Race and IQ — Sam Harris and Charles Murray Set the Record Straight on Intelligence Testing



there's this one piece which is IQ itself having nothing to do with race has been a somewhat taboo topic particularly on the Left politically but what's interesting is that it wasn't always the case because the left used to be kind of booster ish about IQ testing because it seemed to promise a direct road to meritocracy it would get as out of Cleese class differences and people could just be judged on their own merits that's why the SAT was invented the SAT was was going to be an in fact it did serve this function it would be a way for kids who did not go to Grodin and exeter and the rest of it to to get a chance to show how smart they were and they could be brought into the colleges and harvard in particular and it's conent its president back in the 1940s were very hot on using tests for precisely that purpose and by the way i went to harvard in 1961 which pretty well dates me from newton iowa and i was absolutely convinced that i got in because i was able to take an SAT score and get a good score even though i went to a mediocre public school sorry about that Newton high school and and in that sense the enthusiasm for IQ is appropriate insofar as it's a good way to identify intellectual talent but at this point sam it's almost as if we are in the opposite position of conventional wisdom versus elite wisdom that we were say when Columbus was gonna sail to America when when Columbus was gonna sail to America it is true that an awful lot of the ordinary people still thought that the earth was flat but among the elites it was understood the theorises ground well now it is ordinary people are perfectly comfortable the idea that some people are smarter than others and they're perfectly comfortable that that that what we call smart look gets you kinds of jobs you can't get otherwise all that kind of stuff it's the elites who are under the impression that Oh IQ tests only measure what IQ tests measure and nobody really is able to define intelligence and this and that they're they're culturally biased on and on and on and on and all of these things are the equivalent of saying the earth is flat these are not opinions that you can hold in in contests with the scientific literature any more than you can be an Aristotelian physicists in Contra distinction to a Newtonian physicist this stuff is not subject to debate anymore you have to convert the elite wisdom now in colleges is and a lot of your listeners are saying that what I'm saying is pseudoscience gets right frustum yeah you just referenced two things which I think are widely believed which are certainly known to be false and we're known to be false at the time you wrote your book again more than 20 years ago and the first claim is that IQ tests simply measure people's ability to take IQ tests yeah that is a Shibboleth that is is rattling around the brains of certainly many of our listeners no one in touch with the literature has thought that was true for a generation and then there's the idea that these tests are well known to be culturally biased so that you just cannot get valid data on certain groups and and and this is something we've never been able to overcome that also is not the current opinion of psychometricians anywhere is that is that correct yeah and let's let me describe a little bit why we know those two things in terms of why we know that IQ tests measure something other than the ability to take IQ tests it's a matter of predictive validity and predictive validity means that if you take a population with have IQ scores and then you take a their their history on a variety of things of interest such as income or job productivity or the rest of it the IQ scores predict this outcome so they predict income in terms of employment decisions from job productivity you are better off if you're an employer and you have only one datum that you can get you can say you can't have two you are better off knowing an IQ score than you are having a personal interview having grades having degrees or anything else the the single most informative thing you can have is an IQ score this is not the result of a one or two studies the the predictive validity of IQ tests has been established over and over cultural bias you basically have a couple of ways to test for cultural bias one of them is is there a racial difference in the predictive validity of the tests so let's say that the SAT were culturally biased what that says is the SAT doesn't capture this thing called academic ability to succeed in college as well for blacks as it does for whites or it could just systematically underestimate the ability of blacks relative to whites and what then will be the result the result will be that if you let people in who have the lower IQ scores of the lower SAT scores they'll actually do better than the test score predicted the test will have under predicted their performance that has been tested with a an extensive literature there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that test scores whether IQ tests or SAT under predict black performance there is some evidence that they may over predict black performance but that that raises a whole different set of issues and problematic issues but the tests are not biased against blacks in terms of predictive validity the way that most people think about cultural bias though is in items that a white upper-middle class kid is more likely to know the answer to then not a black inner-city kid and the poster child for this was an SAT item that used analogies and it in one of them involved the word regatta as part of the answer and of course people dumped on that saying look who's gonna know what regatta means well there's that there's a very direct way that you can deal with that you can do item analysis of the tests so that you can for example have people simply inspect the items and rate them according to their cultural loading that would be one approach and then you can extract those items and see whether test scores converge or you can see whether the items that are culturally loaded are harder for for black students to answer than they are for white students and the answer those questions is now that the ordering of difficulty of items is the same across races and that when you have tests that are empty of any cultural loading at all that it is not that the the black/white difference diminishes it doesn't sometimes it gets greater because in this is a more complicated statement there's more complicated literature but there is some evidence that the culturally loaded