In our previous discussion, Yan Shen remarked, "500 years from now, we may look back up on the European age of modernization in the same way that we look back upon the Islamic Golden Age of Science today and ask ourselves how a lower IQ group ever managed to lead the world for a few hundred years." More generally, the subject has come up a lot here as to whether and if so why the accomplishments of China and the Muslim world have so greatly lagged those of the West. In other words, if the Chinese (in particular) have higher average IQs than Westerners, and in addition possess an ancient and continuous civilization, why have all the great accomplishments seemingly come from the West?
I had a look through the "Rosters of Significant Figures" in Charles Murray's Human Accomplishment to semi-quantify levels of both Chinese and Islamic accomplishment. (For those who haven't seen them, I recommend you take a look at previous discussions here of Western accomplishment: in music, in biology, and in the names and nationalities of the scientists who named units of measurement.) I merely went through the lists and found any significant figure who was either Chinese or Muslim. Murray defines a significant figure in a field as one that most or all of his sources agree on being important to that field.
Astronomy
Significant figures: 124
Muslim: 2 (Ulugh-Beg, Central Asia; Arzachel, Spain)
Chinese: 1 (Chang Heng)
Chemistry
Significant figures: 204
Muslim: 1 (Geber, Persia)
Chinese: 0
Earth Sciences
Significant figures: 85
Muslim: 0
Chinese: 0
(There was one significant figure on this list from Kenya: Louis Leakey!)
Physics
Significant figures: 85
Muslim: 0
Chinese: 0
Mathematics
Significant figures: 191
Muslim: 3 (Qafa, Persia; Albategnius, Persia; Khayyam, Persia)
Chinese: 2 (Zhu Shijie, Zu Chongzhi)
Medicine
Significant figures: 160
Muslim: 1 (al-Qarashi, Syria)
Chinese: 0
Technology
Significant figures: 239
Muslim: 0
Chinese: 2 (Pi Sheng, Cai Lun)
There was a smattering of Indians in these categories and a few Japanese, especially in math and physics, but virtually all of the rest were white Europeans or Americans. While China could outstrip the West in the years and centuries to come, history gives no encouragement to those who believe that this might happen, and as for the Islamic world, not only does it have low levels of historical achievement, but it shows no signs of waking up.
Admittedly E. Asians tend to do better than Whites on IQ tests. I think their relative mediocrity (relative to White countries, that is) over the past 2,000 years or so relative to their overall high IQ might stem from the fact that their verbal IQ is lower that Whites. Maybe this is more important than mathematical and spatial IQ, which is higher than Whites?
ReplyDeleteYour post establishes nothing apart from what we already knew.
ReplyDeleteMurray's book is highly skewed towards figures who operated in the late 1300s and early 1400s onwards. But we already knew that was the era of the rise of modern Europe. Furthermore, past history tends to magnify the accomplishments of certain individuals. As Steve Sailer once pointed out, in the 1600s-1700s "everyone was considered a genius and even philosophers like Kant could make sizable contributions to science in their spare time." This was an exaggeration but its implications should be obvious. The total human knowledge base was relatively low back in the early days, meaning that most of the stuff accomplished was the low hanging fruit being picked. This doesn't detract from it's importance or enduring legacy, but what it suggests is that the problems that people tackle today are harder and require more brainpower. Perhaps this is why America has become so highly dependent on its Jewish, East Asian, and South Asian minorities.
"While China could outstrip the West in the years and centuries to come, history gives no encouragement to those who believe that this might happen, and as for the Islamic world, not only does it have low levels of historical achievement, but it shows no signs of waking up."
There's one glaring counterexample. The rise of the Jews in the late 1800s and early 1900s. For centuries Jews accomplished virtually nothing of note. Then suddenly out of nowhere, they began to disproportionately dominate science/technology.
Well, admittedly I haven't read the Murray book, but I'm curious just what fraction of those "significant accomplishers" lived in the last 600-odd years? If it's pretty high, then maybe we have the same mystery of why the (mostly) Europeans who lived during that period were so much more accomplished than the ones who lived the 600 previous years, even though I doubt their mean intelligence or creativity was so enormously different.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, I think the Scots were regarded as one of the most remarkably accomplished small European peoples during something like 1700-1850. But more recently, they don't seem to be setting the world on fire, so perhaps there's been some mysteriously rapid "racial decline" or something...
Well the Greeks haven't done anything for thousands of years and don't look like they'll be doing anything any time soon.
ReplyDeleteHistory is a good guide but probably not infallible.
For all the greatness of ancient China, what in the world happened with the last 1000 years? That's not exactly a blip.
