Nordics vs Jews

Growing up as a WASP, I thought that in-group ethnic solidarity was primitive. Then I converted to Judaism and adopted a tribal outlook on life. I look back now on the WASP perspective as naive. All things being equal, a group with solidarity will defeat a group without that solidarity in the struggle for scarce resources.

Kevin MacDonald writes:

The psychological traits attributed to Nordics are principled moral behavior and idealism, high intellect, inventiveness, and, in the words of Gustav Friedrich Klemm, a proclivity to “constant progress” and science:

Members of that race most often strive for the unknown, for the sake of a pure idea, driven by the thirst of knowledge, and not self-seeking interest.

My view is that there is a strong empirical basis for this suite of traits, and that ultimately these traits, particularly moral idealism and science, are the psychological manifestation of individualism as a response to selection pressures in the far north. As Avdeyev notes:

…the home of the Nordic race may be located in the zone of a cool and moist climate, abundant with clouds of fog, in which water vapor is retained in the air [absorbing ultra-violet rays]. In this climate there should be strong and frequent fluctuations of temperature.

I first became aware of the idea that natural selection in the north was responsible for the unique traits of Europeans by reading Fritz Lenz, whose work is reviewed in Raciology. Lenz, like several modern theorists (e.g., Richard Lynn and J. Philippe Rushton), gives major weight to the selective pressures of the Ice Age on northern peoples. He proposed that the intellectual abilities of these peoples are due to a great need to master the natural environment, resulting in selection for traits related to mechanical ability, structural design, and inventiveness in problem solving (what psychologists term “performance IQ”). He argued that Jewish intelligence, in contrast, was the result of intensive social living (what psychologists term “verbal IQ”).

There is in fact good evidence that in general intelligence is linked to mastering the natural environment (see here), and this is particularly the case among Northern peoples.

Lenz argued that over the course of their recent evolution, Europeans were less subjected to between-group natural selection than Jews and other Middle Eastern populations. Because of the harsh environment of the Ice Age, the Nordic peoples evolved in small groups and have a tendency toward social isolation rather than cohesive groups. This perspective does not imply that Northern Europeans lack collectivist mechanisms for group competition, but only that these mechanisms are relatively less elaborated and/or require a higher level of group conflict to trigger their expression.

Under ecologically adverse circumstances like the Ice Ages, adaptations are directed more at coping with the adverse physical environment than at competing with other groups. In such an environment, there would be less pressure for selection for extended kinship networks and highly collectivist groups. Ethnocentrism would be of no importance at all in combating the physical environment.

Europeans are therefore less ethnocentric than other groups—which makes them susceptible to being subverted by groups with a strong sense of in-group solidarity. Individualist cultures show relatively little emotional attachment to in-groups. Personal goals are paramount, and socialization emphasizes the importance of self-reliance, independence, individual responsibility, and “finding yourself.”

Individualists have more positive attitudes toward strangers and out-group members. They are also more likely to behave in a pro-social, altruistic manner to strangers. People in individualist cultures are less aware of in-group/out-group boundaries and thus do not have highly negative attitudes toward out-group members. They often disagree with in-group policy, show little emotional commitment or loyalty to in-groups, and do not have a sense of common fate with other in-group members.

Opposition to out-groups occurs in individualist societies, but the opposition is more “rational” in the sense that there is less of a tendency to suppose that all of the out-group members are culpable. Individualists form mild attachments to many groups, while collectivists have an intense attachment and identification to a few in-groups (see Harry Triandis, Individualism and Collectivism).

Individualists are therefore relatively ill-prepared for between-group competition so characteristic of the history of Judaism.

Posted in Kevin MacDonald | Comments Off

Jewish Flash Boys

I’m reading the new Michael Lewis book, Flash Boys: A Wall Street Revolt.

It seems that Russian Jews are behind much of the innovative high frequency trading. This shocked me. I thought such work would be the province of Africans and Mexicans.