items are ones that minority groups do better on than the purely abstract ones so in other words when you say the tests are culturally biased you are not forced to sort of sit back and stare at the ceiling and decide whether they are on the basis of your intuition there are very systematic ways to interrogate the quality of the test with regard to this and modern tests passed with flying colors well now we're getting closer to the the rods at the core of the reactor here let's talk about the concept of race that it's also widely believed that race is not a valid biological concept it's a social construct this is the many ways to see this is untrue but there's a kernel of truth here which is that it's a it's a biological concept but it is a blurry one I mean it's similar to the way races races can be thought of as analogous to families in fact some people have said that that a race is essentially just a very large family that is partly inbred but you can see family resemblance in the races I mean this is it's not an accident that you can generally predict where a person's ancestors came from by just simply looking at his face right I mean their their phenotypic differences between people that have genetic underpinnings and it's not merely just skin deep I mean there are genetic diseases that various racial groups have or more prone to no tay-sachs sickle cell anemia and this is just straight biology and and because different racial groups differ genetically to any degree and because most of what we care about in ourselves and intelligence included because most of what we care about in ourselves also it has some genetic underpinnings for many of these traits we're talking about something like 50% it would be very very surprising if everything we cared about was tuned to the exact same population average in every racial group there's just virtually no way that's going to be true so it is purely on biological consideration we should expect that for any variable there will be differences in the average it's average level across racial groups that that differ genetically to some degree there's there's a branch point here in the conversation which is that one thing that has changed dramatically since the time that dick and I were working on the bell curve we published at 94 which meant we were basically writing it from 1990 up to 94 mm-hmm the thing that has changed most dramatically is now the genome has been sequenced and so much has been learned since it has been sequenced the whole discussion of ethnicity / race is being conducted a much higher level of sophistication at the time we were working on the bell curve you know they would look at blood groups and things like this to try to have something besides phenotypic characteristics facial characteristics and skin color now the well the ability of the geneticists to simply look at variation over a million snips across populations and do really fascinating cluster analysis probably just the whole conversation about the word populations is what the geneticists like to use now instead of race and I don't blame them and I'm happy talking about populations – that's that's just being done at a huge level that we never considered in a bell curve we simply said if people call themselves black or Latino or white we're going to believe a bad word there are going to be our samples but here's the point going forward in this conversation Sam which is the blurriness of race is noise in the signal the blurriness of race is not going to – artificially make it look as if there are genetic differences in IQ it's going to obscure any such genetic differences in IQ so so in effect we are looking at a noisy signal and if you still see patterns in the data that point to the possibility of genetic roles those signals have survived a lot of contamination but again I mean we need what we should come back to here is that genes are almost certainly only just part of the story and there should be very likely an environmental contribution here and this is something you say in your book many many times let's go back to do the same thing with genes and IQ and race that we did with with cultural bias in the tests and the to the test measure anything except of the ability to take tests we are not helpless to simply say well there's still racism existing so that must be the explanation there are lots of ways that we can look at patterns in the data and say well are these compatible with an exclusively environmental explanation and I want to stress that last point dick and I are our crime in the book was to have a single solitary paragraph that said after talking about the patterns that I'm about to describe if we've convinced you that either the environmental or the genetic explanation has won out to the exclusion of the other we haven't done a good enough job of presenting the evidence for one side of the other it seems to us highly likely that both genes and the environment have something to do with racial differences and we went no farther than that there is an asymmetry between saying probably genes have some involvement and the assertion that it's entirely environmental and that's what the that's the assertion that is being made if you're going to be upset at the bell curve you are obligated to defend the proposition that the black/white difference in IQ scores is 100% environmental and that's a very tough measure here's the way that we went about it so we were now powdered you put it a while ago the the radioactive rods we're getting closer to yes yeah here's the the thinking that dick and I had that led us to write that sentence and it starts out with simply the very high demands that the environmental hypothesis places on you if you say for purposes of just thinking through the arithmetic that that genes and environment it's a 50/50 split in explaining of variants of an IQ in a whole population that means that in order for the environment to explain 100 percent of a standard deviation difference mean between blacks and whites the average black would have to be at an environment that is about 1.5 standard deviations below the white mean that's a really big difference and if you take all of the measures like income and educational attainment and occupational distribution and a variety of other measures of environment of one and a half standard deviations is way way bigger than any of the observed differences are there that doesn't mean that there are unmet aren't unmeasured differences in the environment that are also at work it just is you start off with a really big question in your mind is that plausible that it