CreateDebate


Debate Info

34
33
Agree Disagree
Debate Score:67
Arguments:51
Total Votes:68
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Agree (23)
 
 Disagree (26)

Debate Creator

pakicetus(1455) pic



Racial differences in intelligence?

This oughta be controversial enough to get a nice debate out of:

  

Agree

Side Score: 34
VS.

Disagree

Side Score: 33

TLDR: Somewhat agree, but the racial differences are predominately cultural ones, and the score discrepancies are primarily a result of how much overlap there is between the aspects of intelligence best nurtured by that culture vs what is weighted most heavily by the test.

I will somewhat agree, that any form of measuring intelligence will have different cultural groups (even within the same overarching society) have overall/median scores that tend to cluster together more closely than to other cultural groups (with significant outliers!) and will tend to correlate to higher scores for some cultural groups over others, depending on the method of assessment. Cultures are often divided by race, though not always and there can certainly be members of a culture different from the 'norm' for their race.

The issue largely lies in the methodology of the testing. Intelligence has many components, and different methodologies value different components more highly than others; furthermore, there is some dispute over what components of thought should be considered as falling under intelligence and which shouldn't. The brain is an extremely adaptive organ, and what the mind is set to and what it experiences are far more influential to its eventual capabilities than genetic makeup is, typically speaking.

Side: Agree
polynikes122(13) Disputed
0 points

To say race has anything to do with intelligence is in itself unintelligent. It is a simple case of cultural upbringing and social environment.

Side: Disagree
3 points

To say race has anything to do with intelligence is in itself unintelligent.

I actually agree with this, because...

It is a simple case of cultural upbringing and social environment.

And this is exactly my point. I am suggesting that an apparent correlation between intelligence and race is in fact reflective of this cultural difference- while acknowledging that cultures are most frequently divided along racial lines.

How does this in anyway constitute a dispute to my point? You're echoing exactly what I'm saying while labeling it a dispute. Did you even read my post?

Side: Agree
pakicetus(1455) Disputed
1 point

To say race has anything to do with intelligence is in itself unintelligent.

Uh huh, and why is that?

Side: Agree
1 point

But it's not hereditary. Black people aren't born unintelligent just like Asians aren't born intelligent. It's how they're brought up, and it happens that there are differences in intelligence between different ethnicities.

Side: Agree
pakicetus(1455) Disputed
1 point

I'm getting sick of receiving replies to this debate that do not acknowledge the counterarguments the video gave.

Side: Disagree
4 points

Man, this guy really loves to pronounce his H's. :)

Side: Disagree
3 points

Wow. The source of the video is a white supremacist hate group, probably won't get much debate here.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/ideology/white-nationalist/active hategroups

First it has been shown that there are many types of intelligence, using one measure is not a full measure on intelligence but rather a measure of a specific type of intelligence. Societal and cultural values can skew what type of intelligence is important amongst the group. Focusing on one type of intelligence is fine as long as you know the limits and your biases when doing so. It would seem the author of the video has no interest in these things.

It has also been shown that intelligence often correlates to income and other societal factors. Individuals who have larger incomes and or less social stigma have better opportunities and environments that are conducive to learning more than those individuals without those benefits. Social sciences nod to these inequalities being a cause to the intelligence gap between populations.

Side: Disagree
pakicetus(1455) Disputed
2 points

The source of the video is a white supremacist hate group

White supremacists who believe that Asians and Jews are smarter, and less aggressive than whites.

That makes sense /sarcasm

First it has been shown that there are many types of intelligence, using one measure is not a full measure on intelligence but rather a measure of a specific type of intelligence. Societal and cultural values can skew what type of intelligence is important amongst the group. Focusing on one type of intelligence is fine as long as you know the limits and your biases when doing so. It would seem the author of the video has no interest in these things.

Actually, the impact of social and economic factors has been addressed in the video.

Also, if we intend for other races to live amongst societies which value the importance of other types of intelligence, then this knowledge is nonetheless useful.

Social sciences nod to these inequalities being a cause to the intelligence gap between populations.