Michael Lewis writes on page 95:

A surprisingly large number of the people pulled in by the big Wall Street banks to build the technology for high-frequency trading were Russians. “If you went to LinkedIn and looked at one of these Russian guys, you would see he was linked to all the other Russians,” said Schwall. “I’d go to find Dmitri and I’d also find Misha and Vladimir and Tolstoy or whatever.” The Russians came not from finance but from telecom, physics, medical research, university math departments, and a lot of other useful fields. The big Wall Street firms had become machines for turning analytically minded Russians into high-frequency traders…

From page 97:

Sergey Aleynikov wasn’t the world’s most eager immigrant to America, or, for that matter, to Wall Street. He’d left Russia in 1990, the year after the fall of the Berlin Wall, but more in sadness than in hope. “When I was nineteen I haven’t imagined leaving it,” he says. “I was very patriotic about Russia. I cried when Brezhnev died. And I always hated English. I thought I was completely incapable of learning languages.” His problem with Russia was that its government wouldn’t allow him to study what he wanted to study. He wasn’t religious in any conventional sense, but he’d been born a Jew, which had been noted on his Russian passport to remind everyone of the fact. As a Jew he expected to be given especially difficult entrance exams to university, which, if he passed them, would grant him access to just one of two Moscow universities that were more accepting of Jews, where he would study whatever the authorities permitted Jews to study. Math, in Serge’s case.

From page 125:

Constantine was also Russian, born and raised in a small town on the Volga River. He had a theory about why so many Russians had wound up inside high-frequency trading. The old Soviet educational system channeled people away from the humanities and into math and science. The old Soviet culture also left its former citizens oddly prepared for Wall Street in the early twenty-first century. The Soviet-controlled economy was horrible and complicated but riddled with loopholes. Everything was scarce; everything was also gettable, if you knew how to get it. “We had this system for seventy years,” said Constantine. “People learn to work around the system. The more you cultivate a class of people who know how to work around the system, the more people you will have who know how to do it well. All of the Soviet Union for seventy years were people who are skilled at working around the system.” The population was thus well suited to exploit megatrends in both computers and the United States financial markets. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, a lot of Russians fled to the United States without a lot of English; one way to make a living without having to converse with the locals was to program their computers. “I know people who never programmed computers but when they get here they say they are computer programmers,” said Constantine. A Russian also tended to be quicker than most to see holes built into the U.S. stock exchanges, even if those holes were unintentional, because he had been raised by parents, in turn raised by their own parents, to game a flawed system.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off

We Should Require People To Have A License Before They Procreate

I believe that all Americans, all members of the First World, should be administered mandatory birth control shots by age 12 and not allowed to procreate until they get a license, beginning about age 22. We should only allow high IQ productive citizens to have kids.

I know this doesn’t sound democratic. Well, I’m increasingly disenchanted with democracy. At a minimum, I think we should restrict the franchise to men who own property.

I’m flirting with the Dark Enlightenment.

Richard Lynn writes in his book Eugenics:

The first of the recent proposals for licenses for parenthood was made in 1980 by the American political scientist Hugh LaFollette (1980). He began by contending that some parents are unfit to rear children, notably those who neglect their children, ill-treat them, subject them to violent physical abuse, and even kill them. He noted that research has shown that a large proportion of the children of unfit parents become criminals. He asserted that these parents are incompetent and that they impose costs on society. To mitigate these costs, LaFollette argued that the state should take steps to prevent these children from being born. To make this proposal effective, he proposed that all couples should be required to obtain a license certifying their competence in child rearing before they are permitted to have children. This was the first use of the term license in this context.
In justification of this proposal, LaFollette pointed out that the state already requires people to acquire a license before they are permitted to undertake a number of activities that might cause social harm if performed incompetently. He gives the example of the automobile driving license. Incompetent drivers are a potential danger to the public, so the state reasonably requires people to demonstrate their driving competence and acquire a license before they are permitted to drive on the public highway. Similarly, physicians, lawyers, and pharmacists are required to obtain licenses certifying their competence. Practicing these professions without a license is illegal. The justification for this is that society would suffer if unqualified people practiced medicine, the law, or pharmacy; and steps need to be taken to ensure that this does not happen. LaFollette argued that the same case can be made for rearing children. Here, too, incompetent parenting imposes social costs; and to prevent these, parenthood should be licensed.
In a further justification of this proposal, LaFollette noted that the state already vets prospective adoptive parents for their fitness to rear children. Why, he asks, do we not allow just anyone to adopt a child? The answer is that we recognize that some people are unfit to rear children and that these people should be screened out in assessing the suitability of couples applying to adopt a child. Because society in effect requires the licensing of prospective adoptive parents, it should extend the principle to natural parents.
As regards the practical implementation of the scheme, LaFollette (1980) proposed that all prospective parents should be assessed for their child rearing competence by a psychological examination. This would consist of a personality assessment that would be designed to identify “the violence-prone, easily frustrated, or unduly self-centered” (p. 191). These are essentially the psychopathic, although he did not use that term.
LaFollette conceded that the psychological examination for fitness for parenthood would not be foolproof. No doubt some couples would be denied the parental license who would make adequate parents, while others would be granted the license who would turn out to be unsatisfactory parents. But, he argued, this is no different from the licensing of automobile drivers, physicians, lawyers, and pharmacists. No doubt a number of those who fail their tests for an automobile license and the qualifying examinations to practice medicine, the law, and pharmacy could nevertheless drive automobiles with-out having accidents and work as physicians, lawyers, and pharmacists without harming the public. Conversely, some of those who pass the automobile driving test turn out to be incompetent drivers, and some people succeed in qualifying as physicians but turn out to be incompetent doctors, and so forth. These competency tests for licensing are blunt instruments, but they unquestionably identify a number of the most incompetent thus protecting the public.
LaFollette realized he would have to consider the problem of the enforcement of his parental licensing plan. He conceded that it would be difficult to prevent unlicensed couples from producing children and suggested that this would best be dealt with by taking away the children of these parents and having them adopted or fostered.
LaFollette did not advance his parental licensing scheme on eugenic grounds. He did not point out that socially pathological behavior is transmitted genetically from parents to children, as well as environmentally, by example and poor child rearing practices. He did not mention low intelligence or mental retardation as disqualifications for obtaining the parental license, nor did he have any proposals to prevent babies being born to unlicensed parents. These are all weaknesses in his scheme. Nevertheless, his proposal was a valuable contribution to challenging the contention that everyone has a right to have children, and it stated the undoubted truth that some couples are unfit to be parents and should be prevented from having children.

