Now that once-taboo racial stereotypes (smartest: the jew; smarter: East Asian (this is a new one, though); smart: white; dumb: black) are becoming respectable, maybe we can examine other racial taboos "scientifically"? The sadistic Turk? The stingy Scot? The Shylockian Jew?

I wonder if everybody will accept these investigations as philosophically as Saletan wants members of supposedly low-IQ groups to?

And what about the other stereotype, that women are dumber than men? What do the IQ pioneers have to say about this?

I also don't understand why the scientific contributions of Jews are a recent phenomenon, in terms of the history of humankind, if IQ is hard-wired. Human civilization was built up by Chinese and Asian Indians, Arabs, and Europeans in chronological order. Jews entered the picture only very recently. This suggests to me that their high IQ is a recent phenomenon, and that IQ is not primarily genetic.

Another point: why should the evolution vs. Genesis debate disturb only Christians? The book of Genesis is a part of the Torah, the first book of Moses, and so Jews (and possibly Muslims?) are equally affected.

Jews wrote some pretty thoughtful stuff in antiquity (the Torah, Talmud, Kabbalah) that has had a big impact on civilization.

Jews were doctors and advisers to the Arabs during their Golden Age.

So they have been doing a lot of deep thinking for a while.

In Europe, Jews were confined geographically and professionally by Christian society and by themselves until several centuries ago when many of them began assimilating into mainstream European society. That's when they began making the scientific contributions you refer to in your post.

Three concerns about your post:

The evidence of IQ tests clearly indicate that there is no average difference in intelligence between the sexes.

Average differences in intelligence among groups of people are not 'stereotypes' when supported by tests, results, and facts, nor are they a qualitative statement about the groups they describe.

Groups such as 'Turks' or 'Scots' are not 'races' in the sense that 'black' or 'white' are, so your comments seem rather absurd.

Groups such as 'Turks' or 'Scots' are not 'races' in the sense that 'black' or 'white' are, so your comments seem rather absurd.

OK, substitute "national stereotypes" for "racial stereotypes." It doesn't matter a whit. Also, are blacks and whites separate races? They seem to be broad categories.

Average differences in intelligence among groups of people are not 'stereotypes' when supported by tests, results, and facts, nor are they a qualitative statement about the groups they describe.

The "tests, results, and facts" are disputed by many, and are used by people with racist agendas to justify their obnoxious ideologies. Labeling a group "dumb" is not a qualitative statement?

Racists will use whatever they can to advance their obnoxious ideologies, and perhaps that is a legitimate reason to stop research on IQ differences, but do you dispute the result of the Texas Adoption Project? The project tested the IQs of twins who were adopted as infants. Their IQs were tested again as young adults - the result of the IQ testing showed the adoptive childrens' IQs were closer to their birth mothers, whom they had never met, than those of their adoptive mothers, who raised them their entire life. This shows IQ is mostly a genetic component. What part of this study would you dispute?

'National stereotypes' and 'racial stereotypes' are not equivalent, there are hundreds of nationalities but only 3 main races, so obviously many nationalities overlap in the race category. If 'Scots' really are cheap (and you could test this), it would almost certainly not be genetic (unless white people are cheap on average, and then what does it mean to compare Scots to another white group? This could be a culture issue). You can't make equivalent claims about these categories.

You're the one who has called people groups with lower average IQs dumb, not me... in a separate post I mention that low IQ alone does not warrant diagnosing someone as retarded, that there are other factors such as adaptive scales, etc. in the diagnosis.

No contention of my argument for men and women having the same average IQ? Interesting that one of the best explanations for that is despite men having larger average brains, the ratio of brain weight to body weight for men and women are practically identical. Why would this argument be accepted for the sexes, but not across different races?

Religious texts are not contributions to scientific knowledge. The invention of the decimal system is a scientific contribution. An estimate of the value of pi is a scientific contribution. Asian Indians and Chinese built civilizations; the Jews did not. They may have been doctors to Arabs, but is there a Jewish system of medicine comparable to Chinese medicine or Ayurveda?

I repeat: Jewish contributions to science are very recent, in terms of human civilization. To me, that suggests very strongly that their high IQ is a recent phenomenon. Ergo, IQ is not genetic.