can be a hundred percent environmental well I think we should add here that it is possibly plausible when you bring in the Flynn effect in the sense that so the Flynn it we I don't think we've defined the Flynn effect you haven't even talked to people Alexia but James Flynn who I would that you have actually as far as I can tell in in the bell curve you're the one who brought attention to the Flynn effect can be named the Flynn effect yeah yeah being named after James Flynn who's done his research so tell us what the Flynn effect is the Flynn effect is that it was noted also by a guy named Richard Lynn who was one of the people that I'm excoriated with for citing in the bell curve as being an honest but Richard Leonard also identified this east-asian tests and Jim Flynn identified it and brought it he did more than Linda to bring it public attention namely IQ tests are renormalize a a norming in 1950 they norm it to a mean of a hundred and a standard deviation of 15 what Flynn noticed was that if you give that same test to a set of people in 1960 instead of 1950 the mean is not a hundred it's a hundred and two or maybe a hundred and three so that over the course of the ten years it's that the IQ scores of the population Everson and as he looked at that he found the Flynn effect this secular increase in IQ scores going back to the 1940s and 1930s and extending out into recent data and the implications of this have Jeff's driven scholars crazy since then and the causes of it because there are no even after this much time there's still a lot that's not understood is it simply a matter of increasing of exposure to things which lets you answer IQ questions an example one of the kinds of IQ questions is rotating mentally in your mind's eye an object in three dimensions and being able to say something about how it looked when you look at it from the other side those are items which which I think I did very poorly on by the way well you know the the ability of people to answer that question is going to be different in 1930 when nobody sees routinely objects rotating in three dimensions in front of your eyes than in 2017 where every television commercial is having you know the script and other things rotating in three dimensions as part of our daily lives so it could be that kind of of simply majority and sensitization certain kinds of mental tasks that we weren't sensitized to before also be an increase in G might be there there are some reasons to believe in the analysis of test scores that it could be partly that but not a lot that I think is probably a fair characterization of the state of knowledge right now is improved nutrition a thesis there or not and improved nutrition could well be a contributor improved nutrition does enhance IQ although you would think you think you would hit the ceiling long before the better part of a century because nutrition is probably where it needs to be now there's also by the way there has been direct analysis of the nature of the we're talking very complicated statistics to this point but the nature of the difference between blacks and whites and IQ scores and the subtests and the nature of the Flynn effect as analyzed by subtest and these scholars who did that who are Dutch scholars gel T witcher's WICHE RTS is the lead author of one of the most important articles in this their conclusion is that the nature of the Flint effect is pretty much divorced from the nature of the black/white difference but the Flynn effect itself is a fascinating phenomenon and is a reminder that that we don't know everything there is to know about all this stuff right well that's interesting because I have here a quote from Flynn I don't know when he wrote this or said this but he says quote an environmental explanation of the racial IQ gap need only posit this that the average environment for blacks in 1995 matches the quality of the average environment for whites in 1945 I do not find that implausible end quote so what you just said seems to close the door to that interpretation of the black-white gap yes it does and this is a case where I am citing someone who has done analyses that are at a level of complexity that I'm not independently competent to pronounce this is a vet as a top scholar who did that he had some co-authors whose names I don't recall its top of my head he's a top scholar she does really rigorous work but that's all I can say at this point so I want to just now drive to the ethical and political punchline which is a point you emphasize in your book it really as scrupulous ly as you could and it did not spare you all of the the pain that you subsequently suffered and and perhaps it won't spare us the pain for having this conversation but this really is the takeaway message and again it's the message you took away more than 20 years ago which is whatever their origin mean IQ differences are not all we care about and so we care about ethics and politics and we want societies that maximize human wellbeing and we for this we need political equality and to have political equality you have to treat people as individuals is ethically and it's politically prudent to do this and and here's a crucial point it's also rational to do this because that the differences between groups are not so large that there isn't a substantial overlap between them for every trait we care about so there's and given that the variance between individuals will be much higher than than the variance between groups again for any trait we care about but especially what we're talking now about intelligence it would actually be irrational to read much into group differences so that the trick the truth is I learn nothing about a person's intelligence simply by being told that he's black or white or Asian you still need to treat people as individuals and and you make it absolutely clear in your book that given the overlap in in these bell curves there will be many many blacks who are far more intelligent than most whites I mean so this is a again it all comes back down to honestly evaluating individuals I am FATA CLE agreed with everything you've just said as you pointed out there can I have some of these passages in italics in the book and one of them we have not stressed enough is that there's much more variation within groups than there is between grabbing that separation is much much greater within groups and it is between groups so that the overlap is very large but think of it in terms of being an employer and you're trying to hire you need a really smart guy for a job and Barack Obama walks in to the interview ok he's black if you then make