THOMAS JACKSON WRITES:

Intelligence is not the only important trait now shaped by modern techniques. Medicine has a dysgenic effect on health, since weak children who would ordinarily have died young now survive to have children of their own. In the case of some heritable diseases that can now be treated, there will be a sharp increase in defective genes. In the next 30 years, hemophilia is likely to become 25 percent more common, and cystic fibrosis and phenylketonuria (PKU) will increase by 120 percent and 300 percent.

Prof. Lynn also notes that criminal propensities, which he considers separately from intelligence, are also spreading through the population. Although this is a field that has been almost completely ignored, Prof. Lynn’s own findings are that, at least in Britain, criminals and psychopaths are 77 percent more fertile than other people. Given heritability estimates for criminality derived from twin and adoption studies, Prof. Lynn finds that the excessive fertility of criminals alone probably accounted for a 52 percent crime increase in Britain in a single generation. He considers the spread of criminality a potentially greater problem than the decline of intelligence.

Perhaps the book’s most dismal assertion is that the current reproductive habits of Western populations not only ensure decline, they rule out even the theoretical possibility of genetic improvement. In an era when the most able members of society limit themselves to two or three children, even the most dramatically favorable mutation would have no way to spread through a population. Improvement requires eugenic fertility, which is no longer found in Western populations. They have reached a genetic dead end.

Posted in Eugenics | Comments Off

Does Alexander Technique Promote Secure Attachment?

Here are the traits of mindfulness: “Acting with awareness, being nonjudgmental, having emotional equilibrium (“nonreactivity”), labeling and describing with words the internal world, and self-observation… Mindfulness meditation promotes our nine middle prefrontal functions: bodily regulation, attunement, emotional balance, fear modulation, flexibility of response, insight, empathy, morality and intuition.”

I suspect Alexander Technique, a form of mindfulness most often practiced in the western world, promotes secure attachment.

We all respond to the turbulence of life in one of three patterns — anger, sadness or fear. Angry people turn their frustration on to others, sad people become obsessed with rejection and abandonment (me!), and fearful people become obsessed with their fears. We can’t lose our patterns but we can lighten them through therapy and find new possibilities.

Posted in alexander technique | Comments Off

Why Race Matters: Race Differences and What They Mean by Michael Levin

The New York Times reported in 1991:

A Federal judge has ruled that City College of New York may not punish a professor for writing that “on average, blacks are significantly less intelligent than whites.”

The professor, Dr. Michael Levin, who is tenured in the philosophy department, had sued the college president and dean, charging violations of his civil and constitutional rights.

