# Why ARE so many high-level scientists Jewish? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 25, 2004, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973 "2004-09-25T00:18:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/241 "2012-03-03T17:11:00Z")
And now I am confused. You are now arguing that Ashkenazi Jews have an average full scale IQ of 117 with verbal being 125? I thought you had been claiming that such a difference from the general population was impossible and any study that showed that was the result of small sample sizes? What position are you actually trying to take?!? And catching up, “literally littered”? While I like alliteration you do know what “literally” actually means? Maybe not. No they are not even _metaphorically_ littered. They are present in large numbers because there are many individuals in this world who are smart and hard working and creative, statistically many of them will be Asian, and they see benefit to studying in places like Harvard. If they are the most qualified they should get in. America can use their help. I am unclear what the current rates are for Jewish kids career choices. My hypothesis again is that indeed the Jewish over-representation will be displaced by a representation more in-line with absolute numbers, hence more Chinese and Indian, as more in those countries get educational opportunities and are exposed to the world of ideas. The limiting factor is only that culturally Asian educational systems favor listening and memorizing and does not prize questioning and arguing as much as the Jewish tradition does … and to my mind that is part of what has driven the numbers of Jews in those top levels of creative accomplishments. But that is also beginning to change I think. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/242 "2012-03-03T17:12:06Z")
> [@objectivity](#): > > I tend to look at things holistically instead of over-analyzing a certain point, so obviously you don’t look at the big picture and make pointless remarks on narrow points. This is possibly my favourite quote ever. “I google about to find something which has the right keywords for my point, skim it to see if it looks like it vaguely does, perform the least possible effort to actually cite it for people to read, and demand that all you people actually pointing out that there are several obvious, important errors in what i’m doing stop being nitpickers!” ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/243 "2012-03-03T17:15:54Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > And now I am confused. You are now arguing that Ashkenazi Jews have an average full scale IQ of 117 with verbal being 125? I thought you had been claiming that such a difference from the general population was impossible and any study that showed that was the result of small sample sizes? What position are you actually trying to take?!? > > And catching up, “literally littered”? While I like alliteration you do know what “literally” actually means? Maybe not. > > No they are not even _metaphorically_ littered. They are present in large numbers because there are many individuals in this world who are smart and hard working and creative, statistically many of them will be Asian, and they see benefit to studying in places like Harvard. If they are the most qualified they should get in. America can use their help. > > I am unclear what the current rates are for Jewish kids career choices. My hypothesis again is that indeed the Jewish over-representation will be displaced by a representation more in-line with absolute numbers, hence more Chinese and Indian, as more in those countries get educational opportunities and are exposed to the world of ideas. The limiting factor is only that culturally Asian educational systems favor listening and memorizing and does not prize questioning and arguing as much as the Jewish tradition does … and to my mind that is part of what has driven the numbers of Jews in those top levels of creative accomplishments. But that is also beginning to change I think. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/c9NvBcyN7qE/maxresdefault.jpg "CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley - Teen creates cancer fighting technique") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9NvBcyN7qE) I don’t think Chinese are mindless robots. ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/244 "2012-03-03T17:18:00Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > And catching up, “literally littered”? While I like alliteration you do know what “literally” actually means? Maybe not. b. Used as an intensive before a figurative expression. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/245 "2012-03-03T17:18:54Z")
> [@objectivity](#): > > [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9NvBcyN7qE](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9NvBcyN7qE) > > I don’t think Chinese are mindless robots. Unless they don’t look smart. Then any accomplishment is because they work hard. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/246 "2012-03-03T17:21:13Z")
She did work hard. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/247 "2012-03-03T17:22:35Z")