inferences about how smart he is based on his membership in a snake group you are going to be making a huge mistake and the same thing is true for not just employers it's it's true for admitting people to schools it is true for all of our interactions with other people we do not know whether they are people who would like to hang out with we don't know how smart they are we don't know how much integrity they have by looking at them and assigning them a group membership whether by the way it's not just race but it's also sex and it's sexual orientation and it's ethnicity of a much more detailed form any group you want to name you don't know on the basis of group means what you're dealing with it is virtually impossible to make that point stick again you made that point with absolute clarity in the book and I just read the mo the most controversial sections of the book you know last night just to assure myself of this and you make that point repeatedly but I'm going to give people a taste of the reaction you got to this book the sociologist Steven Rosenthal called the book quote a vehicle of Nazi propaganda wrapped in a cover of pseudo-scientific respectability an academic version of Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf right I mean this was the tenor of the response even among intellectuals and academics who were reviewing the book yep when we wrote the chapter we spent a lot of time in this chapter with with trying to to get it right not just in the technical details but also in the language and when we were all done with it I actually had these hopes that when the book came out that dick and I would be applauded for having taken this inflammatory issue and treated it the same this is not such a big deal this is nothing to get excited about but it's something that it's better to to look at then for people to have these weigh exaggerated notions of what might be going on I thought we might get some kudos for that and it turned out that people I know of academics especially who actually read the book had to know they were lying because I'm thinking of specific academics they just simply know too much about this subject not to have known that they were lying and they lied without any apparent shadow of guilt because I guess in their own minds they were doing the Lord's work yeah it was a kind of moral panic I mean when you look at just how irrational the claims were I mean you're talking about claims that intelligence doesn't exist on some level or that it doesn't matter or that you can't possibly test for it or that there can't possibly be differences among mean differences among groups or that it could have no genetic underpinnings I mean this is like they were throwing out a century of our growing understanding of these things and vilifying you with an energy that clear this is what happens when you touch a taboo in this way I guess that one thing that must be occurring to our listeners now and this is one this is my misgiving about having this conversation and and and going into this area at all is that the question is why talk about any of this why seek data on racial difference at all what is the purpose of doing this because we now have social policy embedded in employment policy in academic policy which is based on the premise that everybody's equal above the neck all groups would be equal above the neck whether it's men and women or whether it's ethnicities and when you have that embedded into law you have a variety of bad things happen let's go back to the employer who sees Barack Obama walk into the office for a job interview and I'm saying for him to treat Barack Obama as a member of a group as opposed to the man sitting across the desk is idiotic as well as being immoral of what social policy is doing it in an employers mind when it is a black candidate walking into that office is all sorts of things that are raising the cost of hiring that person to that employer raising the cost in terms of vulnerability to discrimination lawsuits vulnerability to a variety of other regulatory penalties because all it wants that person that person cannot be evaluated on that person's merits and the decision made solely on those merits without incurring risks because if you treat all of your employees really equally if you fire them for exactly the same reasons or refuse to promote them for exactly the same reasons but those reasons as all such reasons don't lend themselves to ironclad proof you're having to take a chance but let me give you there's a whole bunch of other reasons and and now I want to expand it beyond ethnic differences to gender differences you know there are there is a strong argument to be made that my colleague at AEI christina hoff sommers is made that education in recent years has been taken over by essentially an elite wisdom which has feminized education and changed k-12 education and ways which boys don't thrive in and girls do and the answer to that is not to go back into an old form of education which was based on how boys learn rather it's important to recognize differences between men and women boys and girls that exist to do a good job of educating them throughout the way that we conduct our economic and educational lives and a lot of other institutions the Equality premise that all groups of people only have differences in outcomes because of racism or sexism or inappropriate institutions that assumption has created huge arm but now they take the flip side of that whether you acknowledge it now or just in the past at what at one point there was a place for affirmative action and other course attempts to promote diversity do you think that was a mistake from the beginning or do you think it's a mistake now or what or how do you think about overcoming the challenge of the lack of diversity and it's kind of the attendant stratification of society there the original sense of affirmative action for about the first twelve months after the term came into use was that if you were an employer you should make greater efforts to reach out to applicant pools that you wouldn't have otherwise reached out to and that you would take affirmative action to bring people in that that had been excluded and had people been excluded whether women or blacks or other minorities absolutely was there a need for affirmative action to remedy that yes there was but at the same time that you did that and and you needed to do this on on the basis of of what's good for the people you're trying to help it needed to be one which did not put people into places where they were set up to fail the one of the great scandals that nobody