According to the ruling, college officials abrogated Dr. Levin’s rights to free speech and due process when they formed a committee last year to investigate Dr. Levin, failed to discipline protesters who broke school rules by disrupting his classes and departed from tradition by establishing separate sections of his courses for students who might have been offended by his views, which he never expressed in class.

The ruling by Judge Kenneth Conboy of Federal District in Manhattan, reached after a three-day trial in May, blocks the school from continuing to arrange the special sections and from disciplining or investigating Dr. Levin “predicated solely upon his protected expression of ideas.” The judge also ordered the college to take “reasonable steps” to prevent further disruption of Dr. Levin’s classes.

Mises.org posts this book review: “Given the radical nature of Professor Levin’s conclusions, the question of course arises: Is he correct? I shall say only this. Anyone who proposes to challenge Levin had better be well versed in statistics, intelligence testing, and evolutionary biology, all of which our author appears to have mastered. I venture to suggest that the so-called Flynn effect poses the sharpest challenge to our author’s case. The mean IQ of Western populations has risen over the past sixty years, but surely people are not more intelligent than their parents and grandparents. Does this not suggest that IQ tests do not adequately measure intelligence? I shall leave it to readers to judge the adequacy of our author’s ingenious answer (pp. 128 ff).”

“Most notably, he offers the best noncognitivist account of moral values that I have read. In his view, values are not objective properties, that we intuit, as states of affairs; they are the results of biological adaptation. People do indeed believe their values to be objectively correct; but their belief is a conceptual blind spot. We must, if Levin is right, entertain at the time of action a false belief in value-objectivity at the time of action.”

Jared Taylor reviews this 1997 book by Michael Levin:

Prof. Levin does not flinch from drawing what may appear to be an unkind conclusion: Given the crime rates, social irresponsibility, lack of foresight, impulsiveness, and general self-centeredness of black behavior, blacks probably have a different inherent capacity and appreciation for morality.

He proposes that this difference can be explained by the environments in which blacks and whites (and Asians) evolved. In a warm climate where food can be gathered year-round, people do not need to develop habits of cooperation and planning in order to get through the winter. In the north, it took mutual trust and cooperation for groups of men to bring down large game, so reciprocal morality evolved along with intelligence.

Climate and terrain could also have influenced sexual behavior. Since African women could gather food for themselves and their children even if a mate abandoned them, there was less pressure to insist that men support their children. For the same reason, there was less evolutionary pressure on fathers to stick around. In the north, a man who abandoned his children might well leave no descendants to behave in like manner. And in fact, the family habits of Africans and transplanted blacks are extremely loose by white standards.

What we think of as moral behavior, including sexual morality, is now known to be heavily influenced by genes. As Prof. Levin points out, there is no biological reason to expect different populations to have evolved exactly the same distribution of morality-influencing genes. Therefore it is likely that “the races have … evolved divergent evaluations of cooperativeness, aggression, rule-following, and concern with the future.”

That blacks care less about others and worry less about the future is suggested in virtually every area of behavior. Crime is only the most obvious example, nor is it the expression of wretchedness and self-loathing that excuse-making whites pretend it to be. Prof. Levin notes that “the criminal behavior of young black males just does not look like an expression of despair. In account after account, these individuals come across as full of themselves and unrepentant.” He might have added that if blacks were really reduced to hopelessness by white oppression, they would presumably have high suicide rates, whereas in every age group blacks kill themselves at only one half to one quarter the white rate.

The other prominent black deviation from white morality is reckless procreation, but other traits are just as striking: unwillingness to do volunteer work, support charities, donate organs, volunteer as medical test subjects, keep quiet in theaters, recycle trash, save money, exercise, or keep houses in good repair. Black mothers are twice as likely as white mothers to smoke, drink, and take drugs during pregnancy, even when doctors tell them not to. Blacks between ages 15 and 24 are ten times as likely to have fatal gun accidents as whites of the same age even when gun availability is controlled for. By white standards, black behavior is impulsive, shiftless, and inconsiderate.

D. EMAILS: Libertarianism is great because it proposes that each person take complete, ultimate responsibility for his actions, with no state to hide behind. It relates closely to the issue of black violence/general dysfunction in America which is by and large subsidized by government (the social welfare state that enables and even rewards black promiscuity, etc.) by proposing that white people not be responsible for the sociopathy of black people (nor that I be responsible for your crimes) and allowing the free market to punish those who detract value from society and reward those who add it.

