# Reasons Africa is "lagging behind"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 18, 2010, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711 "2010-06-18T21:17:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/221 "2010-06-25T01:16:09Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > Yes, like the Japanese are best at karate, and the Chinese are best at kung fu. > > What a load of bollox. I think you missed the note of sarcasm in my post. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/222 "2010-06-25T01:20:04Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > Naw, we can be pretty sure evolution is not the reason for the rapid IQ increase within the 20th and 21st centuries. Evolution is driven by natural selection and a handful of generations is simply not enough, not in the safe environments in which most of us live today. I’ve really got to work on making my sarcasm more obvious. > [@](#): > > OTOH in Africa, those huge, nearby markets aren’t there. OK I hear ya, the benefits of stability are more immediate and apparent in Eastern Europe or something like that so it tends to “stick” a lot better and faster. > [@](#): > > But, in essence, I’m saying Africa’s poor because it’s poor. Trying to turn a country round in Africa now is like trying to start a successful business in the roughest, most derelict part of town. > The questions really are how did it get that way, and more importantly, what can be done about it? Well the roughest most derelict parts of town improve through gentrification. I don’t know what the national analogy would be. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/223 "2010-06-25T02:37:48Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Well the roughest most derelict parts of town improve through gentrification. I don’t know what the national analogy would be. Globalisation and international outsourcing. Where rich countries invest in poor countries because they get more for their buck, even if they experience the inconvenience of operating in less desirable areas. Just as gnetrification involves rich people investing in poor areas because you can get a bigger house/factory for less money. And oddly enough when that happens we see countries like South Korea or India progressing from third world to first world amazingly rapidly. And when the standard of living rises in those places the investment moves to somewhere else cheaper. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/224 "2010-06-25T05:50:18Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Where is your evidence that IQ scores relate to an ability to change the world around you? Africa. (And Taiwan) 😉 ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/225 "2010-06-25T06:37:36Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > No. But let’s start with intelligence. An IQ score is not intelligence. Whatever it is that IQ tests measure, have some relationship to intelligence, but there is no basis for equation. > > Now, for intelligence itself, your definition is highly simplistic, and doesn’t at all relate to comparative measures of intelligence. > > Finally, ‘changing the world around you’ has far more to do with physical abilities and social structures than intelligence. Those people who use intelligence to ‘change the world’ in some far greater way than the average are outliers in every population. > > If you are trying point out that IQ scores relate in some way to intelligence, that seems likely based on the mass of empirical evidence, but there is nothing to show that it is an accurate or precise measurement of intelligence, or that there is a relationship between IQ scores or intelligence, and the abililty to ‘change the world’ (with the exception of IQ scores being used in a discrminatory manner). I’m putting aside IQ for now, I’m talking about intelligence. There are two different issues: one is something called intelligence, the other is the degree that IQ tests can reliably measure this "intelligence. I’m leaving the latter argument aside, as 1) I don’t really know the answer and 2) I think there is great debate among those who know much about testing. I still think changing the world", in a very broad sense, is a good phrase, for the reasons I described in my previous post. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/226 "2010-06-25T06:43:53Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > Africa. (And Taiwan) > 😉 So your point is that Chinese people in Taiwan are much more productive than Africans, and that could only be attributed to differences in IQ scores. Why is Greece, the center of a ‘Great Eurasian Empire’ failing while Germany succeeds. Why is Brazil thriving while Venezuela fails? Why does Taiwan thrive while North Korea withers? Surely it must be the faulty gene in Eurasian genetics that allows people with high IQ scores to ignore logic to maintain their predjudices. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/227 "2010-06-25T06:45:25Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > None of those things requires a high IQ however. > > I’m a bit of a skeptic when it comes to IQ generally. I’m not convinced that there is anything that someone with an IQ of 120 can “get” that someone with an IQ of 80 couldn’t, though the latter will usually take more time. > But anyway, no-one would argue that farming or building requires high (individual) intelligence. > > Also, if we’re supposing that intelligence must vary among populations “like basketball”, what about other important characteristics that might affect how a society develops? Are black people on the wrong side of all of them? I’m not sure what you mean by your last paragraph. Perhaps you could explain what you mean by “on the wrong side of all of them”. I think basketball is a poor example to even be argued. There is quite a bit of skill involved, which can be learned. But I do think it is evidence of a genetic difference, i.e., leaping ability and quickness. But better examples are probably sprinting and marathon running. East African blacks and West African blacks dominate each of those categories. And acquired skill plays a relatively minor role. You can either spring really fast or you can’t. Sure you can improve to a degree, but you won’t find an average untrained sprinter being turned into an Olympian. So, there clearly is something genetic going on. So, we have genetic differences evident in 1) appearance (skin color, eye shape, etc), and 2) physical performance. It seems quite logical to me that there would be a manifestation in mental ability, as well. That is really my only point. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/228 "2010-06-25T07:00:54Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I’m putting aside IQ for now, I’m talking about intelligence. There are two different issues: one is something called intelligence, the other is the degree that IQ tests can reliably measure this "intelligence. I’m leaving the latter argument aside, as 1) I don’t really know the answer and 2) I think there is great debate among those who know much about testing. > > I still think changing the world", in a very broad sense, is a good phrase, for the reasons I described in my previous post. The reasons you described are about people knowing that they will be hungry again tomorrow, and it might rain again. It doesn’t require a great amount of intelligence to deal with those things. Beavers have changed the world to a great degree, but probably wouldn’t score well on most intelligence tests. I don’t dispute the value of that thing we call ‘intelligence’, but the superior intellect of non-Africans didn’t do them much good until about 500 years ago. At that time Europeans began looting the rest of world because of their failure to change the world around them to meet the needs of their growing population. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/229 "2010-06-25T07:08:14Z")
> [@Ruminator](#): > > Everybody already knows that tests can be culturally biased. They didn’t have to create a study to prove that. Apparently, they did. Or has it not been argued _in this very thread_ that a biased test like the MCAT is a valid measure of comparison between White and AA medics? > [@](#): > > What’s wrong was their conclusion by extrapolation: _“Race was unrelated to the g factor.”_ That’s a very simplistic reading of their conclusions - so much so that I doubt you read the paper at all beyond the abstract. The result can be better summed up as: > [@](#): > > The present results, along with those of Fagan and > Holland (2002), **do not support Jensen’s default > hypothesis**, on the contrary,the average > difference in IQ between African-Americans and Whites > is not due to the same genetic and environmental factors, > in the same ratio, that account for IQ differences among > individuals within a racial group. and > [@](#): > > The present data offer no empirical support for > Jensen’s (1998) view that racial differences in IQ are due > to differences in g.[…]With regard to the g theory of intelligence, the present > studies do not support Jensen’s (1998) basic assumption > that a **single factor** always underlies performance on IQ > tests In other words, they say they determined that **Jensen’s _g_** was not \*solely \*determined by genetics, that culture & education play a large role in the individual tests that go into determining _g_. > [@](#): > > Did they create experiments proving “_race was unrelated to the g factor?_” You’re just quoting the paper’s abstract to create this strawman. Was the actual paper too technical for you? Clearly, they’re referring to their own results - the _g_ factor _determined by their experiments_ showed no racial bias. And more importantly, their results correlate with [Dolan’s (pdf)](http://users.fmg.uva.nl/cdolan/mbr1.pdf), and with [Schönemann’s(pdf)](http://www1.psych.purdue.edu/~phs/pdf/83.pdf) - Spearman’s hypothesis is dodgy at best, and more so applied the way Jensen did. Both improved statistic computation and empirical testing show this. Do me a favour - read more than just the abstracts, OK? > [@](#): > > How is the “culture” of low-income white children superior to high-income black children? Well, for one thing, they’re still the majority, mainstream culture. And do you, for one second, honestly think that being “high-income” insulates a Black kid from all racial prejudice and bias? Anecdotal example - I’ve tutored a Black university student who was close to failing, quite deliberately, because he didn’t want to look bad in relation to other Black students. Never mind that his parents were well-off, educated, involved, and he’d gone to good schools and did well there. At university, he hung out with other Black kids, and there was undoubtedly pressure there to not stand out, to not be a ‘coconut’. And the standard White perception of him would be that he was there on a race-based scholarship, not merit. An assumption that he’d acted up to, I’m sure. “Stereotype threat” is a real problem at that traditionally-White, now multiracial- University. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/230 "2010-06-25T07:37:22Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > There is quite a bit of skill involved [in basketball], which can be learned. But I do think it is evidence of a genetic difference, i.e., leaping ability and quickness. So your position is that Jews dominated basketball for \>50 years because Jews have genetically superior leaping ability and quickness. :dubious: > [@](#): > > You can either spring really fast or you can’t. Sure you can improve to a degree, but you won’t find an average untrained sprinter being turned into an Olympian. So, there clearly is something genetic going on. So, we have genetic differences evident in 1) appearance (skin color, eye shape, etc), and 2) physical performance. Do we really? Can we see some evidence for this claim? And I mean the claim that \>50% of people with the same genotype for skin color, eye shape, etc. also have genes for enhanced performance. Because if you can’t provide that evidence then nothing of the bloody sort is “clear”. You are engaging in a hasty induction. Or to put it another way, you are collecting underpants for profit. > [@](#): > > It seems quite logical to me that there would be a manifestation in mental ability, as well. . Firstly you haven’t presented any evidence whatsoever for your extraordinary claim that the genotype for skin color, eye shape, etc. correlate to genes for enhanced performance. I await your reference for that claim with bated breath. And even if that were true, it isn’t logical to assume a manifestation in mental ability. It’s a total non-sequitur. People that can run fast must be smarter/dumber than people that aren’t quite as fast! HTF is that in any way logical? By this “logic” people with red hair or people with attached earlobes must also be smarter/dumber than the rest of the population. After all, those factors have an actual, proven genetic basis and, according to you, once we have a genetic difference in one trait, it must also result in genetic difference sin intelignce as well. That’ not logic, it’s a completely mystifying non-sequitur. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/231 "2010-06-25T10:51:19Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I’ve really got to work on making my sarcasm more obvious. Hehe, you have to be careful pretending you don’t grok evolution: I reckon it’s the most misunderstood scientific theory of all time. The majority of people seem to have misconceptions about it – that evolution has a will, that abiogenesis is a part of the theory, that it is about survival of the physically strongest, and that’s before we even get to human evolution… > [@Blake](#): > > And oddly enough when that happens we see countries like South Korea or India progressing from third world to first world amazingly rapidly. And when the standard of living rises in those places the investment moves to somewhere else cheaper. Absolutely, and that’s why earlier I said that the significant investment that China is making in the region is the most significant recent development. The problem of course is that China isn’t exactly short of labour, and they’re no slouches when it comes to manufacturing, so all they’re doing is buying raw materials. But still, in creating the infrastructure to export huge volumes of goods, africa will become more attractive for other countries and other kinds of investment. > [@magellan01](#): > > I’m not sure what you mean by your last paragraph. Perhaps you could explain what you mean by “on the wrong side of all of them”. What I mean is, there are traits like concentration, dexterity, sociability, physical endurance, compassion, aggression etc, which I would expect to affect how successful a population is. And if we’re saying that populations can have different average IQs and such, why not a different average predisposition for these traits? Are traits like this insignificant, versus booksmarts? Or is the base level for black people “bad” in every case? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/232 "2010-06-25T14:37:09Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > Hehe, you have to be careful pretending you don’t grok evolution: I reckon it’s the most misunderstood scientific theory of all time. > The majority of people seem to have misconceptions about it – that evolution has a will, that abiogenesis is a part of the theory, that it is about survival of the physically strongest, and that’s before we even get to human evolution… I get most of my notions about evolution from the movie Evolution with Sean William Scott, particularly that scene where they have to battle a giant amoeba. It would be nice if evolution had a direction and we knew that our great 10^X grandchildren will be telepathic and have laser beam eyes. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/233 "2010-06-25T16:18:39Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > So your position is that Jews dominated basketball for \>50 years because Jews have genetically superior leaping ability and quickness. > :dubious: Blacks weren’t allowed in the NBA until 1950, therefore they did not have the chance to compete. I’m not arguing for or against a genetic influence on basketball skills, just pointing out that your argument is a _non sequitur_. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/234 "2010-06-25T18:14:38Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Blacks weren’t allowed in the NBA until 1950, therefore they did not have the chance to compete. > > I’m not arguing for or against a genetic influence on basketball skills, just pointing out that your argument is a _non sequitur_. > > Regards, > Shodan The point of that old chestnut is the shifting goalposts and perception. The ‘dominance’ of Jews in basketball was related to New York City teams with a high population of Jews, and a perception that basketball was a sport where teamwork was more important than height, reach, and jumping ability. In addition there were the usual stereotypes of Jews, ranging from superior intellect to connivance. The better teamwork of Jews was sometimes ascribed to calling signals in Yiddish that wouldn’t be understood by their opponents. So it was somehow ‘unfair’. It’s a ‘sequitur’ in pointing out that common perceptions don’t define cause and effect. And much of this discussion centers around your point that opportunity has a lot to do with results. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/235 "2010-06-25T20:03:56Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > So your point is that Chinese people in Taiwan are much more productive than Africans, and that could only be attributed to differences in IQ scores. Why is Greece, the center of a ‘Great Eurasian Empire’ failing while Germany succeeds. Why is Brazil thriving while Venezuela fails? Why does Taiwan thrive while North Korea withers? Surely it must be the faulty gene in Eurasian genetics that allows people with high IQ scores to ignore logic to maintain their predjudices. > 😉 It is correct that I think the average differences in ability for those populations contributes to their success, although obviously (and see the wink as a hint) I’m making the point with a grain of humor. Within all of those countries, what you will find is the same order of success for the various sub-populations. If you were to look inside Brazil, for instance, you’d see the East Asians ranking higher than those of sub-saharan African descent on socioeconomic scales and educational achievement. The pattern is the same everywhere. If you were to look inside North Korea you’d see a pitiful and repressive regime that has nearly destroyed the country–but you’d also see a weaponry, rocket and nuclear program that would suffice as evidence there is substantial brainpower there and the economic disaster is probably external. You will find no such innovation and high-cognitive pockets of success driven by sub-saharan Africans inside of any of their politically disastrous nations… It isn’t that politics makes no difference. It’s not that circumstance makes no difference. It’s whether or not you have any proof cases for a given population being able to demonstrate high-cognitive skills on a par with other populations. Where, in any system anywhere, is a proof case that sub-saharan Africans perform on a cognitive par with East Asians? ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/236 "2010-06-25T20:10:33Z")
Actually, Mexican Americans are Eurasians, on average 50 % Euro and 50 % Asian. They only do a bit better than black Americans on school standardized tests. If the Mexican American kids who don’t attend school regularly because of their immigration status were included in the sample, they would probably have lower average performance than black Americans. The only way you can get around the fact that Mexican Americans (and Central Americans) are Eurasian is by some kind of special pleading. Do that, and your argument fails. Incidentally, there is no such thing as a universal black person. Genetically, the peoples who display some evidence of African ancestry in their phenotypes are all different on a genetic level, in varying degrees. The category that you’re using as the basis for your argument doesn’t exist in a scientific sense. It’s a social-political category, not a genetic one. Since you don’t want to define “race”, your argument fails absolutely here. ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/237 "2010-06-25T20:29:33Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > Cognitive ability is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for economic success. Obviously, if you have absurd economic policies it won’t matter how clever your population is. > > As for the ancient Egyptians, they were Mediterranean. > > I’d recommend that you read Mary Leftkowitz’s books \*Not Out of Africa: How Afrocentrism Became an Excuse to Teach Myth as History \*(1996) or _Black Athena revisited_. Actually, Lefkowitz admits right away that if the ancient Egyptians were judged by Americans standards, most of them would be black. That’s merely a concession to the absurd way that Americans render “race”, but it is a necessary concession to have a serious discussion about the issue in an American context. Lefkowitz is a serious scholar, so she concedes the obvious point. The genetics of ancient Egypt are complex and have changed over time. Their are clearly sub Saharan African elements, sharing genetic markers with populations that originated in what is now Kenya and Somalia. There are also Mediterranean and Middle Eastern elements. What percentage owes to what region and how this changed over time is probably an issue that will be argued long after everyone here is dead. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/238 "2010-06-25T21:10:20Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > It is correct that I think the average differences in ability for those populations contributes to their success, although obviously (and see the wink as a hint) I’m making the point with a grain of humor. > > Within all of those countries, what you will find is the same order of success for the various sub-populations. If you were to look inside Brazil, for instance, you’d see the East Asians ranking higher than those of sub-saharan African descent on socioeconomic scales and educational achievement. The pattern is the same everywhere. > > If you were to look inside North Korea you’d see a pitiful and repressive regime that has nearly destroyed the country–but you’d also see a weaponry, rocket and nuclear program that would suffice as evidence there is substantial brainpower there and the economic disaster is probably external. You will find no such innovation and high-cognitive pockets of success driven by sub-saharan Africans inside of any of their politically disastrous nations… > > It isn’t that politics makes no difference. It’s not that circumstance makes no difference. > > It’s whether or not you have any proof cases for a given population being able to demonstrate high-cognitive skills on a par with other populations. > > Where, in any system anywhere, is a proof case that sub-saharan Africans perform on a cognitive par with East Asians? I don’t argue with the general concept that population groups are different, individually and cumulatively. But I’ve met very intelligent and very stupid people with ancestors that originated in different parts of the world, and I’ve never seen a relationship between intelligence and productivity in the manner you describe. All of the cases you cite have simpler, more direct explanations based on history and socio-economic conditions than your theory concerning innate intellectual ability, which you haven’t demonstrated to be a factor in anything. I can keep pointing out the discrepancies in your argument, but you are not addressing your underlying desire to find a connection that can’t be supported by facts. You could just as easily argue that skin color or average height is the causitive factor based on your evidence. If you just enjoy tweaking people who seem trapped in political correctness, that’s fine, I enjoy it too, but I wouldn’t do so in a way that makes me look like an irrational racist (although I don’t mind looking irrational, keeps people on their toes). If you actually believe the cause and effect nonsense you’ve spouted, you’re in no position to judge the relative intellectual abilities of other people. Finally, to answer your question, I cite the case of Nigerians having great success at bilking money from other population groups through internet scams. Others may appear to have greater cognitive ability in building computers, but clearly Nigerians have much greater ability to use them productively, and the other groups have consistent faulty brain functioning that induces them to send their money to people they don’t know based on a scheme as transparent as your reasoning. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/239 "2010-06-25T21:20:21Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > So your position is that Jews dominated basketball for \>50 years because Jews have genetically superior leaping ability and quickness. > :dubious: > > Do we really? Can we see some evidence for this claim? And I mean the claim that \>50% of people with the same genotype for skin color, eye shape, etc. also have genes for enhanced performance. > > Because if you can’t provide that evidence then nothing of the bloody sort is “clear”. You are engaging in a hasty induction. Or to put it another way, you are collecting underpants for profit. > > Firstly you haven’t presented any evidence whatsoever for your extraordinary claim that the genotype for skin color, eye shape, etc. correlate to genes for enhanced performance. I await your reference for that claim with bated breath. > > And even if that were true, it isn’t logical to assume a manifestation in mental ability. It’s a total non-sequitur. People that can run fast must be smarter/dumber than people that aren’t quite as fast! HTF is that in any way logical? > > By this “logic” people with red hair or people with attached earlobes must also be smarter/dumber than the rest of the population. After all, those factors have an actual, proven genetic basis and, according to you, once we have a genetic difference in one trait, it must also result in genetic difference sin intelignce as well. > > That’ not logic, it’s a completely mystifying non-sequitur. You misunderstand me. My only point is that it seems logical that if different groups have different physical characteristics, which they do, that it would not be at all surprising that there would also be differences in mental ability, as well. For example, take Blacks, White, and Asians. It would not surprise me if one group, in general, scored higher in intelligence. The same way they might score higher on any metric—height, for example. Now whether we can accurately measure this thing called “intelligence” is another issue. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711/240 "2010-06-25T21:25:39Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > What I mean is, there are traits like concentration, dexterity, sociability, physical endurance, compassion, aggression etc, which I would expect to affect how successful a population is. And if we’re saying that populations can have different average IQs and such, why not a different average predisposition for these traits? We’re not in disagreement. I think that you are correct, to the degree that the items on your list can be attributed to nature and not nurture. > [@Mijin](#): > > Are traits like this insignificant, versus booksmarts? Or is the base level for black people “bad” in every case? Huh? I don’t think that black people are on the lower end of the curve in all, or even most, things. I don’t know where you get that notion. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reasons-africa-is-lagging-behind/543711.md?page=13)