talks about in elite schools is the dropout rates of their minority students all of the kids who get into MIT and by the way I do not have I I know about dropout rates some years ago for MIT I don't know recent ones but I know that there was a time at which dropout rate among black students at MIT was about 24% now to get into MIT you are going to be in the top 1 or 2 3% of mathematical ability maybe let's say everybody's for the top 5% you're gonna be very smart in math but if you are let in I'm let's say here at the 4th percentile in math ability and you are in engineering classes with your fellow students at MIT the rest of the students in that class are in the top one-tenth of 1% sometimes in the top 1/100 of the top percent and in that kind of setting you are the dumbest kid in the class there is no reason for 24% of those kids not to be highly successful at really good colleges hmm MIT is probably not the place for them because because of the mismatch sorry I feel like that some of the numbers came out wrong there I just saw I just want to make sure I'm tracking what you're saying so you're saying that kids are really smart but there's a huge difference between being in the top one-tenth of 1% mathematically when you're in an engineering class at MIT and being in the 95th percentile mathematically right right said that's that's what I was trying to say but I would appeal to people who are listening to this who have had that kind of experience particularly those of you who have been in classes and you know you're pretty smart but you've been in classes who you also know that the other kids in there are a lot smarter than you are that can be demoralizing experience and imagine that's true of every class you go to by the way there is a literature that has gone both ways on this issue and for the first time this afternoon I will say I am on one side of a contested literature where there are data that can be cited by both sides there are there have been books written that said no this mismatch does not produce the all the bad results that I've just claimed or even if it does produce some of those there are other advantages to it so I want to acknowledge the existence of that alternative argument just to come back to my original question here so the reason why I wanted to have this conversation with you about race and IQ and about the bell curve is I perceive a huge intellectual and moral injustice with respect to how you were treated on this topic because everything you have said about it has been as judicious and as clear-headed ethically as I would hope it would be and you were treated I mean do you you know you got to attend your own witch burning and have for the last 20 years so that's why I'm wading into this morass with you but I'm still conflicted over this issue of why study this topic at all because very easy to see that why anyone would assume that if you're looking in an area that is producing invidious comparisons between races and you're continuing to look in that area and continuing to be interested in that area your interest must be motivated to some degree by a kind of morbid and quasi racist curiosity in just sort of kind of shoring up a notion of difference between white and black in this case and needless to say I'm sure we can find you know white supremacist organizations who absolutely love the fact that the bell curve was published and just admonished their members to read it at the first opportunity why look at this how does this help Society for us to be getting more information about racial difference if you go back to some of my earliest published stuff on affirmative action you go back to 1984 when I did an article for The New Republic in which I was talking about the mismatch problem and a lot of that is how would I feel if I were a black kid my age and going into college and everybody thought I was there because I was an affirmative action kid I would hate that I would really hate it how would I feel if on the job I knew that everybody assumed I got that job because of affirmative action I would hate that and I would try to do my best to to prove them wrong but I find that morally repugnant and and so but a lot of it was was I think a kind of empathy with what if I were me but I was in the same way and personality and intellect and everything else and ambitions but what if I were black living in this world right now and I'll tell you something else I went back to when I got to Harvard in the fall of 1961 there were way fewer black students undergraduates than there are now way fewer but I will tell you this was pre affirmative action pre Civil Rights Act of 1964 for that matter the kid from Newton Iowa every time he saw a black face at the student union or whatever my instinctive reaction was he's probably smarter than I am and I made that assumption because I figured that the black kids are very likely to have had a tougher roto than I had to get there so that was I didn't think about that a lot I wasn't possessed with it it was just my natural reaction and in subsequent years by the early 1980s I was thinking about that way of thinking about my fellow students and the way that I knew that things were going on in the university because I had enough faculty members enough friends who had children in college to know what was going on and I'm saying to myself this is way worse and for that matter I had been tutoring on a volunteer basis in the early 80s kids in the inner-city black kids in the inner-city in the what's called the higher achievement program program is run by the Catholic Church I'm not Catholic but the program wasn't limited to Catholics it took the smartest kids from the inner-city public schools and had them do intensive tutoring a couple of times a week and so I tutored those classes and if this was not touchy-feely tutoring this is fairly high paced stuff and these were great kids and they were they were coming in they were attending they were working hard everything was going right and one of the things that just stuck out was the degree to which all of these attempts at affirmative action in its new form we're creating an atmosphere in which it made it harder for these kids to succeed not easier so I said I said a few minutes ago that when it comes to what I see is the harms done by social policy that I am taking one side in an argument that is still legitimately contested and all I can say is I am taking it on the basis not just of statistics in books but personal experiences I have had where I think we are doing enormous harm to young people by making it harder to treat them as individuals

