Actually, given that Japan was very late (200-500 BCE) to the whole agriculture and urbanization thing, NDD’s thesis inescapably predicts that modern Japan should be kind of like Somalia, only with more crime and less infrastructure.
Oh, lordy, lordy, lordy, an undisguised attempt to use the claim you’re trying to prove as part of your evidence. Every time I think your arguments can’t get any more inane, they do.
So… you’re asserting that a change in belief implies a change in fact? As in, for example, the planets stopped revolving around the Earth and began revolving around the Sun during the sixteenth century? :rolleyes:
Well, yes, in the sense that a moon hoaxer “cannot explain” why the Soviets didn’t call the Americans on their bullshit. When confronted with a fact that fatally undercuts a thesis (e.g. the history of Japan and its modern condition, as has been repeatedly noted on this thread), shrugging off the fact as something that one “cannot explain” is often the best one can do, if one is too firmly wedded to the thesis to accept the reality.
Yes, I know this - that still means what you said was wrong.
…and theirs was superior to every other contemporaneous culture’s philosophy and art…how, exactly? Certainly wasn’t superior to the Indian, or they wouldn’t have adopted Buddhism overwhelmingly over their local religions.
My point is that a genetic difference can develop quickly, if it gives individuals competitive advantages.
It would be kind of awesome if it were true, though :p.
Two thousand years ago Jews did not give evidence of superior intelligence. Now the Ashkenazim do. This change happened quickly. It can be explained in terms of population pressures that were somewhat unique to Jews living in Christian Europe.
What all of this means is that racial differences can evolve within historical time. Racial differences between blacks and whites can be explained by the number of generations that separate each race form a paleolithic existence, and also by the fact that whites developed civilization five thousand years ago, but the ancestors of the Bantu never did.
And yet the Germans, who were winning a third of all Nobel prizes in the first couple decades of the 20th century, were as recently as Julius Caesar, a predominantly pastoralist, semi-nomadic people:
“They do not pay much attention to agriculture, and a large portion of their food consists in milk, cheese, and flesh; nor has any one a fixed quantity of land or his own individual limits; but the magistrates and the leading men each year apportion to the tribes and families, who have united together, as much land as, and in the place in which, they think proper, and the year after compel them to remove elsewhere.”
The Jōmon period lasted from about 14,000 until 300 BC. The first signs of civilization and stable living patterns appeared around 14,000 BC with the Jōmon culture, characterized by a Mesolithic to Neolithic semi-sedentary hunter-gatherer lifestyle of wood stilt house and pit dwellings and a rudimentary form of agriculture.
The author uses the word “civilization” differently than I do, but it is clear that agriculture is much older in Japan than in sub Saharan Africa.
The average IQ is Germany is 102.
http://sq.4mg.com/NationIQ.htm
This is still lower than the 112 average for the Ashkenazim.
I wanted to get back to this, however:
Precisely. We cannot test them. Therefore, you cannot possibly prove your silly claims. And yet you keep asserting them like they’re Gospel truth. Why ?
There’s nothing obvious about it at all. The whole system was notoriously corrupt, for one thing. And since Imperial China was very much a caste society, and an ethnically discriminating one at that, it’s sort of a given that the poor and the undercastes had fewer chances to get a pass than the sons of bureaucrats - or the sons of friends of the examinator.
And, at the risk of repeating myself, since Imperial tests were specific to China ; and nothing like them existed elsewhere in Asia (well, Japan did have a short stint of something like it back when they were in their “China is AWESOME” phase the Heian period, but that didn’t last long) there’s no reason whatsoever to conclude that Imperial testing had any relevance whatsoever to your genetic claims even if we were to accept them for the purpose of argument.
Either your genetic claims are true, all Asians including Chinese are naturally super smart, and then they would be with or without Imperial tests ; or your claims are a steaming load of round objects in which case the tests are pretty much irrelevant either way.
It is not unusual for a theory not to explain all of the relevant facts. A possible explanation for higher average IQs in Japan and South Korea than in Europe is that most of Europe entered a dark age after the fall of the Roman Empire, while Japan and South Korea did not. Another explanation is that in Roman Catholic countries the priesthood was a means of upward social mobility for peasant boys. However, they were forbidden to have children.
So waitwaitwaitwaitwait.
Intelligence levels can change due to population pressures or education in the case of the Imperial Chinese. They can change very quickly.
It follows that negros will always be inferior because their very distant paleolithic ancestors may or may not* have developped agriculture 20 thousand years ago.
Whelp, I’m convinced. This is sound, logical inductive thinking and no mistake.
*(BTW, they did. Before Europeans. You keep making non-factual statements about this for some reason. An honest mistake, no doubt)
Errr yes it fucking well is ? If your theory sweeps inconvenient facts under the rug and handwaves away discrepancies with what you hold for correct, it’s not a scientific theory.
It’s what we in the biz’ call a fanwank.
Pardon my French, but I don’t give a flying fuck what a nation’s purported IQ is.
The Germans have been one of the most scientifically creative of all the world’s peoples. And yet, until relatively recently (historically speaking), they were illiterate, pastoral, semi-nomads.
These are both incontrovertible facts, unlike your implication that modern IQ scores are somehow indicative of a nation’s overall intellectual capacity.
I simply note that you completely ignore - what, four? five? - scientifically sound refutations of your arguments, and instead simply reiterate the one statement which, as has been clearly explained, simply cannot be counted as evidence. Is it any wonder people don’t have much respect for your ability to think scientifically?
The point I have made is that racial differences in IQ can evolve quickly.
Are you willing to provide evidence that IQ is even genetic let alone that it has “evolved” Why have you ignored that Nigerian immigrants reach a far higher educational attainment here in the US than any other ethnic group?
IQ tests are culturally biased, their number are less valuable than you imply but at least provide some causal relationship behind your concept of “race” and IQ