These social sciences fail to account as to why these inequalities exist in the first place. For example, why did China have one of the most technologically advanced empires at a time when Sub-Saharan Africa hadn't even invented the wheel?

Side: Agree
Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

White supremacists who believe that Asians and Jews are smarter, and less aggressive than whites.

That makes sense /sarcasm

So, if you hate Blacks and Mexicans but like everyone else you aren't a hate group?

Side: Disagree
J-Roc77(70) Disputed
1 point

These social sciences fail to account as to why these inequalities exist in the first place.

Not exactly, I mentioned it above. Societal and cultural values can skew what type of intelligence is important amongst the group.

This is about necessity and values within the culture. It is likely that trade and material wealth created a need to move large amounts of stuff within one culture but in a culture where materialism (the consumer kind) was deemed less important and the need for moving large amounts of stuff less a factor. You can also look at the region and see that a primitive wheel would not be as efficient as other means like animals packing stuff due to the geography. Skinny tires are terrible in soft materials like sand.

Inuits never invented a wheel either. Pretty bad measure using the wheel isn't it? Other measures fall apart upon greater scrutiny as well such as the repeated issue of brain size. Men have larger brains then women on average as well, but no study shows men are smarter than women.

http://www.apa.org/research/action/share.aspx

The evidence has piled up for years. In 1990, Hyde and her colleagues published a groundbreaking meta-analysis of 100 studies of math performance. Synthesizing data collected on more than three million participants between 1967 and 1987, researchers found no large, overall differences between boys and girls in math performance. Girls were slightly better at computation in elementary and middle school; in high school only, boys showed a slight edge in problem solving, perhaps because they took more science, which stresses problem solving. Boys and girls understood math concepts equally well and any gender differences narrowed over the years, belying the notion of a fixed or biological differentiating factor.

If men and women have different sized brains but similar results why is it a measure? It is apparent it is a bad measure in this instance.

Actually, the impact of social and economic factors has been addressed in the video.

Glazed over really. The literature is pretty stout pointing to the environmental factors being a cause. It is generally acknowledged that many environmental factors aside do not explain the whole difference in the intelligence of populations. Just because we cannot account for the differences with current methodology doesn't mean that the others claim is correct and many professionals reject how weighted heredity is on some peoples claims about racial intelligence.

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/09/intellect.aspx

Like using the wheel example above the claims of race being a major factor in IQ just don't seem convincing as they reek of bias and or lack of context.

http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2005/01/race.aspx

Intelligence, Race, and Genetics. Authors Robert J. Sternberg, PhD (Yale University), Elena L. Grigorenko, PhD (Yale University), and Kenneth K. Kidd, PhD (Yale University), submit that research that attempts to link genetics and race with intelligence is invalid-based in folklore and not in science.

Race and IQ: Molecular Genetics as Deus ex Machina. In a rebuttal to Rowe, Author Richard S. Cooper, MD (Loyola University Chicago), writes, "it is premature to argue that we should expect useful answers from research on whether there is a molecular basis for racial differences in IQ scores. Until the DNA-phenotype relationship is understood such questions should remain in the realm of nescience - the unknown and the unknowable - not science. Rather than providing useful answers, further research on race and IQ…will instead add to the existing morass of Type I error and willful falsification." According to Cooper, any discussion of race that ignores the cultural meaning and context of race fails the test of good science.

This next part is a bit of a tangent as it doesn't affect my rebuttal as it wasn't part of my reasoning for disagreeing but merely an observation. The group is recognized as a hate group.

White supremacists who believe that Asians and Jews are smarter, and less aggressive than whites.

That makes sense /sarcasm

Sure, it doesn't change how the group values other groups such as Blacks or Mestizos. Do you agree the group is a hate group with racial ideology and are just disputing the "white supremacist" label?

Side: Disagree
2 points

1. now a days racism plays no part in education(most of the time).

2. Education and intelligence are not equivalent what so ever. I don't know where that ideal came from but it's laughable.

