Sub-saharan countries score lower on IQ tests, but I wonder if the Flynn Effect is in play here. What I mean to say is that scoring high on an IQ test may be a cultural skill. Genetics, race, ethnicity, etc. need not come in to it, because the best explanation for the Flynn effect is that technological societies get more complicated as the years go by and people adapt to that.
Look at a cereal box from 1900. It’ll say something like “Wheat is good for you!” and that’s it. Look at one from 2013 and it’s got nutrition labels talking about vitamins, serving size, and recommended daily allowances. That’s tables of data to process and it very well may have a word puzzle for the kids on the back. “Help Cap’n Crunch break the code!” or some such.
Measuring IQ has its uses, but (Brazil84, you need to pay attention to this) it’s less a measurement of intelligence than it is of skill. People in the 1930’s score about an 80 on IQ tests, as we measure it today. That’s functionally retarded. Down’s Syndrome territory. Obviously, they weren’t developmentally disabled and we’re not far enough removed for anything remotely genetic to happen. So what’s changed?
What’s changed is the amount of information a human is subject to. And I think this is where the discrepancy in IQ between cultures lies.
You don’t even need a Flynn effect, my first question would be “how are the tests being administered?”
The first time we got any kind of psychological tests, a moron came, gave us all these pages with little pictures and little boxes and spent several hours reading very slowly and superciliously such complex questions as “who do you love more, your mommy or your daddy? If you love your mommy best, mark the widdle housie! If you love your daddy beeeest, mark the little tree! And if you love both of them the same! Mark the sunnie!” This was to children who could all read by that time, even the dyslexics.
The last time I went through a psychological test of any kind, the test itself contained some irritating questions, but anybody taking it was expected to be able to read it, and none of the questions was as irritating as that psychologist. I don’t remember the irritating questions a couple of years later; I remember the irritating asshole 39 years post facto, and I’m sure that wanting to reach inside the mouth of the testgiver, grab his stomach and pull it out has a negative impact on test results.
That’s basically just a repetition of your conclusion. What exactly would or wouldn’t happen in such a country which would result in it being “non-functional”?
And roughly speaking, what is the minimum national average IQ to avoid having a “no functionality” situation? Since the normal cutoff for mental retardation is 75, can I take it that an average national IQ of 76 would do it?
The point being made is that someone of normal intelligence from the 1930s would score low on a modern IQ test due to the cultural changes and increase in knowledge.
Could one of the mods please explain to me why known white supremacists who post the same links every few months, over and over, and never admit that they are repeatedly posting lies, while continually arguing that non-whites are mentally retarded aren’t banned?
Nothing would work. There’s be no system of government at all. No justice, no defense, no sanitation, no roads, nothing.
Look at downtown Gabarone in Google Street View. It’s a functioning city. The lines are painted straight on the roads. People who seem to be able to dress themselves are walking around and waiting for buses and carrying parasols. There’s a Shell station advertising “V-Power” gas, just like they do here. People are driving well-maintained cars (almost all the cars are white, for some reason.) It looks pretty much like any city anywhere. You’d have none of that. A nation of mentally retarded people could not build an office building or run an electrical grid.
We’re now delving into the realm of the absurdly obvious, and your sincerity in asking “Gosh, why couldn’t a nation of retarded people work” is highly questionable. It’s like asking me to prove that a Chihuahua could not win the Kentucky Derby and asking “well, at what point is a horse enough like a dog to not win the Kentucky Derby?” It’s not a spread of possibilities.
It’s hard to say since there are no countries in the world where the normalized IQ isn’t 100. So we have no examples. But I’d guess things would start to fall apart long before you got as low as 76. Just guessing, though.
The fact that you don’t understand why the United States in the 1930s had people who on modern tests would have scored as being very stupid, and yet the USA then was a functioning country, says a lot. You don’t seem to understand anything about IQ tests at all.
Obviously. So, let me help you. Hmmm…what’s the best way to put this? Oh— it’s debate board!!! And as such you’re likely to encounter ideas you don’t agree with and—heaven’s to Betsy—might even find offensive.
Mags! Haven’t heard from you in a long time… Board’s been kinda dull without Mr. Crankypants around. How’s Bubba and Deewayne?
Yes Karrius, as Mags helpfully pointed out, it’s a debate board.
Well… actually… not quite. There is a section for debate, and a section each for factual information, opinions etc. But not really one exclusively reserved for racists and their rants. So they chip in where they can.
(Hey… It takes practice to hone skills in disseminating falsehoods and ego fanning self proclaimations of superiority due to your draw in the gene pool…)
Awesome, thanks. So I have your vote for never complaining about Der Trihs again, that you don’t think calling people mentally retarded is being a jerk, and my new thread “Factually speaking, why are conservatives baby raping evil psycopaths?” is perfectly ok.
I’m glad I have your support.
Also, “debate” implies, well, a debate. The fact that you think brazil’s “constantly post the same links that have been proven untrue over and over, while putting everyone on ignore” a ‘debate’ says a whole lot about you as a person.
My post has very little to do with brazil, with whom I have very little if any interaction; it has to do with you and your notion that people who you find offensive because of their positions don’t have the same right as you have to be heard. I love it when liberal douches like you reveal their true colors. Thanks for the laugh, and not letting me down.
