1. Mainstream Science on Intelligence
2. A considerable number of Nobel Prizes
3. Studies on the question
4. Conclusion by D. Reich, professor of genetics at Harvard (2018)
1. Mainstream Science on Intelligence
Mainstream Science on Intelligence is a treaty that presents widely accepted conclusions in the community of intelligence specialists. The publication was first published in The Wall Street Journal on December 13, 1994 in response to the often misleading and even aggressive treatment of the media about the current state of research in the field of intelligence (“Some conclusions dismissed in the media as discredited are actually firmly supported”) This publication follows the controversy triggered by the publication of The Bell Curve. It was written by psychology doctor Linda Gottfredson and is signed by Gottfredson and 51 other university professors, all specialists in the field of intelligence research, (with all the big names in intelligence research (Cattell, Carroll, Jensen , etc.))
The following professors – all experts in intelligence and allied fields – have signed this statement:
Richard D. Arvey, University of Minnesota
Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr., University of Minnesota
John B. Carroll, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Raymond B. Cattell, University of Hawaii
David B. Cohen, University of Texas at Austin
Rene V. Dawis, University of Minnesota
Douglas K. Detterman Case Western Reserve
Marvin Dunnette, University of Minnesota
Hans Eysenck, University of London
Jack Feldman, Georgia Institute of Technology
Edwin A. Fleishman, George Mason University
Grover Gilmore, Case Western Reserve University
Robert A. Gordon, Johns Hopkins University
Linda S. Gottfredson, University of Delaware
Robert L. Greene, Case Western Reserve University
Richard J. Haier, University of Callifornia at Irvine
Garrett Hardin, University of California at Berkeley
Robert Hogan, University of Tulsa
Joseph M. Horn, University of Texas at Austin
Lloyd G. Humphreys, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
John E. Hunter, Michigan State University
Seymour W. Itzkoff, Smith College
Douglas N. Jackson, University of Western Ontario
James J. Jenkins, University of South Florida
Arthur R. Jensen, University of California at Berkeley
Alan S. Kaufman, University of Alabama
Nadeen L. Kaufman, California School of Professional Psychology at San Diego
Timothy Z. Keith, Alfred University
Nadine Lambert, University of California at Berkeley
John C. Loehlin, University of Texas at Austin
David Lubinski, Iowa State University
David T. Lykken, University of Minnesota
Richard Lynn, University of Ulster at Coleraine
Paul E. Meehl, University of Minnesota
R. Travis Osborne, University of Georgia
Robert Perloff, University of Pittsburgh
Robert Plomin, Institute of Psychiatry, London
Cecil Reynolds, Texas A & M University
David C. Rowe, University of Arizona
J. Philippe Rushton, University of Western Ontario
Vincent Sarich, University of California at Berkeley
Sandra Scarr, University of Virginia
Frank L. Schmidt, University of Iowa
Lyle F. Schoenfeldt, Texas A & M University
James C. Sharf, George Washington University
Herman Spitz, E.R. Johnstone Training and Research Center Director, Bordentown, N.J.
Julian C. Stanley, Johns Hopkins University
Del Thiessen, University of Texas at Austin
Lee A. Thompson, Case Western Reserve University
Robert M. Thorndike, Western Washington Un.
Philip Anthony Vernon, University of Western Ontario
Lee Willerman, University of Texas at Austin
Mainstream Science on Intelligence defines intelligence as a mental ability to analyze, understand and use its immediate environment. Intelligence tests, while not measuring creativity, personality, or other pyschological differences that contribute to differences between individuals, are nonetheless a reliable and valid means of measuring intelligence and, although there is a wide variety of intelligence tests, all these tests measure the same intelligence. The relative distribution of IQ across the general population can be represented using a Gaussian. The majority of european Caucasians group around 100 of IQ. A score of 70 or less indicates mental retardation, while a score greater than 130 indicates high intelligence. IQ measures a human characteristic of great practical and social importance that is constantly correlated with level of education, occupation, and social and economic success. Having a better IQ greatly increases the chances of personal success in society.