> [@objectivity](#): > > I don’t think Chinese are mindless robots. You will note that DSeid pointed out that Asian _educational systems_ are highly based on memorization and repetition. And they are. Even if that was somehow an ‘ethnic trait’ (it’s not) rather than a cultural trait (it is) you are committing a logical fallacy (composition) to go from one exemplar and try to make a statement about a group. ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/248 "2012-03-03T17:23:54Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > You will note that DSeid pointed out that Asian _educational systems_ are highly based on memorization and repetition. And they are. Even if that was somehow an ‘ethnic trait’ (it’s not) rather than a cultural trait (it is) you are committing a logical fallacy (composition) to go from one exemplar and try to make a statement about a group. Actually, I read it wasn’t, but I don’t want to look for the research papers I’ve read all over the Internet. ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/249 "2012-03-03T17:29:49Z")
[![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/ygInMvH30QU/hqdefault.jpg "Japan - Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygInMvH30QU) ---
**Author:** ![colonial](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/34f0e0/32.png) [@colonial](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colonial)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/250 "2012-03-03T17:35:10Z")
> [@colonial](#): > > Maybe it will dawn on you that I was not denying the numerical results were 125, > I was denying they were an accurate measurment of Feynman’s intelligence. > > The reasons I deny it are highlighted in the quote you kindly provided from Gleick, > whose bio Genius I have read. > [@objectivity](#): > > If you are a REAL genius, you can’t possibly have 125 on an IQ tests and let’s remember that the test is the same for everyone. It’s absolutely ridiculous to suggest that someone who’d get 125 on an IQ test might be smarter than someone who’d get 200. You show from your reply that you have not understood a word I have said. Time for me to move on. There appear to be several other members here who are willing to dealing with you and your inept posts. ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/251 "2012-03-03T17:37:42Z")
[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/we-should-turn-east-and-learn-from-the-worlds-best-school-systems/story-e6frg6zo-1226103754960](http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/we-should-turn-east-and-learn-from-the-worlds-best-school-systems/story-e6frg6zo-1226103754960) I know it’s not a research paper, but still. ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/252 "2012-03-03T17:39:03Z")
> [@colonial](#): > > you show from your reply that you have not understood a word i have said. > > Time for me to move on. There appear to be several other members here > who are willing to dealing with you and your inept posts. hurr durr i have 125, but i bet i’d have 1033248093284 if they knew how to test intelligence properly, hurr durrrrrrrrrrrr. I had 200 on an online internet test, it must be true. Internet iq tests are thus more valid, hurrrrrrrrrrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/253 "2012-03-03T17:42:03Z")
> [@colonial](#): > > You show from your reply that you have not understood a word I have said. > > Time for me to move on. There appear to be several other members here > who are willing to dealing with you and your inept posts. I have very well understood what you said. My point still stands. If you can’t get a high IQ on an IQ tests, it’s not the test’s fault, it’s your own fault. And by the way 125 is definitively way above average. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/254 "2012-03-03T17:42:08Z")
Why yes, yes she did work hard. Typically that’s how it works. _Enough_ smarts, coupled with enough passion enough curiosity and plenty of hard work. And if you question a statement of fact I have made then I am [happy to back it up](http://theeducatedsociety.com/chinas-entrance-exam-system/). > [@](#): > > China’s emphasis on the all-important gaokao (college entrance exams) unintentionally creates three roadblocks toward premier status: 1) it sustains an anachronistic culture of rote learning in a modern era; and 2) it creates a social and economic divide; and 3) it sustains a thriving industry of fraud that jeopardizes China’s legitimate power. … The link to the Taiwanese system documenting the same cultural tradition was provided previously. Also I will cite my son who has been working in the Japanese educational system at the High School level for the past four years. Can’t hyperlink him though. 🙂 Finally [even Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rote_learning) makes this point using a variety of Asian nations as exemplars for the rote learning approach and stating > [@](#): > > Chinese learners hold high the tradition of rote learning as being an integral part of their culture. Again, I believe this tradition is in a state of flux, but creating their “fair share” of those at the top levels of creative accomplishments will depend on developing a tradition of questioning and arguing in addition to exposure to ideas and educational opportunity for all in general. See, this is how this forum works. I make a claim, I support it if questioned (so long as the requests do not become frivolous). ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/255 "2012-03-03T17:45:25Z")