46 Comments

  1. Mark Taronji said:

    20:23–20:46 absolute nonsense. Blacks are not immersed in the same social environment or the same economic environment as whites in 1945. If you think that’s true, you just aren’t paying attention

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  2. F P said:

    He calls himself Mike hunt,and it blows his mind … . Mike don't strain the brain too much .
    Equal in the proportion of idiots and intellects as well as idiotic bigots .(what part can you not comprehend )
    Does the angle of your dangle remain proportional to the heat of your meat while your ignorance and hatred remains constant

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  3. Pablo Ramos said:

    You know? There is an inherent racism in your example of Barack Obama as a black person. I couldn't imagine you using Obama as an example of a white person, and yet, he is EXACTLY 50% of each. His father was a "poodle", his mother a "labrador" and he is a "labradoodle". (Dog breed example is for emphasis). You fall back into the old discriminatory attitude in which a drop of black blood makes one black.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  4. Robert W. said:

    You can't have a rational discussion with Leftist on the issue of race. They see racist boogeymen around every corner and become triggered very easily.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  5. Jose Cruz said:

    Murray should have known better that the US is a very racist country that has a racist history and lots of social problems related to race. Of course, writing a book that states average IQ of different races is throwing gasoline in the fire.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  6. Jwell Jrock said:

    I think the most intelligent people on the planet should be obvious to anyone with common sense

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  7. Magical Realism said:

    His claim that common people thought the earth was flat is flat out wrong. Factually wrong. Look it up. Just take their 'expert' words with a grain of salt.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  8. Jayq Bratt said:

    HIGH LEVEL Mathematics, writing, astronomy, medicine(prosthetic limbs and surgery) botany, agriculture, time keeping , iron and metal working, navigation, architecture! AND THE MEGALITHIC All of the things that require intelligence existed in AFRICA/MIDDLE EAST IN THE PAST! THOUSANDS OF YEARS BEFORE THE "HIGHER IQ" EUROPEANS KNEW OF SUCH THINGS !! Thats fact . and free info IF YOUR IN DOUBT! To use the current social/economic condition of the world to make large conclusions about human genetics without taking into account history is truly IGNORANT !! I can agree that Africa and middle east may be behind! BUT DUE TO EXTERNAL / HISTORICAL REASONS
    The PYRAMIDS ! The PYRAMIDS! OF EGYPT , BALBEEK IN LEBANON , ETHIOPIA, NUBIA, ANCIENT ISRAEL , . SORRY THIS ARGUMENT HAS MANY LOGICAL FALLACIES

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  9. jimmy jew said:

    Smarter people make more money because they are smart, and their children are also smart because intelligence is in their genes, and these children will make more money too because they are smart too just like their parents. What’s so difficult to understand?