Intelligence tests are not culturally biased against individuals from a racial or ethnic minority, but there are observable differences in the relative distribution of IQ across groups. The average IQ of european Caucasians is 100, with Ashkenazi Jews and American Asians having a higher score, and Hispanics and Blacks having a lower score, 85 for the African-American average.
With respect to race differences, genetic factors play a more important role than environmental factors.
The conclusions of our research does not dictate any particular social policy because we can not determine our goals. Nevertheless, our findings can help predict the likelihood of success and collateral effects in pursuing these goals through different means. ”
To read the treaty in full:
2. Nobel Prizes
A considerable number of contemporary Nobel laureates have already spoken out on these issues.
James Watson, Nobel Prize for the discovery of the helical structure of DNA
“There is no reason to expect that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution have evolved in the same way. Our willingness to distribute equal intellectual powers, as a kind of universal endowment, is not enough to make it so ”
“I am pessimistic about the future of Africa, because all our development aids are based on the assumption that Africans have the same intelligence as ours (europeans), while it is clearly shown that it is not not the case ”
William Shokley, Nobel Prize in physics for the development of the transistor, allowing the transition to the electronics era.
“African Americans have an inextricably lower intelligence, about 15 percent (compared to Europeans). I have studied these questions for years. I consider that my collaboration in the familiarization with his fundamental data is more important than my contribution in physics »
Peter Medawar, Nobel Prize in Medicine.
“The notion of races has been systematically depreciated for political or humanitarian reasons and it is high time for scientists to write freely again on the issue”.
+ Francis Crick, Lederberg, Huxley, Richet, Lorenz…
(and then of course Darwin, Galton, Aristotle, Plato, Voltaire, Kant, Broca, Montesquieu …)
3. Studies on the question
You could be surprised by these informations, because they do not circulate much in the media (not at all). Still, if you go to NCBI which is the main American scientific database, or more simply google scholar, and you are looking for scientific studies related to racial differences in intelligence or simply on IQ or human intelligence, you will be surprised to realize that almost all studies clearly support what is here and even consider it as well known facts, as these informations are for a long time.
4. Conclusion by D. Reich, Professor of gentics at Harvard
In a highly commented New York Times article of March 2018, David Reich, a professor of genetics at Harvard, explains …
“There may be some concerns about possible misuse of data to justify racism, but as a geneticist I also know that it’s simply no longer possible to ignore the average genetic differences between races.
Revolutionary advances in DNA sequencing technology have been made over the past two decades. This progress allows us to measure with perfect precision what fraction of the genetic ancestry of an individual goes back, for example, from West Africa. With the help of these tools, we learn that, while race can be a social construct, the differences in genetic ancestry that are correlated with many current racial constructions are very real.
Well-intentioned people who deny the possibility of substantial biological differences between human populations curl up in an indefensible position, which will not survive the onslaught of science.
While most people agree that it is important to find genetic explanations for certain diseases, they are restive when it comes to genetic influences on behavior and cognition.
Is I.Q, intelligence or number of years of education are influenced by education? Of course. But does it also measure cognitive and behavioral characteristics? Almost certainly. And since all characters influenced by genetics differ from one population to another (since the frequencies of genetic variation are rarely identical from one population to another), genetic influences on behavior and cognition will also vary from one population to another.
You will sometimes hear that the biological differences between populations are small, because humans have diverged too recently from common ancestors so that substantial differences have emerged under the pressure of natural selection. This is not true. The ancestors of East Asians, Europeans, Africans and Australians were, until recently, almost completely isolated from each other for 40,000 years or more, which is more than enough for the forces of the evolution can work.
In the years to come, genetic studies will show that many traits are influenced by genetic variation, and that these traits differ on average between human populations. It will be impossible – indeed, anti-scientific, silly and absurd – to deny these differences”
David Reich, Harvard University, March 2018.