125 is smart but it is no genius. Feynman was a genius. Yes, he also was curious, questioning, critical, passionate, creative, and applied himself. But a test that calls him just bread and butter smart is a test that fails to identify what true genius is. ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/256 "2012-03-03T17:47:24Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Why yes, yes she did work hard. Typically that’s how it works. _Enough_ smarts, coupled with enough passion enough curiosity and plenty of hard work. > > And if you question a statement of fact I have made then I am [happy to back it up](http://theeducatedsociety.com/chinas-entrance-exam-system/).The link to the Taiwanese system documenting the same cultural tradition was provided previously. > > Also I will cite my son who has been working in the Japanese educational system at the High School level for the past four years. Can’t hyperlink him though. 🙂 > > Finally [even Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rote_learning) makes this point using a variety of Asian nations as exemplars for the rote learning approach and stating > > Again, I believe this tradition is in a state of flux, but creating their “fair share” of those at the top levels of creative accomplishments will depend on developing a tradition of questioning and arguing in addition to exposure to ideas and educational opportunity for all in general. > > See, this is how this forum works. I make a claim, I support it if questioned (so long as the requests do not become frivolous). Hong Kong, Beijing, and ten Chinese provinces participated in the 2009 PISA, but their results reflected education systems that were still the same-old knowledge acquisition models, whereas Shanghai had progressed to equipping students with the ability to interpret and extrapolate information from text and apply it to real world situations — what we would normally refer to as ‘creativity.’ Twenty-six percent of Shanghai 15 year-olds could demonstrate advanced problem-solving skills, whereas the OECD average is 3 percent. You can’t generalize on the education systems of all Chinese provinces. [http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/01/how-shanghai-schools-beat-them-all/](http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/01/how-shanghai-schools-beat-them-all/) ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/257 "2012-03-03T17:48:46Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > 125 is smart but it is no genius. Feynman was a genius. Yes, he also was curious, questioning, critical, passionate, creative, and applied himself. But a test that calls him just bread and butter smart is a test that fails to identify what true genius is. Basically, he had a very adventurous and intrepid mind, but not a high IQ. That’s my opinion. Those qualities have nothing to do with intelligence. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/258 "2012-03-03T17:51:28Z")
> [@objectivity](#): > > [http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/we-should-turn-east-and-learn-from-the-worlds-best-school-systems/story-e6frg6zo-1226103754960](http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/we-should-turn-east-and-learn-from-the-worlds-best-school-systems/story-e6frg6zo-1226103754960) > > I know it’s not a research paper, but still. What was the phrase… ? [something about learning to use google?](http://ehlt.flinders.edu.au/education/iej/articles/v4n4/wong/paper.pdf) > [@](#): > > Rote Learning versus Meaningful Learning > > Chan (1999) believed that the style of Chinese learning was still very much influenced by > Confucianism that is dominated by rote learning and the application of examples. However, Biggs and Moore (cited in Biggs, 1996, p.54) highlighted that there was a distinction between rote and repetitive learning. According to them rote learning was generally described as learning without understanding, whereas repetitive learning has the intention to understand its meaning. They believed that the influence of tradition and the demands of the assessment system had affected Confucian Heritage Culture (CHC) students’ choice of using a repetitive strategy in learning. The Western student’s learning strategies starts with exploration followed by the development of skills. Chinese learners believed that skill should be first developed to produce an acceptable output which would then pave the way for creativity to flow (Biggs, 1996, p.55). Flynn, Sue and Okazaki (cited in Biggs, 1996, p.48) argued that CHC students performed better than their Western counterparts and that such a high level of achievement could not be obtained through rote learning. This led Biggs (1996, p.63) to believe that CHC students were deep learners who in fact preferred high-level meaningful learning rather than rote learning. Westerners believed that Asian learners used the rote-learning