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  10. jimmy jew said:

    The races that have created or maintained or improved a civilization are different from those that have not. It takes intelligence to create or maintain or improve a civilization. Some races are more intelligent than others, and they look different too, and that’s natural. It’s all very scientific. The blacks have not invented the wheel, nor have they created writing.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  11. jimmy jew said:

    IQ test was created to apply to the white population. At the time, the blacks were not on the radar screen. So how could it have been discriminatory as to the blacks or to the other races? And when it was applied to the other races too, the blacks scored the lowest. Don’t blame the test. Blame your parents- for lack of nature and nurture.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  12. Common Sense said:

    Finds Asians to have the highest average IQ and gets called a white supremacist.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  13. Simon Sozzi said:

    12:00 Whst does "calling yourself Latino" matter? You could be "Afro-Latino", "European-Latino", "indigenous/Latino", "Asian-Latino" and every mix in between. What kind of "race" is "Latino"? My ancestors are from Spain and Italy. But somehow because they immigrated to South America instead of North America, my IQ, on the average, should be lower…? If that's not a cultural bias then I'm just dark and dumb.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  14. Edward Roy said:

    The Left will NEVER EVER accept this truth.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  15. Edward Roy said:

    Impact of IQ is obvious when you look around the world at White vs. Asian vs. Hispanic vs. Black countries.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  16. Jon micheal said:

    They did there best to water it down, but blacks, average, horribly for IQ. If you just look at the Bell Curve and then get out in the world, there are no surprises

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  17. Robert Xavier said:

    Low IQ has nothing to do with poverty.
    Poverty is the result of a wasted childhood
    which results in choices which lead to suffering
    and the inability to face & overcome suffering
    thus the choice to comfort oneself with entertainment
    which does nothing to improve their lives.

    Wasted Childhood:
    Astronomy, Geography, History, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Math, English.
    None of which prepare a child to be a successful adult.

    Solution:

    English is used in every subject,
    children don't need a dedicated English course.
    Simply emphasize the use of proper English in the grading of their work.
    Computer coding is a far more practical & useful language to learn, as the children can use it to create an app or a game and make money, before they even graduate elementary school.

    Math is boring & generally useless to Children & to most adult careers.
    Accounting, Finance, Taxation, Spacial Geometry & Calculus on the other hand are practical, useful and can motivate a child to be financially responsible & practice design, while still exercising the mind with math problems.

    Nutrition & Self-Defense are a far more valuable & practical ways to teach Chemistry & Biology. As junk food & laziness contributes to a poor work ethic & ultimately poverty.

    Illustration & Music also exercise the Mind and add skill the students can then use in employment or business later in life.

    Business, Ethics & Law are far more valuable to youths than Astronomy & Geography. As they need to learn that Action Movie, Comic Book ethics & justice will get them thrown in jail in real life. And practicing small business projects in school can motivate children who don't want to be employed for the rest of their lives, to look at employment as a means to gather capital, to invest in themselves.

    Finally, Practical Psychology is essential in helping emotionally unbalanced children learn how to cope with the potentially life derailing negative emotional experiences that most of us experience several times in a life time. They need to know that they need to talk it out, write it out, use a sound board to understand how they're feeling and straighten out their thinking. They need case studies to prepare them. To help them analize the probelm and figure out how to overcome. Most of all, they need to know that life can go on after a major set back, like jail. Hopelessness leads to homelessness & a drain on society.

    None of the above require a High IQ.
    As even D students can understand the practical lessons and how to apply it to their lives, to be financially free and avoid the consequences of criminal behavior.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  18. nerf 93 said:

    and left pretend to be more scientific

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  19. jlrinc said:

    IQ tests are designed to correlate highly with what we call success. Then we define the quality that allows someone to succeed in our culture intelligence. Then we say look how high intelligence correlates statistically with success. And how do they know this? Because IQ tests tell us this scientifically. Wash, rinse, repeat.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  20. Bobby Westner said:

    If someone like Forest Gump with iq of 30 dumb as a rock can do well in life and even got laid by a hot blonde then anyone can too.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  21. Chad Waldron said:

    A shibboleth? Must be a traveling man.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  22. Chi Huang said:

    For any society to advance, people need to be politically incorrect, and scientifically correct.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  23. Stefan Travis said:

    Yes, the great skeptic Sam Harris is gullible about IQ scores.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  24. Random ID 10 T said:

    Space shuttle program was run by high IQ white men

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  25. Random ID 10 T said:

    IQ experts in early 1900's said Jews and Italians were uneducable. They were high IQ white men

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  26. Random ID 10 T said:

    Vietnam War was brought to us by high IQ white men. Invasion of Iraq courtesy of high IQ white men

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  27. Random ID 10 T said:

    Give tests that don't need English

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  28. Random ID 10 T said:

    Was blood tested for lead for example?