Just a couple examples that come to mind of the struggle between the free market and government on the issue of race:
1. The government forces employers to employ blacks and other groups that test high for degeneracy, though it is obviously bad for business
2. The government forces parents to send children to school with black children that the free market has otherwise priced out of that school district
3. The government encumbers the economy with the burden of a 25,000 dollar average annual cost of maintaining each incarcerated person in a prison system where most inmates are black
Other issues would be the risk to your life that government creates in 1. employing minorities with demonstrated psychopathic tendencies as police officers and 2. prohibiting you from owning the tools of self-defense, particularly in places with high rates of minorities (LA, NYC, Chicago, etc.). Going through this list, you will notice that the absence of government cures every problem.
You have noted in the past that Jews have used government to (over-)represent their interests in America. It would appear that the easiest way for the white race/WASP class to combat this would simply be to shrink the size of government, given that even if all whites united behind a race bloc, they are about to be a minority in this country anyway.

Posted in Blacks | Comments Off

Why Is There A Meme That Americans Are Ignorant?

Why are there only news stories about Americans who don’t know geography or the World Cup or whatever? Americans are no more ignorant a people, on average, when you measure by race, than any other people. Anyway, I don’t trust these polls and stories as the subjects have no incentives for answering the questions.

From Australia:

BEFORE the World Cup started, we showed you footage of an American prankster, Baha Salamah, testing his compatriots’ knowledge of football.
The results were not impressive.
Since then, millions of Americans have leapt onto the football bandwagon, inspired by their team’s surprising run to the World Cup’s round of 16. They’ve been paying far more attention to the sport than usual. Surely they’ve learned something in the process?
Sadly, no. They haven’t.

Posted in America | Comments Off

Racial Differences In Personality

Richard Lynn is professor emeritus of psychology of the University of Ulster. This article is based on a longer paper published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences, 2002, Vol. 32, pp.273-316.

For as long as official statistics have been kept, blacks in white societies have been overrepresented in all indices of social pathology: crime, illegitimacy, poverty, school failure, and long-term unemployment. The conventional liberal explanation for this is white “racism,” past and present, which has forced blacks into self-destructive choices. More clear-headed observers, however, have sought a partial explanation in the low average IQ of blacks…

I propose that the variable that explains these differences is that blacks are more psychopathic than whites. Just as racial groups differ in average IQ, they can also differ in average levels of other psychological traits, and racial differences in the tendency towards psychopathic personality would explain virtually all the differences in black and white behavior left unexplained by differences in IQ.

Psychopathic personality is a personality disorder of which the central feature is lack of a moral sense. The condition was first identified in the early nineteenth century by the British physician John Pritchard, who proposed the term “moral imbecility” for those deficient in moral sense but of normal intelligence. The term psychopathic personality was first used in 1915 by the German psychiatrist Emile Kraepelin and has been employed as a diagnostic label throughout the twentieth century. In 1941 the condition was described by Hervey Cleckley in what has become a classic book, The Mask of Sanity. He described the condition as general poverty of emotional feelings, lack of remorse or shame, superficial charm, pathological lying, egocentricity, a lack of insight, absence of nervousness, an inability to love, impulsive antisocial acts, failure to learn from experience, reckless behavior under the influence of alcohol, and a lack of long-term goals…

There is almost complete consistency in the racial differences in outcomes that can be considered measures of psychopathic personality. In everything from child behavior to sexual precocity to adult crime rates we find Asians at one extreme, blacks at the other, and whites, Hispanics and American Indians in between. These differences are not only consistent through time but are found in countries such as France, Britain, Canada, and the United States, which have very different histories of what could be called “racism.” Indices of high psychopathic personality in blacks are likewise found in the virtually all-black societies of Africa and the Caribbean.

Racial differences in psychopathic behavior persist even when IQ is held constant, and the same racial differences are found in essentially every kind of measurable behavior that reflects psychopathic personality. The most plausible explanation for these differences is that just as there are racial differences in average IQ, there are racial differences in what could be called “average personality,” with blacks showing greater psychopathic tendencies. The argument that white “racism” is responsible for black social pathology is increasingly unconvincing.

WARREN EMAILS:

Luke,

I was wondering if you’re familiar with PSYCHOLOGY TODAY’S “Unique – Like Everybody Else” blog written by Scott McGreal. He takes on a lot of topics you’ve been addressing related to race, intelligence, and personality.

