Even if there are genetic markers which correlate well with psychological characteristics, this doesn’t mean the genes cause the psychology. Since other likely causes are social, you would need studies that isolate social causes from genetic causes–adoption studies, twin studies, etc. Does this Rushton have anything like that? (If not, am I right that even granting the correlation he’d still have nothing?)
What percent of African Americans are really misidentified darkly hued south Asians? I thought so.
The classical racial divisions were based on the geographic race concept, consistent with zoology. The divisions, K=5, are logical as the populations grouped under them genetically cluster due to minimal interbreeding over the last 100 generations:
That said I would agree that behavior traits can not define races. To the extent that there are racial differences in such traits it’s because the global genetic variance which codes for the patterns of morphological differences that differentiate races co-vary, if weakly, with global genetic variance that codes for behavior differences.
I would say that differences in criminality don’t appear to fully be a function of differences in intelligence. Ronald Fryer (2010) recently replicated Neal and Johnson (1996) – who replicated Murray and Herrnstein (1994) – and showed that in the nationally representative NLSY 97, IQ differences explain a large portion of the crime differences. Quote:
We already went through this. Races: Negroids, Caucasoids, Mongoloids, Australoids, and Americoids. Genetic commonalities: multivariate genetic similarity with respects to SNPs.
Repeating your claim isn’t the same as proving it.
Could you at least make an attempt to answer Blake’s question? That is to say, can you demonstrate, with scientific evidence, why the claims made by this scientist are incorrect?
Losing an argument with people who are much better informed and generally smarter than you are isn’t akin to rape. I don’t know if you have a thought disorder or what, but it doesn’t speak well of your mental abilities.
Thought what? Are the voices in your head answering you back?
Have South Asians, Arabs, and Pacific Islanders been mistaken for black Americans at times? Of course they have. Are you really staking your defense of discredited race theory on people being able to eyeball “races” correctly? This is such an obvious fail.
I find that video incomprehensible. The author, for example, maintains that racial classifications are “completely arbitrary.” As I and others have shown this is not the case.
Feel free to point out an argument that I lost here or elsewhere. I have to admit, the logical rigour here sets my mind afire (e.g., “Since races do not even exist in any biologically meaningful way, it is impossible for there to be any biologically determined differences.”)
So you’re unable to specify a percent? You can check the nationally representative Add health data. There is a variable that lists self identified race and interviewer identified race. Check the correlation.
Actually, come to think of it, I don’t believe any psychologists do take those purported psychometric instruments/measurements seriously any more, if ever they did. (Here’swhat RationalWiki says, anyway.) Are there any such instruments they do take seriously now, to measure anything about a mind/personality other than IQ? Does anybody know?
Actually, come to think of it, I don’t believe any psychologists do take those purported psychometric instruments/measurements seriously any more, if ever they did. Are there any such instruments they do take seriously now, to measure anything about a mind/personality other than IQ? Does anybody know?
In IO, the big five and others are commonly used (as they tend to show trivial between ethnic/racial differences). See, for example,: Foldes et al. (2008) “Group differences in personality: meta-analyses comparing five U.S. racial groups.” They also have fair degree of predictive validity.
Show me an official race definition that has Blake’s 95% criteria as a criteria and maybe I will comply. As it is, it would be very easy to trim the geographic races to meet Blake’s arbitrary criteria. As noted before, my races can be seen in Figure 1 here. I already gave the names. The commonality is the multivariate genetic similarity that leads the populations to cluster and leads individuals within each population to be more similar to each other than not. To meet the above arbitrary criteria, we would only have to classify all, or nearly all, individual and populations that do not cluster as “mixed races.” Since populations that do cluster are necessarily more similar to each other than not.
Whatever the case, Blake’s whole point is irrelevant to the discussion. It goes without saying that you can have genetically determined differences between non genetically (or biologically or zoologically) delineated groups.
So, it is easy to identify races when we simply rule everyone who does not match our arbitrary definitions as being outside the racial categories.
Of course, that is like setting up a medical trial and then just excluding everyone who fails to get well on the medicine as being outside the scope of the trial.
Industrial Organization. The big five. The big five seem to form a super factor called the “general factor of personality.” The GFP is Rushton’s baby. Unlike the general factor of intelligence it seems to have less predictive validity than the specific factors, so it seems to be more of theoretical than practical interest.
Reread what I said. (It’s easy to identify races. Period. And it’s easy to match individuals to a race or a set of them. Period. What I said concerned Blake’s arbitrary 95% genetic criteria.)
NDD, You can refer to Garret Jones’ discussion here. He’s less suspect than Lynn. Anyways, Lynn has updated IQ score here. It’s worth keeping in mind that these are IQ scores. No one has tested to see if they are measure invariant, like the US Black-White difference. As such, it’s undetermined whether they represent actual cognitive ability differences.