3. Most if not all IQ tests are not relevant to measure someones intelligence level. e.g. if a guy who lived in a jungle his whole live can't understand the test then the test is useless. Furthermore if that guy can't at least score a 90 then the test isn't accurate. Do to the fact that it take some intelligence to survive on your own without anyone teaching or passing down knowledge to you.

(if you do not think that it takes intelligence to survive as the guy in my example is doing, then your ideal of intelligence is clearly off and your most likely talking about education(smarts), this is common.)

4. For crying out loud, this guy is an editor. With that said he does have much credibility, still I will reserve from calling him a racist even though that's what it seem like(because he's an editor with no PHD talking about such a subject). I doubt he can find any group of PHD graduates that can back him up what he is saying. If he can get the black PHD graduates to agree with him, than my mouth is shut. Lola

5. What this guy (and anyone who agrees with him)fail to realize is that environment plays a BIG role in education. e.g. The real reason Jimmy doesn't do good in school is because he feels like math, science or history will not help him survive life at home or in his area. He doesn't see education as a way out.

Plus the studies it's self don't account for cultural influences.

6. He's examples are more then 5 years old making it irrelevant to even be a creditable source in the academic community. Wow one look at the reference, every one of them sources are out dated there's even one from 1974.... really?

7. At some point you should ask yourself, why is an editor making a video about something nowhere near his field of profession. A guy who clearly doesn't know how to correctly use sources on a academic level, which means all of his sources could of been dis-proven by now and even at the time the video was made. So what is his angle with this?

People find a more creditable source on the subject than this guy. Because this only looks like a joke to me.

Side: Disagree
1 point

Neil deGrasse Tyson, /end topic. .

Side: Disagree
2 points

Thomas L. Jennings - First African American to hold a U.S. patent. The patent, which was issued in 1821, was for a dry-cleaning process.

Norbert Rillieux - he developed an evaporator for refining sugar, which he patented in 1846

Benjamin Bradley - he developed a steam engine for a war ship. Unable to patent his work, he sold it and with the proceeds purchased his freedom.

That was just a few of a long list of black inventors.

Here are a few black scientist.

Benjamin Banneker - Banneker learned the rudiments of reading, writing, and arithmetic from his grandmother and a Quaker schoolmaster. Later he taught himself advanced mathematics and astronomy. He is best known for publishing an almanac based on his astronomical calculations. 1731 -1806

Rebecca Cole - Cole was the second black woman to graduate from medical school (1867). She joined Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell, the first white woman physician, in New York and taught hygiene and childcare to families in poor neighborhoods.

Dr. Daniel Hale Williams - he received his M.D. in 1883. He founded the Provident Hospital in Chicago in 1891, and he performed the first successful open heart surgery in 1893.

Link for this -

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/bhmscientists1.html

Link for black writers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ListofAfrican-Americanwriters

Link for black composers(descent)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ListofcomposersofAfricandescent

Link for black Astronauts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listofblack_astronauts

I put those links there because clearly these people have an IQ higher than 80 or whatever. Keep in mind that these nothing more than a small mount of intelligence black people when looking for how many there actually are. If black people intelligence are truly low then these people must of geniuses easily.

Here are some random quotes on the matter from average people.

"While I agree genetics plays a part in the results, the environment in which one grows up in plays a huge part as well. Any child, regardless of race, living in the suburbs, will probably score higher than a child who lives in an urban city, on average. The schools are better funded, the children have access to larger variety of study materials, and they usually don't have as many issues at home to contend with. "

"My step father, who is white, is highly intelligent, and even he used to say that he was lucky to have the money that he grew up with. He used to say money can buy a better education, better neighborhoods and even better outlook on life. By your logic,if you have a white artist and a black artist, then you'd assume that the white artist is always going to be a BETTER or more brilliant artist than the black artist?"

Side: Disagree
pakicetus(1455) Disputed
1 point

Methinks you don't know how averages work.

Also, he specifically said in the video "there are certainly smart blacks, and stupid whites".

Side: Agree
ProLogos(2793) Disputed
1 point

Don't be mean, some people aren't good at math. .

Side: Disagree
1 point

Check the argument below to see my full statement... double send.

Side: Disagree