I’m trying to immerse myself in the literature on this topic, as it’s related to my field of Industrial Organizational psychology, and I haven’t reviewed it for a while. Here are some of my thoughts thus far.

Your article references a definition of sociopathy as “general poverty of emotional feelings, lack of remorse or shame, superficial charm, pathological lying, egocentricity, a lack of insight, absence of nervousness, an inability to love, impulsive antisocial acts, failure to learn from experience, reckless behavior under the influence of alcohol, and a lack of long-term goals…”

I’m wondering – how many of these characteristics could be attributed to a white Southern slaveholder before the Civil War? For that matter, how many of them could be attriubuted to the enforcers of Jim Crowe laws in the South before Civil Rights legislation was passed and enforced? I’m old enough to remember Lester Maddox brandishing an axe handle, and he seemed highly sociopathic.

What happens, Luke, when an individual’s culture is totally destroyed, and the community of nations does not step up to support the downtrodden, as it did when the state of Israel was founded? For the Native American, this meant life on a reservation, and systematized fostering of dependency by government that surrounds their “soverign nations.” For the freed slave, it meant sharecropping and Jim Crowe laws.

You’ve extrapolated from scientific research on the elusive construct of intelligence to conclude that “The argument that white “racism” is responsible for black social pathology is increasingly unconvincing.” Is this in fact the case? Exactly how long “should” it take a race to recover from kidnapping, bondage, and systematized persecution? Do we have “scientific research” to inform us about that? I can recall the 100th anniversary of the end of the Civil War in my lifetime – and only two generations have passed since the end of Jim Crowe in the South. Even today, Mark Cuban is frightened by the sight of a black kid in a hoodie.

Turning to the scientific side, here are some thoughts I’ve been having as I review the research. First, we have the construct of intelligence, or “g.” What IS it, exactly? The hard core critics point out that “intelligence is what intelligence tests measure” – no more or less. However, that’s not exactly true – the “g,” or “general” factor of intelligence is actually the overlap between what a NUMBER of tests measure at any given point in history – and, as the Flynn effect demonstrates, that “something” that is being measured is a moving target. Interpreted literally, the Flynn effect seems to indicate that we are exponentially more intelligent than individuals who lived – let’s say around 1900, when the Army started administering the first modern intelligence tests. As a devout fan of the writer Joseph Conrad, who published in the 1800s and died in 1924 – I find this pretty hard to swallow. Exactly now did this erudite novelist find a loyal group of readers in such a population of morons? And how did that group of morons pull off the Social and Industrial revolutions that gave us our modernity?

Richard Lynn says that the Flynn effect is reaching a plateau – and that the narrowing of racial differences concurrent with that plateau is a result of improved nutrition. However, if that’s the explanation, why doesn’t Flynn posit that improved nutrition could eventually eliminate these racial differences? Does his implicit assumption that differences will remain reflect a racial bias?

My understanding is that Lynn’s work is based on metanalysis, and that he has been accused of being selective about the studies that he chose to include. Readers of your article should understand that these sorts of studies are a form of “metanalysis.” The first metanalyses, designed for the field of education, were developed by a man named “Glass,” and are referred to as “Glassian” metanalysis. Later, John Hunter, a psychologist, improved upon these methods. Essentially, a meta-analysis is an “analysis of analyses” that computes an “effect size” by aggregating all the data from a number of studies and then correcting for error associated with sample sizes. Doing this holds the promise of getting closer to a “true” result that is not influenced by the handicap of small sample sizes.

This is a very tricky business, as the quality of the individual studies naturally impacts the result. There is always a judgment call on the part of the researcher, who must determine if the content and methodology of an individual study has enough commonality with the other studies to justify its inclusion in the “meta” study.

Going back to the Flynn effect, I wonder about Lynn’s explanation of its diminuation over time as a result of nutrition. If nutrition is so essential to IQ differences in populations, how does that square with the “cold climate” theory that those who had to cope with a cold climate evolved into more intellient beings? Wouldn’t warm climates naturally afford higher levels of nutritional food? For example – I subscribe to a “Container Gardening” group on Facebook that seems to have a high membership of Filipinos. The nutritional plants they are able to grow there – year-round – is astounding. I assume that the same would be true in other tropical and semi-tropical locations.

