1995 SAT scores
Rank by test score - all and Asian
Race - Wh-white Af-Black As-Asian Al-All Races
Wh Judaism 25,600 1030 * Jewish Avg
As Hindu 4138 1029 * Asian Indian
Af Unitarian 64 966 * Top Black group
Al Episcopal 22,109 957 * Episcopal
Al Presbyterian 37,353 955 * Presbyterian
As Total 70739 938 * Asian Avg
Wh Total 688,933 934 * White Avg
Race Religion Number Math + Verbal SAT
Wh Unitarian 1,745 1073
Wh Quaker 894 1037
Wh Judaism 25,600 1030 * Jewish Avg
Al Quaker 1,009 1029
As Hindu 4138 1029
Al Judaism 27,374 1026
As Presbyterian 3195 1022
As Angelican 197 1019
Al Hindu 4,741 1012
Wh Hindu 82 1004
As No Pref 17987 1001
As U Methodist 662 998
Wh Mennonite 952 990
As Unitarian 49 986
As Episcopal 444 983
Wh Chistian Sci 830 979
Wh No Pref 99,076 979
Al Mennonite 1,063 974
As Methodist 1108 973
As Quaker 25 973
Wh Mormon 6,400 972
Wh Episcopal 19,555 970
As S Baptist Conv 332 966
Af Unitarian 64 966 *Top Black
Al No Pref 137,305 963
Wh Luth Missouri 8,038 963
Wh Un Church of Christ 7,066 962
As Wesleyan 32 960
Al Luth Missouri 8,624 959
Al Episcopal 22,109 957* Episcopal
Wh Presbyterian 32,019 956
Wh Angelican 1,765 956
Al Chistian Sci 989 955
Al Presbyterian 37,353 955* Presbyterian
Al Un Church of Christ 7826 951
Wh U Methodist 23,470 949
Al Mormon 7,594 948
Wh Other 20,125 947
Wh Lutheran in Am 23,380 943
As Christn Reformed 298 943
Wh No Answer 44,397 942
Al U Methodist 26,037 939
Wh Afr Methodist 144 939
As Total 70739 938* Asian Avg
Wh S Baptist Conv 14,165 938
Al Lutheran in Am 25,020 937
Wh Total 688,933 934* White Avg
As Lutheran in Am 471 931
As Un Church of Christ 253 930
Al S Baptist Conv 15,729 929
As Judaism 218 925
Wh Christn Reformed 2,235 924
As Baptist 3003 924
As Islam 2184 923
Mahayana Buddhism a high IQ variant of budhism
The original buddhism was Theravada and used Pali
Even by the time of the buddha, Sanskrit was no longer publicly spoken
Theravada buddhism took root in south east asia, IQ = 90
but never took root in East Asia, IQ = 105
Mahayana Buddhism uses Sanskrit,
and has a more complex hinduistic theology and only Mahayanist buddhism is found in East Asia
To be a mahayanist takes a lot more thinking power than to follow theravada
http://www.arthurhu.com/index/aaward.htm
Award Spectrum
Ratio vs US Population
---------------------------------
71 WestingHouse E. Asian 1996
50 Indian: Olympic Seattle Scholarship
50 Wang: American Physical Society, Smith
43 USA Today College Team 1996 Indian
30 Indian: ACM awards
25 Indian: Fortune Richest 40 under 40
24 Chinese: Olympic Seattle Scholarship
24 Homeschooler Spelling Bee Top 10
21 Time Richest under 40 Indian
13 Chinese Ivy League
13 Indians Forbes Tech 100
11 Indian doctor
8 USA Today College Team 1996 Asian
7 Jew Chinese Time rich under 40
5.7 Asian Ivy League
5.7 Chinese Forbes Tech 100
4.8 Fortune Richest 40 under 40
4.3 US Born Chinese Doctor 1990
4.0 Chinese American Nobel Prize
4.0 Chinese SAT (est)
3.5 Time Under 40 rich Asian
2.2 US SAT seniors 1999
---
ACM Turing Award 1966-1997
# % Rate Group
1 3% 1.0 Asian
0 <3% <3.0 Chinese (0)
1 3% 30.0 Indian
8 25% 12.0 Jewish
