the PRODOS blog

Have a hug. Read Atlas Shrugged.

Shoddy science and fuzzy reasoning on race, IQ, and wealth

ReasonRules.ThinkerToThinker.com links to aWikipedia article about a book called IQ and the Wealth of Nations by Dr Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Ulster, Northern Ireland, and Dr. Tatu Vanhanen, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.

Wikipedia:

… The book argues that differences in national income (in the form of per capita gross domestic product) correlate with differences in average national IQ. The authors interpret this correlation as showing that IQ is one important factor contributing to differences in national wealth and rates of economic growth, but that it is not the only determinant of these differences.

… The authors believe that average IQ difference between nations are due to both genetic and environmental factors. They also believe that low GDP can cause low IQ, just as low IQ can cause low GDP

… For 104 of the 185 nations, no studies were available. In those cases, the authors have used an estimated value by taking averages of the IQs of neighboring or comparable nations.

For example, the authors arrived at a figure of 84 for El Salvador by averaging their calculations of 79 for Guatemala and 88 for Colombia. Including those estimated IQs, the correlation of IQ and GDP is 0.62.

Finnish blogger, Mikko Ellila, has written the following:
See original in Finnish here, or English translation here.

Bringing Negroes to Europe lowers the mean intelligence level of European population, because Negroes have lower median-IQ than whites.

There is a positive correlation between intelligence and standard of living.

… When the mean intelligence level decreases, the standard of living of the country decreases.

… So bringing Negroes to Europe would lower the standard of living in Europe, even if Negroes wouldn’t be social bums living on taxpayers money.

These are examples of shoddy science and fuzzy reasoning coming together.

In the view of Dr Anna Blainey (Melbourne, Australia) the following statement by Mikko Ellila demonstrateshis denial of free will and moral faculty for Negroes:

Negroes obey laws regulated by white society only, when they are concretedly upkept with harsh discipline. If discipline softens, Negroes african biological character of people is manifested in their behaviour.

My own view is that complianceto governmental laws which relate to respect of person and property (in contrast to laws which seek to regulate people or laws which plunder citizens) requires: The ability to think in principles – which isintegral to human nature. And a respect for self-ownership.

Biology (including genetics) is not involved in either case. It’s completely irrelevant.

I tend to be emotionally more “volatile” than my wife. For instance, I tend to get upset faster and to a greater degree than she does. It’s possible there may be some biology/genetics involved in this.

But I don’t need to be reminded of any strict laws against rape, murder,or plunder, to remain steadfast in my respect of others – even of those who I feel have wronged me.

Why not? Because I act morally. In fact my moral thinking limits my range of potentially harmful actions far more than any laws.

My moral principles are not in any way derived from my biology.

Nor is my dedication to truth and justice.

Which parts of Mikko’s thinking are based on his European biology?

Come on Mikko, tell us.

Report This Post

10 Comments

  1. Becaused you emailed me asking me to comment on these issues, I will point out that the “human nature vs. biology” dichotomy postulated by you is obviously a false dichotomy.

    Human nature is a product of biology. Man has been not created by a supernatural being. Homo sapiens is a product of biological evolution, i.e. genetic evolution.

    “The ability to think in principles – which is integral to human nature” follows from “human nature” which is a product of genes.

    Man’s mind is a product of his brain. The mind does not exist independent of the brain. If it did, it would be a supernatural soul. There is no soul. There is only a brain, and the mind it produces.

    You said:
    “I tend to be emotionally more

    Report This Comment

  2. Mikko wrote:
    – – –
    Becaused you emailed me asking me to comment on these issues,
    – – –

    I’ve asked you to comment on a number of issues.

    You have not done this.

    – – –
    I will point out that the

    Report This Comment

  3. Good afternoon Mikko.

    Mikko:
    – – –
    I can

    Report This Comment

  4. Which specific points in your posts do you want me to comment on, and which particular parts of my posts do you want me to translate?

    Report This Comment

  5. Good morning Mikko.

    Apologies for the delay in getting back to you. I’ve been flat out organising International Capitalism Day 2007.

    You wrote:
    – –
    Which specific points in your posts do you want me to comment on, and which particular parts of my posts do you want me to translate?
    – –

    It would be very helpful to have YOUR English translation of your complete post from

    http://mikkoellila.thinkertothinker.com/?p=141

    Thanks for your consideration.

    Report This Comment

  6. Society Consists of People

    In the discussion over immigration and multiculturalism, many people seem to forget that each society and culture is produced and maintained by certain kinds of people.

    European culture and modern Western society have been produced by
    white people.

    One would be able to go to Africa to take a look at cultures and
    societies produced by black people, if railways, airports, concrete pavements, stone walled houses, electricity, telephones, television and the like didn’t exist there; all of these things have been brought to Africa by white people.

    Middle Eastern people have produced a culture of desert dwelling herder tribes, i.e. the so-called Islamic culture.

    East Asians — mostly the Japanese and the Chinese — once built a
    society whose standard of living and level of technological knowhow were higher than in Europe for centuries.

    The collectivist, authoritarian mindset typical of the Asians however
    lead to stagnation, which is e.g. why the Americas and Africa were
    colonised by the Europeans, not by the Japanese or the Chinese.

    Rationalism and individualism, along with the support for private
    property and free enterprise which inevitably follow from them, are the quintessential hallmark of European thought. This is why the Industrial Revolution came about in Europe, and not in Asia.