strategy because of their practice of memorization, which did not enhance understanding. Marton, Alba and Kun (1996, p.70) however, argued that there were two types of memorization, namely, memorization with understanding and mechanical memorization. They concluded that Asian students could perform better in their level of achievement than the Western students because they had memorized with understanding. Yu and Atkinson (cited in Kirby, Woodhouse and Ma, 1996, p.142) on the other hand stressed that the less fluent students, tended to rote learn for subjects, which required high language skills because they lacked the vocabulary to write on their own. However, the study conducted by Kirby et al (1996, p.148) had shown that even less-proficient students also use some forms of deep approaches to learning. > > Creativity or Lack of it > > Chinese children learnt well through concrete examples. They usually did better in concrete > subjects but were weak in abstract thinking and lacked creativity and originality (Salili 1996, > p.100). The Chinese authoritarian education system, which demanded conformity, might not be conducive to the development of creative and analytical thinking. Furthermore, Chan (1999) claimed that Chinese students were being assessed mainly by examination with little emphasis on solving practical problems. Smith (cited in Couchman, 1997) believed that the Taiwanese students’ learning styles stressed reproduction of written work, and factual knowledge with or no emphasis on critical thinking. Ballard and Clanchy (cited in Kirby et al, 1996, p.142) agreed that the Asian culture and education system stressed the conservation and reproduction of knowledge whereas the Western education system tended to value a speculative and questioning approach. These differences in attitude to knowledge might affect the assessment of Asian students by Western lecturers. Spizzica (1997) believed that different cultures value different types of knowledge and skills differently > [@](#): > > RESULTS AND DISCUSSION > When Asian international students were asked about differences in their learning experiences between their home country and Australia, each of them cited several differences, but this paper focuses only on differences relating to learning and teaching styles. The comments and statements made by these students were audio taped and transcribed and are reported ad verbatim in this paper, with a number recorded in parentheses, identifying each of the nine students. > > Classroom learning experiences > > Asian students generally come from a more passive learning environment, especially for nonpractical > subjects. This is obvious from the statements made by the students below: > You just sit there listen to what teachers said [1] > …you just sit there let the lecturers give you some knowledge [4] > > The teaching style in Asian countries is more teachers centred, where the teachers or lecturers would give all or most of the information to the students. This makes the learning easier for students because they don’t need to look for more knowledge themselves. This style of teaching also enables the teachers to cover a wider scope of knowledge in the allocated teaching time. > Students involved in this interview regard this style of learning as spoon-feeding. They say it is… > unlike high school where most information was given [1] > it just spoon feeding … the lecturers give exactly what they want [4] > The tutors spoon feeding you, not so much on discussion [9] > […] > > Rote or Repetitive Learning > > From the information provided by the students during the interview, it is clear that Asian assessment systems requires students to remember all that they have learnt and to reproduce their learning in the examination in order to do well. According to one student, “…in Malaysia as long as you study and memorise what you learn you can do well” [6]. Other students reflect similar beliefs. > The most important thing in Vietnam is you have to learn hard all that your teachers say. Even if you just try to learn hard you can get the best mark. You have to learn hard too much. [3] If you study in the college, in the exam the lecturers will give you some hints, you can prepare for it, but not here, you can’t actually do the thing just memorise and memorise. You need to know how to use it and apply your knowledge in the em. [9] ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/259 "2012-03-03T17:53:47Z")
That’s why Shanghai reformed the education system and dominated all other regions in the latest PISA. ---
**Author:** ![objectivity](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ccd318/32.png) [@objectivity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/objectivity)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2012, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973/260 "2012-03-03T17:59:02Z")
I think some people think Asians are not creative because a lot more people perform on a high-level because they study harder, thus there are a lot of people performing on a high-level who are not truly “intelligent”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-so-many-high-level-scientists-jewish/265973.md?page=14)