"'National stereotypes' and 'racial stereotypes' are not equivalent, there are hundreds of nationalities but only 3 main races, so obviously many nationalities overlap in the race category. If 'Scots' really are cheap (and you could test this), it would almost certainly not be genetic (unless white people are cheap on average, and then what does it mean to compare Scots to another white group? This could be a culture issue). You can't make equivalent claims about these categories."

I didn't say they were equivalent. I'm saying that racial and national stereotypes fall into the same category: xenophobia.

You're the one who has called people groups with lower average IQs dumb, not me... in a separate post I mention that low IQ alone does not warrant diagnosing someone as retarded, that there are other factors such as adaptive scales, etc. in the diagnosis.

Sorry, euphemisms do not make something less offensive. Saletan did use the word "stupid" in his previous article, with reference to Jews who converted to Christianity (they were low-IQ Jews!). Someone who publishes tables of national IQs, according to which many nations are composed of people who are mostly borderline retarded, cannot hide behind the shield of "doing science." We know many of Hitler's supporters were also doing similar "science."

white_chalk:

Another point: why should the evolution vs. Genesis debate disturb only Christians? The book of Genesis is a part of the Torah, the first book of Moses, and so Jews (and possibly Muslims?) are equally affected.

Maybe because hardly any Jews believe that the Genesis creation account is to be taken literally (perhaps further evidence of higher average IQ's amongst Jews?)

Well, what about the study by David Kirp on adopted French schoolchildren, which clearly shows that IQ is related to family status of the adopting parents?

That's interesting. Is that true? I doubt it. They take their religion seriously enough that Israel is a theocratic state.

Taking your religion seriously is not the same thing as taking the scriptures literally. I have not personally met a single Jew, Orthodox, Conservative or Reform who believes in literal interpretation of Genesis.

I also think you will find that Israel has a very high percentage of atheist and agnostic Jews.

If so, that is good news. I hope this skepticism extends to the rest of their scriptures.

But isn't that true of "Christian" Europe, too?

PATXYZ, if you just believe the research, men have higher IQ than women, but women have better memories. One study claimed men score on average 8 IQ points over women, while women had about the same advantage over men in memory tests. Other, perhaps more representative studies claim that male IQ is on average 3 to 4 points over female IQ, similar to the racial difference Saletan quotes.

So, if you believe that these studies are a sign of genetic differences, you need to explain why men and women have different IQ scores too. After all, there is much more genetic difference between men and women (a whole chromosome!) than between black and white men.

One large study of opposite-sex siblings in the US found a 1 IQ point difference. While this was statistically significant in the sample, it shows that the difference becomes smaller when environmental factors are better controlled. A study of a much more homogenous population (all Scottish children at age 11) showed no statistical difference between male and female IQ at all. Clearly, environmental factors need to be controlled better. Saletan's attempt to reduce the difference to genetics is spurious.

"Maybe because hardly any Jews believe that the Genesis creation account is to be taken literally (perhaps further evidence of higher average IQ's amongst Jews?)"

I know some really dumb Jews. Umm...what was I going to say? Oh yeah, the idea that most christians the the bible literally is another stereotype. I really think that that needs to be said. For all of the cries of "racism" and whatnot, the idea that christians aren't as smart as Jews is just sort of getting taken for granted. Fine, there are some really bright Jews, but Mel Brooks is an idiot. I'm sorry, but so is Larry David. Neither of these men are as funny as they seem to think that they are, and if a goy told the same jokes in the same way, they'd get booed off of the stage for being sexist and not funny.

The whole problem with race is that people LOVE the idea of it, and will NEVER, EVER let it go. Jews love the IQ thing just as much as the Irish love the drunk thing. It's ugly, it's stupid, and it's here to stay. The next time you switch from say Merryl Lynch to Goldman Sachs, or whatever, imagine if you were sitting there waiting to be helped, and there was a room full of Jews and a black guy came over to help you. Be honest, would you feel ok about that? I wouldn't. It's MY money. I'm not a jew, and I want a jew looking after it. It's sad, but it's true. I want someone who is really smart, not AA smart. Until AA is done away with, there is no chance that racism of this sort is going away. Sorry.