    Asians are able to live in a European society because they experience no difficulty following its rules. However, Asians do not want to uphold the values of the Enlightenment in their own societies, because they simply fail to see the need to do so.

    From the Asian perspective things like freedom of thought, religion,
    conscience and association, and free elections, appear to be superfluous
    nonsense. Asians consider the absolute authority of the leader,
    uncritical support for the official state dogma and persecution of
    dissidents to be normal, self-evident and indispensable.

    For the Africans, looting, rape, nepotism, corruption, clan warfare,
    superstition and impulsive homicide are business as usual. If Africans
    come to form the majority in a country outside Africa, the country turns
    African. This has already happened e.g. in Haiti, which curiously
    resembles its African counterparts because its society has been torn apart by Bolshevist-style anarchy and voodoo culture.

    In the United States and in Canada, negroes behave bearably only when in
    clear minority. The surrounding white society — on the one hand with
    its coercive apparatus consisting of the police, the prisons, armed
    self-defence of the populace, and vigilantes in the KKK vein, and on the other via
    socio-cultural pressure — forces negroes to adapt to Western culture.

    White Americans are obviously Europeans, and therefore, North American society, which is dominated by white people, is a European society, which only happens to be located in America.

    Correspondingly, black Americans are basically Africans living in America, which means that areas dominated by them are like African isles in the midst of a sea of a white European society.

    Were black-majority areas to be independent city states, they would
    naturally be even more different from white neighbourhoods than they currently are. However, since also black ghettoes belong to the United States, they abide by US law. It is as though these negro enclaves were occupied by the surrounding white society, with white man’s law imposed on the ghetto by police power alone. If legislative power were held by black people themselves, they would not pass similar laws, and would not try to uphold them.

    Negroes only abide by the laws of white society when concretely forced
    to do so, with stern discipline. Come laxity, and the African biological characteristics of the negroes once again manifest themselves in their behaviour.

    In a circus even a lion can obey man when kept in check by a whip. But
    once harsh discipline is no longer maintained, the lion will transgress.

    Biology is destiny. Living beings cannot escape their biology. All opposition
    to sociobiology, including feminism, is based on the denial of the nature of man as a biological species.

    Still, man is an animal, homo sapiens. He was not created in the image
    of a god. There are no gods and nobody created man.

    Humans are biomass, shaped by their genes and subject to certain
    biological laws. Just as a person needs a certain amount of nutrition of a certain kind in order to survive, there are in human action certain regularities having to do e.g. with aggression, sexuality and intelligence.

    Ceteris paribus, an army of one hundred thousand men is stronger than an
    army of one hundred thousand women. The male population of Finland
    commits more acts of rape in total than the female population. A population of
    500 million whites has a higher median IQ than a population of 500 million whites and 100 million negroes.

    Importing negroes into Europe lowers the average level of intelligence
    of the European population because negroes have a lower median IQ than
    whites. A positive correlation exists between intelligence and standard
    of living. The causality goes both ways. On the one hand a rising
    standard of living increases the level of intelligence for example by
    decreasing the incidence of brain damage caused by malnutrition. On the
    other hand an intelligent population is more capable of securing itself
    a high standard of living. When the mean level of intelligence is
    lowered, the standard of living of a country is lowered. Stupid people
    cannot maintain a high standard of living because the standard of living
    equals the sum real value of the production of goods and services per
    capita; stupid people are not able to maintain as high a value of
    production as smarter people are, so a stupider society has a lower
    standard of living. Hence, importing negroes into Europe would lower the
    European standard of living even if negroes weren’t bums living off
    taxpayer money.

    To top it off, nowadays negroes mostly remain unemployed or otherwise
    parasitise the European taxpayer. With more bums living off taxpayer
    money arriving in Europe, there is less revenue to go around. The more
    negroes come to Europe, the less Europe can afford public healthcare,
    education, pensions, daycare etc.

    Negroes commit more crimes than white people. When negroes are brought
    into Europe, crime increases. This is not a prediction, but a scenario
    that has already materialised. In Finland immigrants commit over 20
    times more acts of rape per capita than the Finns do. The more immigrants of
    African and Middle Eastern origin there are in Europe, the more Europe
    has crime. If all the nonwhites living in Europe today were to move back
    to their respective countries of origin, crime rates in Europe would fall by tens of
    percentage points.

    Report This Comment

  7. I am not going to reply to the whole article. There are many subjects here to be worked out and it is going to take a long time to do it.
    One issue on the biological front. Men are more variable than women. True and the reason is obvious to anyone who understands genetics.
    I am going to try to explain it to you. All of a womans genes come in pairs. There are two kinds of genes. Dominate and recessive. If there is a dominate gene in a pair it says what happens. This happens 75% of the time. The recessive gene can only do its’ thing 25% of the time.
    A man is basically the same but he has some unpaired genes. With the unpaired genes when there is a recessive one there I does its thing 100% of the time. There aren’t many unpaired genes but there are enough to make men different from women.
    Also there are enough recessive genes to make men more variable than women.
    Men have smarter and dumber, stronger and weaker, braver and more cowardly members in their group than women. There are simply more men at the extremes .

    Report This Comment

Leave a Reply

© 2019 the PRODOS blog

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑

Report This Blog