginally within the field, and worse, that sociology and sociology suffer from the replication crisis.
The numbers are correct, and they are MORE correct as time passes as we age and educational differences don’t mask biological differences.
This doesn’t mean x race is dumber than y race. It means there are more dumb people in x race than y race because climate didn’t cause natural selection, agrarianism didn’t cause natural selection and markets didn’t cause natural selection that reduced the size of the underclasses (those who cannot adapt to increasingly complex work at low cost.)
For example, in the UK where most African immigrants are from Nigeria or Ghana, the numbers are quite good – because those two countries have had middle classes the longest. This does not apply to other areas of Africa. Likewise, in SE Europe, which has had Turkic Ingression, the European IQ is substantially lower than the rest of Europe. Worse, given the reversal of eugenic reproduction in European countries we have lost about 15 points of IQ since the beginning of the industrial revolution.
1) A group’s aggregate IQ is MORE a function of the size of the underclass than group (racial) differences in traits.
2) The next primary difference is neotenic evolution – slowing development buying better neurological performance and larger brains (East Asians are the most neotenously evolved, with the largest brains).
3) Neotenic evolution slows maturity and lessens maturity, which lowers aggression, particularly during maturity, and allows continue cognitive development – particularly executive function (self-control, or agency).
The problem is that your quality of life is more dependent upon the IQ of your neighbors than your own. This is the challenge of all developing countries – especially now that the European technological advantage has been redistributed to the world, and growth has flattened since the war.
The primary difference between racial distributions is that East Asians and west Europeans (a) were more homogenous and isolated, (b) were more neotenized by the ice age, (c) practiced institutional economic eugenics during the medieval period (manorialism), and (d) practiced drastic capital punishment over the past 1000 years. These drastic reductions in the underclass skew the averages. There are also subtle but significant differences in personality distribution, and comprehension – principally verbal acuity, and environmental awareness with Amerindians and Asians the general examples.
That said, (a) brain size, (b) degree of neoteny, (c) neural density – particularly in size and thickness of the cortex, and the number and distribution of the tiny connective neurons produce these differences. These adaptations are facilitated by evolution in a cold climate in isolation among small homogeneous groups.
If you have a basic understanding of genetics you’d know that the difference in genetics regulating brain size in a chicken and an ape is almost. The difference in regulating brain size between chimps and humans something on the order of ten times. The races have different gestation periods, different maturity rates, different depths of maturity, and different ages of reproduction, and different rates of copulation.
Humans self-domesticated. It was hardest in Africa with the number of human variations, less hard outside of Africa with fewer variations but more survival options, less hard as we migrated north, with more survival options but harder survival conditions.
It must have been a wonderful time between leaving Africa 60,000 years ago, evolving into fully modern humans by 40,000 years ago, and hunting ourselves out of large game by the mesolithic 15,000 years ago. Same for the Americas. In about the same amount of time in both the Americas and Eurasia, we had overhunted everything in Eurasia but rabbits, birds, and deer.
People didn’t take up agrarianism because they wanted to. They had to. It was just a miracle that despite a much harder working life agrarianism supported more people than hunting and gathering.
The Three Lies of the Left:
1) the false promise of continuous growth.
2) the false promise of the morality of man – man is amoral (Practical).
3) the false promise of the malleability of man – its 80% genetic and 20% idiosyncratic developmental differences.
Please don’t waste my time unless you have mastered the literature by at least the top ten people in the field.