There also is an alternative interpretation of the Flynn effect – which is that intelligence measures vary over historical time because they are not really measuring what we think of as intelligence. I can send you a recent citation which points out that – logically – intelligence is not a scientific construct, because it is not empirically falsifiable. Remember – the “intelligence” test of the early 1900s had an “average” score of 100 – but if our present day population took it, their average would be significantly higher. We simply take a number of tests, administer them, and define intelligence as the overlap i.e, “general factor”) between those tests. Factors are based on the statistical technique of factor analysis, which is an exploratory technique. Some of the pioneers of the intelligence construct even argued that “content” of the tests being administered was irrelevant!

Finially, we have the question of race and genetics. A recent study of race in Mexico found that there are distinct, highly diverse and easily identifiable genetic sub-groups within that nation, Given their history of invasion, conquest, and immigration (for that last factor, consider that it’s the geographic gateway to the United States) – this is an astounding result. The same result has been found in England – some small towns have an identifiable genetic footprint associated with the national origin of the name of the town they’re associated with.

Although researchers like Lynn prefer to emphasize the “reality” of race, there is no getting around the fact that we are currently in the midst of an emerging “realty” of genetics that promises much deeper understanding (i,.e., predictive power) than more superficial characteristics of skin color, eye color, and hair. It’s coming, so we must be careful not to embarass ourselves with sweeping generalizations that will document our ignorance for the amusement of future generations,

Some of the proponents of race differences are now selling the idea of a correlation between intelligence and the trait of conscientiousness. I have not read these articles yet, but I find this idea counter-intuitive to my experience. Before I became an Industrial-Organizational psychologist, I worked as a School Psychologist. The mentally retarded people I knew through that work were some of the nicest and most conscientious people I’ve ever known. They can work in a sheltered workshop (and sometimes now at McDonalds) with a consistent level of conscientiousness that is awesome, If there is a relationship between intelligence and conscientiousness, I would posit that it’s mediated by variations in comprehension of rules and instructions. I’ve also known very intelligent people who are cunning and devious. I never found that with my mentally retarded students, or even with slow learners.

Luke, I’m confident that the average intelligence of your readers far exceeds the average of major ethnic groups in the U.S. I have no quarrel with the information you’re presenting in terms of its valdiity for discussion or the credentials of those involved. My only desire is to point out that this is a politically charged and highly contentious area, and therefore. hidden agendas do exist.

I also want people to understand that it’s a HIGHLY COMPLEX area that must be approached using systems theory thinking of the type explicated by the great Jewish founder of social psychology, Kurt Lewin. Behavior is a function of person in their environment!

Posted in Blacks, Race | Comments Off

Erin Andrews Shows Off Her Excellent Use Of Herself

Erin Andrews

Her boyfriend is the Kings’ Jarret Stoll.

Posted in alexander technique | Comments Off

When Your House Is On Fire, Don’t Expect To Be Subtle

I was about nine months into my Alexander Technique teacher training when my girlfriend of the time noticed that when I walked, I tend to be ball up my hands in fists.

Many nervous people have tics. They squint, furrow their brows, scratch their face, play with their hair, anything to distract themselves from the fire inside.

Sixty four minutes into this video, Alexander teacher Rebecca Tuffey tells a singer with a nervous tic: “You might find that is something you can change once your body is more quiet. If the house is on fire, can you do nuanced things? Are you singing Mozart? No, you’re trying to deal with the emergency. It’s like that in our nervous systems.”

Posted in alexander technique | Comments Off

Letting Go Of My Beliefs

As any regular reader of my blog knows, I have many strong opinions, but I try to go through vast swathes of my life without any conscious beliefs.

According to F.M. Alexander, all beliefs are unnecessary muscle tension. That idea does not have to be 100% true to be interesting and useful. Think about how many strong beliefs you have when you are most relaxed. I suspect very few. Strong beliefs go hand in hand with increased body tension while letting go of beliefs accompanies a letting go of body tension.

I find it fun to walk down the street without any beliefs. I find it fun to go to work and to leave my beliefs at home for a few minutes or a few hours. When I teach Alexander Technique, I try to let go of all my beliefs except the ones in the classical principles of the Technique.

I find that as I live my life, my beliefs tend to weigh me down, so over the past few years, I’ve tried to let go of the ones I don’t need.

Posted in alexander technique | Comments Off