31 97% 1.3 White
---
Forbes 1998 Hi Tech 100
Source: Forbes Magazine
Analysis by Arthur Hu
http://www.forbes.com/asap/tech100/ 9/22/98
4% 0.7 5.7 Chinese - Chen, Yang, Wang, Chen
4% 0.3 13.3 Indian - Sidhu, Shah, Wadhwani, Patel
6%-8% 3.5 Jewish - Glaser, Dell, Grove, Ellison, Fisher, Kirsch, Kaplan, Levine
16% 8.0
---
1997 Forbes 100
MANY OF HIGH TECH RICH ARE IMMIGRANTS, INDIANS AND CHINESE ARE 6-7X
POPULATION, 6% of RICHEST \doc\web\clip\97\21\micrrich.txt The
Seattle Times Company
http://www.seattletimes.com/extra/browse/h...ech_092297.html
12% are from Microsoft
4% vs. 0.7 Chinese = 5.7 times population
2% vs. 0.3 Indian = 6.7 times population
Immigrant - at least 10%
8-12% vs 2% Jews = 4-6 times population, call it 5.0
----
nalysis by Arthur HU
Fortune 2001 Richest Under 40
Pop List Pct Group Index
4.2 8 20.00% Asian 4.76
0.6 6 15.00% S Asian 25.00
1.6 2 4.00% E Asian 2.50
12.9 3 7.50% Black -1.72
12.3 1 2.50% Hispanic -4.92
69.6 28 70.00% White 1.01
Comments - Whites are only about average, the Asians at 4.76X and
South Asians at 25X who are only 0.6% of 2000 Census are really
cleaning up. Blacks lag, but at -1.72 are still above half parity,
Hispanics are the ones really left out at -4.92 or one-fifth their
population.
---
Above URL continued
---
@@Indian
Indo Americans are the only group that can consistenly meet or beat
Jews in education or achievement awards or measures.
Thanks to JPark607 6/2001: the darker skinned South Indians seem to
rise to the top; the following two kids are from the southern-most
states of Tamil Nadu and Kerala, respectively.
"How can the first 12-year-old to score a perfect 1,600 on the SAT want to
keep away from the media, many wonder. The test is conducted for gifted
children by researchers at Johns Hopkins University. Of the 600,000 gifted
seventh- and eighth-graders the program has tracked through two decades, Vino
is the first to earn perfect scores on both the math and verbal portions of
the college-admissions test, said Claudia Burns, program coordinator."
http://www.rediff.com/news/1999/jul/16us2.htm
"For the second-year running, an Indian child won the US National Spelling
Bee championship to enhance the region's reputation for producing some of the
sharpest minds in the world... George, who is home-schooled, narrowly missed
winning an unprecedented double crown. He lost in the finals of the National
Geographic Bee to a public-schooled [Taiwan born] American who named the three largest
sections of Denmark. George, whose feat of reaching both finals is itself
unprecedented, managed just one."
---
@@Olympic Scholarship
doc\94\4\olymscho.xls olympic scholarship Seattle Times/PI
Asian 8/30 = 5.6X non-Asian
indian 50X
chinese 24X
vietnamese 22X
Asian 6X
Asians high but Asian Indians highest
---
@@Spelling Bee
Spelling Bee Spectrum
--------------------------------
66 Indian top 10 winners
13 Homeschool top 10 winners
6 Enrolled in spelling bee
5 Jewish top 10 winners
Scripps Howard National Spelling Bee
see http://www.spellingbee.com
Appears to be dominated by Indians, though the press has been
mentioning homeschoolers.
Of top 10 winners:
Indian: 4 (Buddiga, Tadipatri, Gunturi, Thampy) 40% vs. .6% = 66X
Jewish: 1 (Goldstein) 10% vs. 2% = 5X
----
%%Richest Under 40
zip37\doc\web\99\13\rich40.wk1
zip37\doc\web\99\13\rich40.txt
http://www.pathfinder.com/fortune/forty/4.html
Sept 1999 Time Richest Under 40
Indians lead, Chinese about = Jews in richest under 40 list
Pct Pop Rate Index
Indian 3 7.50% 0.3% 22.73 21.31
Chinese 2 5.00% 0.7% 7.58 7.10
Jewish 6 15.00% 2.0% 7.50 7.03
Asian 6 15.00% 4.0% 3.75 3.52
White 32 80.00% 75.0% 1.07 1.00
Total 40 100.00% 100.0% 1.00 -1.07
Hispanic 1 2.50% 9.0% 0.28 -3.84
Black 1 2.50% 12.0% 0.21 -5.12
Chinese 2 Yang Suh
Indian 3 Jain Kumar Chatter
Asian 6 Yang Jain Kim Kumar Suh Chatter
Black 1 Jordan
Jewish 6 Dell Glaser Blum Tuchmann Greenberg Snyder
Hisp 1 Fernandez
---
USA Today Feb 6, 1997 p. 6D
Rank by Population Rate
USA Today College Academic Team
Number Pct US Pop Index
South Asian 2 10.0% 0.40% 27.92
Jewish 3 15.0% 2.0% 7.00
All Asian 4 20.0% 4.1% 5.50
East Asian 2 10.0% 2.4% 4.75
Black 3 15.0% 12.1% 1.38
Total 20 100.0% 100.0% 1.12
White 13 65.0% 72.6% 1.00
Hisp 0 0.0% 11.3% 0.00
----
asian.awards.usa-today
\doc\95\06\usbest95.txt
"USA Today Salutes the Best and Brightest" USA Today May 18, 1995 p. 8D
Asians 7X, Chinese/Koreans 15X, Indians 40X population
First Team
Num % Pop Rate
White 15 71.4 68.90 1.03
Asian 6 28.6 4.00 7.15
Chin/Kor 3 14.3 0.98 14.59
S Asian 3 14.3 0.36 39.72
Total 21 100.0
doc\94\6\usahigh.wk1,.txt USA Today high school awards
Rank 1993
Vietnamese 100.0
S. Asian 33.3
Chin/Kor 25.0
Asian 20.7
Japanese 16.7
Non-Asian* 1.0
---
@@Westinghouse Talent Search
Westinghouse Talent Search Home page
1996-97 finalists (pdf)
\clip\97\08\west97.pdf
Summary
In 1997, Jews scored under the Indians, as finalists, they scored
less disproportionately than either the Chinese or the Asian Indians
In general, Jews do better than Asians as a whole, but they are much
closer, or often worse than Chinese or Indians broken out
separately on tests of scientific ability such as this competition..
Finalists ranked by race
1997 1996
Index Index
East Asian 40.7 71.0
Asian Indian 27.1 39.4
Jewish 19.0 23.0
Asian / PI 11.6 27.9
White/Other 1.0 1.0
Hispanic -1.5 -2.0
---
Above URL continued
----
HINESE SHUT OUT OF 1997 WESTINGHOUSE WINNERS
\clip\97\07\westing.txt AP 11-Mar-1997 1997. The Associated Press.
All Rights Reserved. Teenager Wins Westinghouse Science Award
J Adam Ezra Cohen
Other winners of the Westinghouse competition and their scholarship
prizes were
W Carrie Shilyansky, San Marino, Calif., $30,000;
W Nicholas Karl Eriksson, Missoula, Mont., $20,000;
AI Davesh Maulik, Roslyn, N.Y.,$15,000;
J Emily Beth Levy, North Miami Beach, Fla., $15,000;
AI Dev Edward Kumar, Dallas, $15,000;
W Ann Clair Seiferle-Valencia, Farmington, N.M., $10,000; *
J Dylan Micah Schwindt, Cortez, Colo., $10,000;
W Rose J. Payyapilli, Brooklyn, N.Y., $10,000; and
W Whitney Page Bowe, Lawrence, N.Y., $10,000.
Out of 10, 3 Jews, 2 Asian Indians, 0 East Asians
Raoul Contrares says Seiferle-Valencia was Hispanic
\doc\web\97\03\westsci.wk1
1997 Westinghouse Science Talent Search Finalists
Both Indians won prizes, but none of the Chinese made it that far
even though they were proportionally ahead of the Indians at the
finalists level. Jews were ahead of Asians, but behind Indians
proportionally among the winners, based on likely surnames and
other data.
---
Winners Pct Pop Rate Index
Asian Indian 2 20.0% 0.3% 66.67 142.3
Jewish 3 30.0% 1.5% 20.00 42.7
Asian / PI 2 20.0% 3.5% 5.71 12.2
Hispanic 1 10.0% 12.0% 0.83 1.8
White/Other 4 40.0% 0.854 0.47 1.0
East Asian 0 0.0% 0.8% 0.00 0.0
-------
Arthur Hu is a chinese racist and he often is quoted by Sailer etc
He started his data collections to prove that Chinese are the superior race
as compared to whites
---
http://www.arthurhu.com/index/asind.htm
Asian Indians
Asian Indians are the only Asian ethnic group that consistently outranks the Jews on socio-economic measures and academic awards, if not politics. Unlike the Chinese, the Indians come largely already knowing English and western culture. While there are some Indians on the margins, Indians have remarkable incomes, education, and social statistics. Technically, they are racially similar to caucasians, but they do come from the Asian continent, and have a culture and history similar to East Asian "orientals".
30% of hotels and motels in the US are Indian-owned 80% of Indian men are college-educated 45% of Indian women work outside the home. 65% of Indian men hold manager/professional jobs http://www.spindlepub.com/hbkindia/profile.htm 5/1998 Source: India: A Dynamic Democracy. A Government of India Publication. Also see Overrepresentation and awards and college
---
BANGLADESHIS AT BOTTOM, INDIANS FROM UGANDA DO WELL
\clip\97\05\unequal.txt The Economist February 8, 1997 Race relations
Integrated but unequal "The greatest progress has been made by the
many Asians who came to Britain in the 1970s after being expelled
from Uganda. Many of these were well qualified when they arrived.
They and their children are now as well represented as whites in
managerial and professional jobs. Asians of Bangladeshi origin, on
the other hand, typically have few qualifications and are often
unemployed or in low-paid jobs. "
---
@@high tech
z47\clip\2001\01\indsil.txt Richard Russell is a highly regarded
level-headed investment guru who has written for Barron's for
decades: "Richard's Remarks: Word document: Dow Theory Letters
January 19, 2001 Did you know that 50% of all the new start-ups in
Silicon Valley are led by Indians?"
---
@@hotel
asian.indian.hotel
hu: \priv\96\13\asinam.htm web: http://www.marketingtools.com
Asian-Indian Americans by Marcia Mogelonsky August 1995 American
Demographics In 1994, 7,200 Asian-Indian owners operated 12,500 of
the nation's 28,000 budget hotels and motels, according to the
Atlanta-based Asian American Hotel Owners Association.
---
@@Movie
AMERICAN DESI FULL OF ASIAN INDIAN IN-JOKES
z48\clip\2001\03\desiam.txt Film Review: An Indian-American comedy
Tuesday, 20 March 2001 13:11 (ET) STEVE SAILER, UPI National
Correspondent LOS ANGELES, March 20 (UPI) [American Desi] South Asia
Indians are the highest income ethnic group in America. Yet,
Americans pay so little attention to Indian immigrants that the
federal government lumps Indians with Chinese and Japanese. The
camera focuses in on a dim-looking white boy. He glances at the lean
and hungry Indian on his right, then at the equally intense Chinese
guy on his left...as the doomed Euro-American realizes his inevitable
fate. America has been brain-draining the intellectual cream from
the billion people of India. Indians tend to have a leg up over their
East Asian immigrant rivals for technology jobs because most speak
some English upon arrival.
Above URL continued
---
@@programmer
1 in 4 programmers worldwide from Indian
\clip\97\26\indiprog.txt
MASTERING SOFTWARE HELPS INDIA YOUTHS SNAG FOREIGN JOBS
@@race
The indians are actually dark-skinned caucasians, but they are from
the continent of Asia, from a social, economic, cultural and
historical standpoint, they have many similarities to Asian races
such as the Chinese, and share traits such as high income, high
education, low rates of single parenthood, and high academic
achievement.
---
@@skin color
Jpark discusses whether darker
skin Indians in south are actually the smarter ones with more high
tech industry, even if light skinned ones still have higher status.
----
Some more racist stuff from Sailer
------
This is about the 2000 US election but note his obsession with skin color
http://ampolitics.ghazali.net/html/upi_analysis.html
Finally, the GOP benefits because West Asian and South Asian immigrants tend to be able to assimilate into the white American mainstream less self-consciously than more racially distinctive immigrants groups like the East Asians. These West and South Asian populations belong to the overall Caucasian race. Indeed, many Americans cannot readily distinguish West Asians from, say, European Greeks. The South Asians do tend to look less European. Yet, even the very dark computer programmers from South India tend to have recognizably Caucasian features.
05-11-2008, 03:58 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-11-2008, 03:59 AM by G.Subramaniam.)
Some Pew report stuff
----
Annual income over $100k
Jews 46%, hindus 43%
Annual Income over $75k
Jews 58%, hindus 65%
Annual income less than $30k
Jews 14%, hindus 9%
Post graduate education
Jews 35%, hindus 48%
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/blog...rouble_wit.html
Sanjoy Das
August 15, 2007 04:09 PM
However, the two jokers (Lyn & Vanhanen) took the data about India's IQ from a very old study conducted in 1962 in rural Madhya Pradesh! It is bad data to begin with.
Lynn is married to a chinese, and all his students who compiled the far eastern data were also Chinese. They used urban data from around Beijing!
above url
Sanjoy Das
September 21, 2007 07:34 PM
nickn:
Puerile accusations such as "sneaky Indian" does not get us anywhere. As is clear from my earlier comment, I am questioning the concept of IQ tests itself. I am not speaking as an Indian but as a scientist and a human being.
Your point about the Math olympiad is wrong. The very same source claims that Iran's IQ is 84%, the same as Indiaâs!
The obvious reason why Indians don't do well in Math Olympiads is the same as why Indian's don't do well in the Olympics, or any competition for that matter: poor infrastructure, malnutrition (India's malnutrition levels are comparable to sub-Saharan Africa), a bad education system, and the abhorrent caste system. âBad memesâ like communism, apparently have gone a long way in bettering the lives of the poor.
I will now waste my time with Lynn's book. But I have noticed Lynn report that the IQ of Indians when raised in "first world" living conditions is 98%:
http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/001949.html
That study further reveals Lynn's own racist intentions - he was trying to "elevate" Indian IQ to "caucasian" levels!
Now whether India's IQ is 81, 84, or 98, I DON'T CARE, simply because IQ is no measure of intelligence as I will argue below.
The rest of the comment â such as IBM investing in Vietnam over India being an indication of Indian intelligence â is just too silly to merit a response.
I dare you to provide counter arguments for each of these points:
ONE: Yes, the poorer the nation is, the lower the chances of survival of the less "fit". Jared Diamond correctly observed that Papuans are very intelligent. People in hunter-gatherer societies are exceptionally clever, because of increased evolutionary pressure towards higher intelligence. At the other extreme, in wealthy nations, thanks to good healthcare, basically everyone survives and reproduces. Within India, I have personally observed that those living in abject poverty are smarter on an average than their wealthy counterparts.
Exactly how is calling some group of humanity intelligent âlaughableâ?
TWO: The Piraha â an Amazonian tribe â cannot count beyond the number One!! They have no numbers, just âoneâ and âmanyâ. The concept of counting is so alien, no matter how much they are taught, they can simply not grasp the idea. On the other hand, the coot (a bird) has the ability to count.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiege...,414291,00.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...0402_coots.html
Who, according to you, is more intelligent: the Piraha native (a human), or the coot (a bird)?
THREE: The Welsh have better mathematical abilities than the English:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/1531275.stm
The difference is solely because of language. Now, if you know any Chinese, you will find that the Chinese language preserves the place-coding in numbers very well (unlike the Indian languages, where it is too complex).
That, my friend, is precisely why speakers of some languages do better than others at mathematics: the difference lies in language. It is NURTURE, not NATURE.
FOUR: IQ tests are based upon very trivial numerical and pattern matching problems. In computer science, there is a concept called Chomskyâs hierarchy, for computing machines, based on their computing power. At the lowest level is the Finite State Automaton, and at the highest is the Turing Machine. To do calculations like addition/ subtraction/multiplication/elementrary pattern recognition â precisely the kind of tasks one is given in IQ tests â all you need is a rudimentary Finite State Machine. The ability of humans on the other hand, goes well beyond that of a Turing machine. It is capable of MUCH more than rudimentary arithmetic.
In other words, trying to gauge human intelligence through simple IQ tests is like trying to measure the velocity of light with a speed-o-meter!
above url
---
Sanjoy Das
September 22, 2007 09:11 AM
Nickn:
(i) Kindly stop posting misleading comments. Iran has an IQ of 84, almost exactly the same as India's. The reason they perform better than India in Math olympiads (or in the Olympic games) is much better explained by poverty, malnutrition approaching sub Saharan levels, institutionalized racism in the form of the caste system, and a lack of infrastructure.
(ii) I have not read Lynn's book, nor do I plan to. But, I see that the original data for Lynn's "analysis" was obtained from Sinha et al. (1968). The data, I believe, was from a survey of Madhya Pradesh. I briefly checked again. Most of the later data from the 1970s and 1980s was mainly from even more backward places - UP, Bihar, and my own homestate of Orissa, not Delhi, Mumbai, or Bangalore.
Lynn also attempts to "elevate" the Indian IQ to "caucasoid" levels, further revealing his own racist motivations:
http://www.geocities.com/race_articles/l..._diff.html
However, you completely missed the crux of my argument. I don't care what the Indian IQ turns out to be. As I said before, IQ is no measure of intelligence, as people of the stature of Stephen J. Gould would tell you. Here is why:
(iii) As I said before, there is a much stronger evolutionary pressure towards better intelligence in backward societies. At one extreme are the hunter-gatherer societies. As Jared Diamond observed, the Papuans are a highly intelligent people. In affluent societies, less intelligent people have almost the same probability of survival. It is just Darwinism 101. The San Bushmen must be an extremely intelligent and resourceful people to survive in the harsh Kalahari conditions. There is nothing "laughable" about this statement, except in the eyes of a bigot.
(iv) Mathematical ability is no measure of intelligence. In a study, it was found that the Welsh do better than the English at mathematics, simply because their language handles the place coded numerals better. The Chinese language is also excellent at treating place coding. That alone will go a long way in explaining the better Chinese mathematics skills. The processing time to parse numbers inside the cortex is eliminated in Chinese speakers.
(v) The Piraha, an Amazonian tribe, can't even count up to two! Does it mean that they are really dumb? Contrast the Piraha with the coot (a bird) which, recent studies reveal, has the ability to count its eggs. Does it mean that the coots (birds) are dumber than the Piraha (humans)?
(vi) As I said before, the brain is a vastly complex entity. In computational theory, you have something called Chomsky's hierarchy. The least powerful computing machines in this hierarchy are Finite State Machines (FSM), at the other end is the Deterministic Turing Machine (DTM). The brain is probably infinitely more powerful than even the DTM, as Penrose would argue.
Now, arithmetic operations and other rudimentary tasks in typical IQ tests, involve computations that can be accomplished by the simple FSM! In other words, attempting to measure intelligence through IQ tests is - as I said before âis like trying to measure the velocity of light with a speedometer!
At best, IQ can be used as some indication of scholastic achievement within an ethnic group. Beyond that, IQ is meaningless.
above url
Sanjoy Das
October 20, 2007 12:29 AM
ez:
ONE. You missed the point in my earlier argument. I am not denying the lower IQ scores among those Indians who are living in India.
However, those differences are much better explained by malnutrition, illiteracy, and grammatical rules of the Indian language. Indian pregnant women are severely malnourished BTW. Besides, I am at a total loss to see how IQ tests could have been conducted in MP and Bihar villages.
Also, unlike Indians living in the US, those in Britain originally were working class Indians. Somehow, just living for 1-2 generations makes their IQs equal that of the British.
TWO. Neither is J. Philippe Rushton that renowned nor does his work deserve much merit. His source of funding is the discredited Pioneer Trust, not the Canadian equivalent of the NIH or NSF. This guy resembles Michael Behe, a Lehigh Univ biologist and a covert intelligent design proponent whose funding comes from the Discovery Institute.
(Even renowned scientists - including those of double helix fame - are capable of intense bigotry though!)
THREE. Interesting that you mentioned Rushton. Idiots like Lynn, Vanhanen and Rushton try to "explain" IQ differences across ethnicities as differences in reproductive strategies. They claim that low IQ scores correlate with larger genitals, sexual promiscuity, and unstable marriages. (In fact Rushton was citing a pornographic magazine in one of his scientific papers to further his claim that Africans have larger genitalia!).
above url
Sanjoy Das
October 20, 2007 12:39 AM
Razib,
The Indians living in the US are drawn largely from privileged, "upper" caste groups. However, those who came to the UK were not necessarily so. The 96% IQ comes from those UK Indians (as far as my understanding about the IQ data goes - and as I have said before, I don't read utter crap!)
above url
Sanjoy Das
November 3, 2007 11:16 AM
I hate do degenerate into petty nation-level arguments, but I will make this exception only to show how silly this IQ argument is.
(It is also both interesting and relevant to observe that IQ-race proponents such as Josh Stein singularly harp on the same thing ad nauseam without providing any effective counterpoint. Perhaps a sad reflection of their own intelligence levels.)
INDIAN vs. CHINESE NOBEL PRIZE WINNERS
There are six Indian Nobel laureates, and nine Chinese. A pretty fair ratio considering that there are 20% more Chinese in the world than Indians.
However, observe carefully - Indians have won other forms of recognition for their scientific contributions too, which Chinese have not. Here is how:
(i) The second space telescope was named "Chandra", and there is "Chandrasekhar limit" in connection with black holes, in honor of famed Indian astronomer Chandrasekhar.
(ii) Elementary particles that do not conform to Fermi-Dirac statistics are called "Bosons" in honor of J C. Bose. You also have Bose-Einstein condensate.
(iii) Then, E C G Sudarshan, co-founder of the Tachyon hypothesis was not given a Nobel, arguably due to racism. I do not recall any instance of a Chinese being dened a Nobel on similar grounds.
(iv) There is the awe-inspiring name of Ramanujam, the Indian mathematician who can well claim to be among the greatest intellectuals of the last few centuries. I do not recall any Chinese name in the past 100 years.
What more, the Chinese Nobel prizes are all shared ones. The Chinese got one-third to one-half of a Nobel apiece, not full ones like the Indians.
Care to explain why the "high IQ Chinese" managed significantly less compared to the Indians? Why the discrepancy?
INDIAN AMERICANS vs. CHINESE AMERICANS
Care also to explain why Indians have been so successful in the West, in comparison to the Chinese? In the USA, the Indians are well ahead of all ethnic other communities, including the Jews, the Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese, in education, academic success, as well as wealth.
If only high IQ Indians manage to come to the West, the same filter should apply to Chinese immigrants too, correct?
above url
I also argued how language and script translates to better IQ scores. Since Mr. Nguyen speaks Vietnamese, let me take an example from that language.
In Vietnamese, the number 12 is âmöôøi haiâ (möôøi=ten; hai =two). Hence Mr. Nguyen perceives the number 12 simply as âten-twoâ. This obviates the need to translate back and forth during numerical tasks.
On the other hand, in my own language (Oriya), the number 12 would be âbaraâ. The word âbaraâ is a separate word on its own, not a combination of âtenâ and âtwoâ as in Vietnamese, which would have been âdasha-duiâ (âten-twoâ). In order to accomplish equivalent tasks, I have to go through a whole extra set of mental processes than Mr. Nguyen for the same task.
The word for another number 36 further illustrates this point. Mr. Nguyen who speaks Vietnamese, perceives the number 36 simply as âthree-ten-sixâ. To me the same number is actually âchhattisâ, which is an entire word of its own, roughly mapping to âsix-thirtyâ (much worse than even English!).
Chinese, Japanese, Korean, all share this feature. Number manipulation is a much easier task in those languages than in Indian languages. English is somewhere in-between.
Again, I have also pointed out how the intricate Chinese script helps children develop the ability to manipulate visual patterns better. While I know that there have been studies done in this direction, I was unable to find anything online.
However, I can supply a parallel example. Many Chinese, Japanese and other Orientals adults display the ability to recognize absolute pitch (not relative pitch). Even trained musicians in Western cultures are sometimes unable to accomplish this rare feat. That of course does not mean that Orientals have better musical abilities than Caucasians. The simple explanation lies in the fact that Oriental languages make use of complex intonations. Chinese is after all a highly tonal language! Oriental children learn to discern subtle differences in tone at a very tender age than whites, and grow up to recognize absolute pitch. Voila!
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/conte...34/b3948401.htm
While China's big state-run R&D institutes are close to the cutting edge at the theoretical level, they have yet to yield many commercial breakthroughs. "China has a lot of capability," says Microsoft Chief Technology Officer Craig Mundie. "But when you look under the covers, there is not a lot of collaboration with industry." The lack of intellectual property protection, and Beijing's heavy role in building up its own tech companies, make many other multinationals leery of doing serious R&D in China.
China also is hugely wasteful. Its 9.5% growth rate in 2004 is less impressive when you consider that $850 billion -- half of GDP -- was plowed into already-glutted sectors like crude steel, vehicles, and office buildings. Its factories burn fuel five times less efficiently than in the West, and more than 20% of bank loans are bad. Two-thirds of China's 1,300 listed companies don't earn back their true cost of capital, estimates Beijing National Accounting Institute President Chen Xiaoyue. "We build the roads and industrial parks, but we sacrifice a lot," Chen says.
India, by contrast, has had to develop with scarcity. It gets scant foreign investment, and has no room to waste fuel and materials like China. India also has Western legal institutions, a modern stock market, and private banks and corporations. As a result, it is far more capital-efficient. A BusinessWeek analysis of Standard & Poor's (MHP ) Compustat data on 346 top listed companies in both nations shows Indian corporations have achieved higher returns on equity and invested capital in the past five years in industries from autos to food products. The average Indian company posted a 16.7% return on capital in 2004, vs. 12.8% in Chin
SMALL-BATCH EXPERTISE
The burning question is whether India can replicate China's mass manufacturing achievement. India's info-tech services industry, successful as it is, employs fewer than 1 million people. But 200 million Indians subsist on $1 a day or less. Export manufacturing is one of India's best hopes of generating millions of new jobs.
India has sophisticated manufacturing knowhow. Tata Steel is among the world's most-efficient producers. The country boasts several top precision auto parts companies, such as Bharat Forge Ltd. The world's biggest supplier of chassis parts to major auto makers, it employs 1,200 engineers at its heavily automated Pune plant. India's forte is small-batch production of high-value goods requiring lots of engineering, such as power generators for Cummins Inc. (CMI ) and core components for General Electric Co. (GE ) CAT scanners.
Competing with china
Essentially the homogenous Han at 105 IQ cannot be beaten in mass manufacturing
and any nation attempting to do that will fail
What he Hans lack is lots of super Hi IQ > 125
Japan only produces the same number of nobel prizes as Australia
Where our niche is hi value products
The chinese diaspora success in south east asia can be simply explained as a 105 IQ group dominating a 90 IQ base population
What IQ also says is that Chinese diaspora in the west will do well, but cannot dominate in countries with a flatter bell curve with significant populations having IQ over 115
05-11-2008, 05:00 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-11-2008, 06:31 AM by Bharatvarsh.)
The "success" of the Indian diaspora in US being discussed above maybe true but it can give a skewed picture of the reality, although US and Canada border each other, Indians (or Hindus for that matter) in Canada have more in common with Indians in UK than with those in US in terms of socio economic status, education and other variables.
The Indians in US are highly self selected and many come from well off families in India, in Canada by contrast many Indians who come here are middle class or even lower, and do labour jobs at least in the first generation, I am not sure how Indian kids perform here in education. You even see some Indians coming here from the villages, mainly Panjabi Jatt farmers who settle in BC where there are Sikhs in rural areas or Brampton. In US by contrast many Indians are engaged in IT and well off.
Also the so called "success" comes at a price, I noticed that the outmarriage rate for Hindus is higher in US when compared with UK or Canada, and a lot of 2nd generation Hindus in US fall into the ABCD category. US is a self designated melting pot which would explain the high outmarriage rate, plus besides some NJ cities I don't know any big city in US with substantial Hindu population. By contrast most Hindus in Canada are concentrated in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver (London and Leicester in UK). I was checking some survey, it showed that by 3rd generation 91% of US Indians can only speak English, the rates would be much lower in UK or Canada, I know 3rd generation Gujaratis who can still speak fluent Gujarati. So while some Indians may go gaga over how Indians are doing in US, there are also trade offs such as how many remain Hindu or convert etc.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In Vietnamese, the number 12 is âmöôøi haiâ (möôøi=ten; hai =two). Hence Mr. Nguyen perceives the number 12 simply as âten-twoâ. This obviates the need to translate back and forth during numerical tasks.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The same is true for South Indian languages too, at least for Telugu and Tamil so I presume others are similar.
13 = padhamoodu (padhi = 10, moodu = 3)
14 = padhnaalugu (padhi = 10, naalugu = 3)
And so on.
The above mentioned Sonjoy Dos makes some valid arguements but a lot of rubbish claiming that "lower" castes are more intelligent than "upper" castes solely based on his own prejudices or that africans are more intelligent than indians or chinese without stating the evidence for this conclusion.
His reason for malnourishment in India being the caste system is also laughable, as is the claim that Ireland is one of the wealthiest nations (certainly a developed country but plenty of other nations are ahead).
His claim that IQ tests are absolutely useless in estimating intelligence is also rubbish, of course nothing can measure your intelligence 100% correctly but they give us a good approximations of intelligence.
If he makes claims then he better have some evidence to back them up.
If Rushton is a charlatan (which he is) then this guy is an even bigger charlatan, one of those ultra leftist types who claim that we are all equaly endowed and environment is the sole cause of differences.
The current position in Psychology (which I support) is that both genes and environment play a role and neither of them are isolated from each other but interact constantly.
As for the claims of this or that caste having a better IQ, I repeat that guesswork is all fine but nothing compensates for hard data which can only be compared when all other important factors are controlled for. Until such experiments are done, I would be hesitant to make confident claims about any group IQs.
|