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  29. Random ID 10 T said:

    What is control for nutrition, exposure to toxins etc?

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  30. Random ID 10 T said:

    Have heard that everyone tests close in scores until facility with English is important in the test

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  31. Sartre plagiarized my unborn self for too long said:

    Dude, how the fuck does Mr. Harris get to talk to all of these legendary sanins?! I was jerking off to Mr. Murray's soothing voice throughout the entire video—imagine how satisfied my plebeian self would have been if it were to talk to him IRL.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  32. doradoro, desarrollador indie said:

    Another ignorant who doesn't know that everyone is african and races doesn't exists as a science term.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  33. Friendly Rational Policia said:

    The scary thing is left elites knowingly push their agenda that IQ and race is absurd . Even though they completely know the truth. They intentionally discard stuff to fulfill the agenda.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  34. breadfan1071 said:

    I wonder if Cornell West designed an IQ test how well would white Americans VS African Americans score.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  35. Frank Man said:

    I can see how Race and IQ can be used in the hopes of a beneficial result and get the opposite. Ex. I hire the highest IQ person to work for me. This person demonstrates their abilities and will leave the instant a better opportunity comes by and I lost all my money training them and have to find someone else. Ex 2. Smart people don't make friends easy and generally have few. It is hard to work with someone who is a "know it all". (I have 129 IQ/self employed(. Ex 3. I hire a clerk to receive incoming patents and file them. My clerk can take these ideas from my country, say Germany and run off to another country, say the US. He can then take stolen ideas and become a celebrity without paying royalties to the Germans because they are demonized. There are cases for lower IQ. This is of special interest to voters.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  36. Luis Daniel Mesa Velasquez said:

    I agree that the study is not racist and that knowing mean differences among groups we might get a clearer picture. I don't agree that it is precise though… you can bisect any population in whichever way you want, by any trait you see fit and you will get only 1 of 2 outcomes, either the means of the measured indicator are the same or they are different. Attributing that difference ONLY to your division is something that is impossible to prove (due to there being an infinite number of ways of subdividing a population and proving that any other subdivision produces a different result). That's statistics for you, it's interesting but most of the time meaningless as it can be used to prove one thing and the opposite just the same.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  37. TimMurrowMusic said:

    The noise gate on this is killing me….This is the first time in my life that I felt like silence was screaming at me.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  38. Jah Bless said:

    Complete racist nonsense. IQ and SAT are not the same. You can be the "dumbest" person on earth and train to learn questions on SAT and score well. The IQ test is intended to be unstudy-able. In other words true "smartness" cannot be learned one is born with it or its "innate." CM is fabricating nonsense here.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  39. Sigma Geranimo said:

    f Nobel prize exist 5000 years ago, the Chinese win them all.
    If Nobel prize exist 3000 years ago, the roman win them all,
    now, in 21 century most Jews win them all,.

    in the future, who knows maybe Black or Arab people will win them all.

    What IQ and race BS yo guys talking about ?

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  40. DEFACTO9 said:

    Phwahahaaaa as if Im anything like my Father… and you dont need to know what race I am to understand this.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  41. Eddie Sengola said:

    Paul Bustion, we can talk here?

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  42. Khalid AlAli said:

    I listened to this for the first time during the summer of 2017, while I was still going through my mandatory military national service. I remember I was on my bunk bed at the barracks. Very interesting talk.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  43. Allan Weisbecker said:

    Here's my Open Letter to Sam Harris proving evidence that he is a disinformation agent of the state:
    http://blog.banditobooks.com/an-open-letter-to-an-agent-of-the-deep-state-sam-harris/

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  44. Arya Turner said:

    the most advanced civilizations today are Western societies. Scientists within these societies have proven that Africans have low IQ's. Got any African scientific studies that prove the contrary? Nah.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  45. Quinn Taylor said:

    It obviously makes a difference in areas of the world where governments do not make sound quality decisions for their people, and such results in corruption which breeds poverty.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply
  46. Grady Whitman said:

    4:25 IQ as the best predictor of an employees success at a job more than an interview or resume? It depends entirely on the job.

    June 29, 2019
    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *