Africans Less Intelligent Than Westerners?

[Craiglowery]

"There was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but people who have to deal with black employees find this not true" -Dr. James Watson, Nobel Prize Winner

 

 

 

 

 

http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/ ... 067222.ece

 

 

 

 

 

One of the world's most eminent scientists was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he claimed that black people were less intelligent than white people and the idea that "equal powers of reason" were shared across racial groups was a delusion.

 

 

 

James Watson, a Nobel Prize winner for his part in the unravelling of DNA who now runs one of America's leading scientific research institutions, drew widespread condemnation for comments he made ahead of his arrival in Britain today for a speaking tour at venues including the Science Museum in London.

 

 

 

The 79-year-old geneticist reopened the explosive debate about race and science in a newspaper interview in which he said Western policies towards African countries were wrongly based on an assumption that black people were as clever as their white counterparts when "testing" suggested the contrary. He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.

 

 

 

The newly formed Equality and Human Rights Commission, successor to the Commission for Racial Equality, saidit was studying Dr Watson's remarks "in full". Dr Watson told The Sunday Times that he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Ãâ whereas all the testing says not really". He said there was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true".

 

 

 

His views are also reflected in a book published next week, in which he writes: "There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so."

 

 

 

The furore echoes the controversy created in the 1990s by The Bell Curve, a book co-authored by the American political scientist Charles Murray, which suggested differences in IQ were genetic and discussed the implications of a racial divide in intelligence. The work was heavily criticised across the world, in particular by leading scientists who described it as a work of "scientific racism".

 

 

 

Dr Watson arrives in Britain today for a speaking tour to publicise his latest book, Avoid Boring People: Lessons from a Life in Science. Among his first engagements is a speech to an audience at the Science Museum organised by the Dana Centre, which held a discussion last night on the history of scientific racism.

 

 

 

Critics of Dr Watson said there should be a robust response to his views across the spheres of politics and science. Keith Vaz, the Labour chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said: "It is sad to see a scientist of such achievement making such baseless, unscientific and extremely offensive comments. I am sure the scientific community will roundly reject what appear to be Dr Watson's personal prejudices.

 

 

 

"These comments serve as a reminder of the attitudes which can still exists at the highestprofessional levels."

 

 

 

The American scientist earned a place in the history of great scientific breakthroughs of the 20th century when he worked at the University of Cambridge in the 1950s and 1960s and formed part of the team which discovered the structure of DNA. He shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for medicine with his British colleague Francis Crick and New Zealand-born Maurice Wilkins.

 

 

 

But despite serving for 50 years as a director of the Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory on Long Island, considered a world leader in research into cancer and genetics, Dr Watson has frequently courted controversy with some of his views on politics, sexuality and race. The respected journal Science wrote in 1990: "To many in the scientific community, Watson has long been something of a wild man, and his colleagues tend to hold their collective breath whenever he veers from the script."

 

 

 

In 1997, he told a British newspaper that a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be homosexual. He later insisted he was talking about a "hypothetical" choice which could never be applied. He has also suggested a link between skin colour and sex drive, positing the theory that black people have higher libidos, and argued in favour of genetic screening and engineering on the basis that "stupidity" could one day be cured. He has claimed that beauty could be genetically manufactured, saying: "People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would great."

 

 

 

The Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory said yesterday that Dr Watson could not be contacted to comment on his remarks.

 

 

 

Steven Rose, a professor of biological sciences at the Open University and a founder member of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science, said: "This is Watson at his most scandalous. He has said similar things about women before but I have never heard him get into this racist terrain. If he knew the literature in the subject he would know he was out of his depth scientifically, quite apart from socially and politically."

 

 

 

Anti-racism campaigners called for Dr Watson's remarks to be looked at in the context of racial hatred laws. A spokesman for the 1990 Trust, a black human rights group, said: "It is astonishing that a man of such distinction should make comments that seem to perpetuate racism in this way. It amounts to fuelling bigotry and we would like it to be looked at for grounds of legal complaint."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Old people never cease to amaze me. But what if they really found proof of genetic differences in racial intelligence? Would this change the way all races are treated? Naturally, racism usually depends on skin color, ethnicity, religion, etc, but could intelligence level be added to this criteria?

 

 

 

 

 

Also, check out what this guy had to say about racial intelligence.

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Philipp ... d_his_work

 

 

 

 

 

Rushton wrote Race, Evolution and Behavior (1995) in which he uses the r/K selection theory to explain why he found East Asians consistently averaged high, Blacks low, and Whites in the middle on characteristics which he claims are indicative of nurturing behavior on an evolutionary scale. Rushton began publishing his theory in 1984. He claims that East Asians and their descendants average a larger brain size, greater intelligence, more sexual restraint, slower rates of maturation, and greater law abidingness and social organization than do Europeans and their descendants, who average higher scores on these dimensions than Africans and their descendants. Rushton contends that through the course of world history, there has been an anatomical correlation between brain weight and penis size, that is, the larger the brain, the smaller the penis. "It's a trade off, more brains or more penis. You can't have everything," he told Rolling Stone in 1994.

 

 

 

 

 

 

:XD:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So what are your thoughts on this topic?

[Arch_Tyrant]

Rushton contends that through the course of world history, there has been an anatomical correlation between brain weight and penis size, that is, the larger the brain, the smaller the penis.

 

 

 

:-k

 

 

 

wow...lmao

 

:XD:

[Ichimaru]

I think it's irrelevant. Caucasians are greedy fools using their intelligence to exploit, and slowly lead their civilization into oblivion. Africans live in simplicity, physical labour, and relative cheerfulness despite their situation.

 

 

 

Which is worse, which is better? Does it even matter? People are different, there is no such thing as someone "better".

[cyco]

I think it's irrelevant. Caucasians are greedy fools using their intelligence to exploit, and slowly lead their civilization into oblivion. Africans live in simplicity, physical labour, and relative cheerfulness despite their situation.

 

 

 

Which is worse, which is better? Does it even matter? People are different, there is no such thing as someone "better".

 

 

 

Well that wasn't racist.

[kido14]

What never ceases to amaze me is how you seem to post a new topic every single day. Is all you do all day read online news articles?

[cyco]

What never ceases to amaze me is how you seem to post a new topic every single day. Is all you do all day read online news articles?

 

 

 

Haven't you guys got over this yet? Who cares. If you don't like Craig and you obviously know hes going to post a news article, don't click on it.

 

 

 

Does it affect your life in some major way, by him posting a news article?

[Nadril]

What never ceases to amaze me is how you seem to post a new topic every single day. Is all you do all day read online news articles?

 

 

 

Haven't you guys got over this yet? Who cares. If you don't like Craig and you obviously know hes going to post a news article, don't click on it.

 

 

 

Does it affect your life in some major way, by him posting a news article?

 

 

 

If its interesting and can cause discussion? Sure, I like that. But it sometimes seems like just any random thing that happens gets posted by him.

[Craiglowery]

What never ceases to amaze me is how you seem to post a new topic every single day. Is all you do all day read online news articles?

 

 

 

Yes I love to read online news articles because sadly the news that most people watch and/or read doesnt inform them of what's really going on in the world today.

 

 

 

Does it bother you that much to where you have to send me a pm asking me if the only reason I post topics is for attention? Please if you dont like the topics that I post then dont bother reading them.

 

 

 

And cyco, thank you for not being bothered by my topics.

 

 

 

Man so many people have beef with me posting topics.

[Nadril]

@ craig:

 

 

 

http://www.digg.com

 

 

 

Have fun.

[doomy]

Could just be an attitude thing, I find that here in nz white people are more inclined to try harder then maori people.

[warri0r45]

The Dr Watson from Watson and Crick? Oh man, that's dissapointing. He cofounded one of the most important biochemical structures ever. All I can say is that it sucks the old bastard has to let his own prejudices tarnish the great work he's done for the field of genetics.

[kido14]

[hide]

What never ceases to amaze me is how you seem to post a new topic every single day. Is all you do all day read online news articles?

[/hide]

 

 

 

Haven't you guys got over this yet? Who cares. If you don't like Craig and you obviously know hes going to post a news article, don't click on it.

 

 

 

Does it affect your life in some major way, by him posting a news article?

 

 

 

If its interesting and can cause discussion? Sure, I like that. But it sometimes seems like just any random thing that happens gets posted by him.

 

Exactly, these are so pointless

 

[hide]

What never ceases to amaze me is how you seem to post a new topic every single day. Is all you do all day read online news articles?

[/hide]

 

 

 

Haven't you guys got over this yet? Who cares. If you don't like Craig and you obviously know hes going to post a news article, don't click on it.

 

 

 

Does it affect your life in some major way, by him posting a news article?

 

You do make a point, and I realize this, it just gets on my nerves because it seems like he's just trying to get attention by posting all of these topics, even after it's been blatantly said he's annoying. I guess bad attention is better than none?

 

[hide]

What never ceases to amaze me is how you seem to post a new topic every single day. Is all you do all day read online news articles?

[/hide]

 

 

 

Yes I love to read online news articles because sadly the news that most people watch and/or read doesnt inform them of what's really going on in the world today.

 

 

 

Does it bother you that much to where you have to send me a pm asking me if the only reason I post topics is for attention? Please if you dont like the topics that I post then dont bother reading them.

 

 

 

And cyco, thank you for not being bothered by my topics.

 

 

 

Man so many people have beef with me posting topics.

 

You love to read because supposedly the news most people watch isn't informative? First of all that makes no sense, maybe you're just saying you love to read it because the online medium is supposedly more accurate? Most people watch news that doesn't inform them of what's REALLY going on in the world today? Yea the articles you've posted are a great example of that...

 

Obviously it does since I did it which you didn't bother responding to, which is why I decided to post on here in the first place. I don't read them, I just read the headlines to see what it's about and most times it's something pointless.

 

If you have to thank one person for not being bothered by your topics, doesn't that give you a little hint?

 

 

 

Bottom line is people can easily find news stories on their own without you posting one every single day. Maybe what you could do instead is just make one thread and post a news story you happen to find interesting and state your own opinion about it, or better yet make a blog.

[Evilperson]

I, nay, the whole tip it community would appreciate it if:

 

 

 

You didn't cite wikipedia.

 

You bold face the main parts of articles, or at least write tl,dr: summary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyways, it is a weak hypothesis which causes controversy as a stunt for media attention. Of course this is all just speculation.

[flying_death_bombs55]

[hide=click if you dare]

He claims that East Asians and their descendants average a larger brain size, greater intelligence, more sexual restraint, slower rates of maturation, and greater law abidingness and social organization than do Europeans and their descendants, who average higher scores on these dimensions than Africans and their descendants. Rushton contends that through the course of world history, there has been an anatomical correlation between brain weight and penis size, that is, the larger the brain, the smaller the penis."It's a trade off, more brains or more penis. You can't have everything,"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I find that offensive, because I am part chineseim not saying anything about my penis here :Psorry girlsbut I'm still smart.

 

 

 

Ps: this should give you a hint. [/hide]

[Medellin]

The Dr Watson from Watson and Crick? Oh man, that's dissapointing. He cofounded one of the most important biochemical structures ever. All I can say is that it sucks the old bastard has to let his own prejudices tarnish the great work he's done for the field of genetics.

 

 

 

If he has proof of what he says, it shouldn't tarnish his reputation

[Nadril]

As far as his hypothesis, I think its bunk.

[Kashi]

I love this Watson guy just from reading this article.

[Ambassadar]

I think this is a culture issue rather than a race issue. The races or countries that are perceived to be more intelligent usually have cultures that are very fertile grounds for people to develop their raw intelligence.

 

 

 

Japan is perceived as one of the smartest countries. If you took thousands of babies from an undeveloped section of Africa and raised them in Japan by Japanese parents their scores would probably be the same as any other Japanese child because they would have the Japanese culture.

 

 

 

The geneticist guy is being an idiot on this topic because he is ignoring culture in his hypothesis. To even attempt to legitimize that claim he would need to show that his so called "less intelligent races" remained less intelligent when raised in different cultures. I think if he tried this experiment he would find he was sorely mistaken with his hypothesis.

 

 

 

A random fact to add on is one of the smartest guys I know is from Nigeria.

[kelem_ryu]

I highly doubt there is a gene for beauty or intelligence, for musical aptitude or whatever.

 

 

 

The DNA is just the blueprint for the radio. The music comes from somewhere else.

 

 

 

 

 

PS.: I enjoy the news article threads.

[Jaziek]

@ craig:

 

 

 

http://www.digg.com

 

 

 

Have fun.

 

 

 

please no! digg is starting to suck enough as it is!

[BlueTear]

I'm inclined to blame the tests themselves, language barriers as well as education overshadows sheer intelligence by way too much to get an accurate statistical read on something as elusive as human intelligence.

 

 

 

(PS. I also can't say I mind the newsthreads. Sure, I don't find all of them interesting, and I wouldn't post all of them myself, but many of the things brought up are not reported by my local media, but are still worthy of thougth.)

[Hydraides]

Craig I now Knight you Ron Burgandy, Let this be an honour lol

 

 

 

It's true though to be honest...I cna't really think of any influencal Black people who have affected this world, mabye thats just because most of them never got a good education

 

 

 

And I agree with the person saying, Black people may not be as clever but at least they are cheerful

[kelem_ryu]

Westerns and Asians are probably more conditioned on high IQs, because of the cultural values.

 

 

 

I wonder where this conditioning will lead to. Eventually some people will figure out that they can use their intellect for other purposes than society intended. It's like breeding a bunch of Hulks.

[Zonorhc]

Intelligence is a product of one's upbringing and sociocultural context, rather than any sort of genetic disposition or any other explanation for "natural" ability, so this may only be a case of misjudgment on this scientist's part.

[transcript80]

I don't think that there is a gene for beauty, intelligence or homosexuality.

 

There are lots of genetic differences between races. A nice examples is alcohol susseptibility. In asian races, in some cases a certain gene is not properly expressed, causing them to have difficulties in breaking down alcohol. This "defect" is seen a lot more in asian populations as in kaukasian ones.

 

 

 

However, what this guy is trying to prove is mainly due to differences in culture/standarts. How was this test performed? Because of the lack of proper education in most african countries, these people are less educated. This may be the cause for them appearing less intelligent in the tests.

 

 

 

I think the ability to learn is equal for all race, with extremes for them both. But because of the circumstances in their surroundings, many african people do not get the chance to evolve themselves. I'm not saying that africans are less intelligent in any way, they just don't have the tools to exploit it in many cases.