ReplyDeleteBy the way Dennis, if you want evidence of who the bright young scientists of the future will be, why not take a look at your own post from before regarding Thomas Friedman and the Intel Science Talent Search. ;)
ReplyDeletehttp://mangans.blogspot.com/2010/03/thomas-friedman-immigration-fanatic.html#comments
"The egregious NYT columnist Thomas Friedman writes a paean to race replacement: America’s Real Dream Team. Almost every pro-immigration cliche and platitude makes an appearance there, along with his imitation of an enthusiastic puppy practically wetting himself over how smart immigrants and their children are compared to us hopeless rednecks.
O.K. All these kids are American high school students. They were the majority of the 40 finalists in the 2010 Intel Science Talent Search, which, through a national contest, identifies and honors the top math and science high school students in America, based on their solutions to scientific problems. The awards dinner was Tuesday, and, as you can see from the above list, most finalists hailed from immigrant families, largely from Asia. "
History keeps on going. Will white children today, who are the potential leaders of tomorrow, step up to the occasion? Or will they allow themselves to be disproportionately outclassed by their East Asian, Jewish, and South Asian counterparts? No doubt the past is important, Dennis. But the future depends on the human capital available today. The question is, will white children today rise up to the fore, or will they instead fall back on the accomplishments of their ancestors in the past?
What Yan Chen fails to grasp is that the "European age of modernization" has been going on for over two thousand years. It's not exactly a flash in the pan. Meanwhile the "Asian age of modernization" stubbornly refuses to arrive.
ReplyDeleteAs Yan Shen says, _Human Accomplishment_ explicitly throws away any data about figures post-1950. It's not a surprise that the West dominated for the 500 years previously. Better results would come from looking at nationality of Nobelists in the post-WWII era, and especially their ancestry (since there's been so much immigration).
ReplyDeleteAs Steve Sailer once pointed out, in the 1600s-1700s "everyone was considered a genius and even philosophers like Kant could make sizable contributions to science in their spare time." This was an exaggeration but its implications should be obvious. The total human knowledge base was relatively low back in the early days, meaning that most of the stuff accomplished was the low hanging fruit being picked.
ReplyDeleteSo why were there no high IQ Asians grabbing that low hanging fruit?
Perhaps this is why America has become so highly dependent on its Jewish, East Asian, and South Asian minorities.
America imports Asians because they are cheap, not because of their dazzling intelligence. They have the side benefit of helping companies meet their diversity quotas.
For centuries Jews accomplished virtually nothing of note. Then suddenly out of nowhere, they began to disproportionately dominate science/technology.
And you are speculating that one day Asians will do the same. Perhaps they will, but history suggests otherwise.
Maybe white people are less conformist? The history of western art is very different from the history of eastern, in that the evolution of western art was determined to a much greater extent by specific individuals. I think differences in testosterone levels are part of it too.
ReplyDeleteWhites are Goldilocks race. ;)
Yan Shet makes a good point. If things go on as they have and are, the world may indeed look back on the geese that laid the golden eggs and wonder where all the fun went?
ReplyDeleteOnce again, he displays his primary loyalty (the United States), this time by joining the time-honored culture of critique. He's still in the bottom percentile as far as his efforts in pursuit of that loyalty go.
Perhaps this is why America has become so highly dependent on its Jewish, East Asian, and South Asian minorities.
Conversely, perhaps it's why Jews, east Asians, and south Asians don't seem to work much magic outside the west.
The rise of the Jews in the late 1800s and early 1900s. For centuries Jews accomplished virtually nothing of note. Then suddenly out of nowhere, they began to disproportionately dominate science/technology.
Actually, much of what they accomplished post emancipation mirrored their accomplishments pre-emancipation. You know, the accomplishments they call you an anti-Semite for noticing.
Similarly, I think the Scots were regarded as one of the most remarkably accomplished small European peoples during something like 1700-1850. But more recently, they don't seem to be setting the world on fire, so perhaps there's been some mysteriously rapid "racial decline" or something...
I know, right? Lots of questions here. Like why "cognitively elite" Ashkenazis don't set much of anything on fire on their own... Like why "cognitively elite" Chinese and Indians need to escape the environments they create for environments Europeans create, in order to "work their magic."
I'm not going to be a multicultural or Chinese apologist, despite my Internet pseudonym. It's pretty clear to me that the modern order that permeates the globe at this moment in time is one fundamentally rooted in Western culture and Western accomplishment.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it does seem clear to me that nothing is permanent in human history. We can look within Europe itself to see this. The Roman Empire, which was the height of civilization for its time was centered in Southern Europe and included the other areas surrounding the Mediterranean. Today, 4 out of 5 of the PIIGS countries that can't get their finances in order fall within this core area of the Roman Empire and they're depending on Germany, the productive center of Europe in modern times and the land of barbarians in Roman times, to bail them out.
Now, I don't know the methodology behind Murray's lists*, but it seems to me that with modern society firmly rooted in European cultural hegemony, that it is hardly surprising that most of the figures that have made contributions to the body of human knowledge--the body necessary to build modern society--would be European. And furthermore, with the right climate for discovery, chain reactions of breakthroughs and insights can occur within localized areas, helping to further skew these metrics toward Europeans.
This is to our credit as Europeans. However, it does not rule out future greatness outside of the greater European world. In the ascendancy of Europe and its colonies, European civilizational innovations have spread throughout the world in a way that may allow other powers, such as those in East Asia to use the new tools available to them to compete.
For now, China is not a land of innovation but one of production and imitation. However,as Chinese elites become more and more acquainted with Western methods, I see no reason why they should not be a formidable competitor in the decades to come.
*I see that he's credited the Chinese for inventing movable type and paper, though he's given no credit for gunpowder or mechanical clocks.
Obviously it's not all about IQ - or conscientiousness. Indeed, no fine scholar has ever claimed that it is.
ReplyDeleteAlso of note in this connection, Ashkenazim are barely better than other Whites in art ('per capita' I mean), while they are far superior in physics. Biology and philosophy lie between physics and art in that respect.
I would suggest that physics/math is the field where it is hardest for a man with an IQ of 160 to outdo - thanks to superiority in other traits, perhaps including creativity - a man with an IQ of 170. In biology and philosophy such an event is considerably more common, and still moreso in the beaux arts.
What contrasts is that the ancient Hebrew poetry of Job, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes, seems to be the most superior literature in the world. This was a small nation, too, which makes her achievements more remarkable. An estimated 300,000 at the time of David, whereas the Greeks are estimated at 10 million by time of Plato in -400, having undergone massive population growth over the four centuries prior. Ashkenazi luminaries of the quill like Bellow and Heine are great, but can't compare with it, and neither can gentile Europeans. Of course, we don't know yet how close Ashkenazim are to those Hebrews in terms of neutral and near-neutral SNPs; regardless of that they could have changed materially by selection without much change in neutral markers. There are also non-biological influences on the making of great literature.
We should not assume that Arabs, Persians, or Oriental Hebrews before and after dispersion from the Levant had the same IQ and other traits in -500, 0, 800, and 1200, that they have today. That assumption is quite unwarranted. To take in some thinking about how or why population IQs may have changed in the past, one can look at Gerhard Meisenberg's book - though most of the book is an introduction to topics in bio, evo psych, anthro, etc that many HBDers are more or less acquainted with.
Mark, I think it's obvious that there's more to the subject than IQ. HBDists seem very stuck on IQ, but I think personality (which includes IQ) is a better answer. Invention is individualist, non-conformist, aggressive, not collectivist, conformist, harmonic. It's about seeing a better way to do something, a way no one else seems to see. East Asians seem (generally) unable to take a dump without a consensus, relative to Euros.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, I've come to the same "Goldilocks" conclusion, that Europeans hit a "sweet spot" between savage individualism and civilized conformity.
Not that east Asian personality doesn't have its superior elements. For whatever reason, you don't see their elites selling them down the river and race-replacing them. (Though I will say this much - if the day ever comes that the east Asian elites do decide to race-replace their populations, kiss that race goodbye. I suspect they'll acquiesce much more readily than Euros)
Same old tune - what "cognitive elitists" like Yan Shet actually have to teach us, they won't teach; they will in fact, teach the opposite.
"but what it suggests is that the problems that people tackle today are harder and require more brainpower."
ReplyDeleteSooooooo, the intellects of Asia of the last two millenia couldn't bother themselves with the low-hanging fruit. They magnanimously decided to let the dumb Euros do all the easy lifting, like, oh, say, working out the Three Laws of Motion, the Laws of Thermodynamics, Pythagorean theorum, electricity, x-rays, the inventions of telescopes, light bulbs, graphing calculators...
Those puzzles were just. too. easy for these Asian Mental Giants. Got it.
RS, I see it as masturbatory to praise Ashkenazis for both their high intellects, and their small numbers; they go hand in hand.
ReplyDeleteIn all seriousness, I think that the chances are good that East Asians will at the least balance out Europeans in our children's lifetimes, if not in ours. I would think the appropriate response to this possibility would be one of optimistic expectation that we might benefit from their progresses as they have benefited from ours.
ReplyDeleteRegarding creativity, I wouldn't be surprised if East Asians proved as creative as whites, nor if whites proved more creative than East Asians. I would be surprised if East Asians proved more creative, but that, of course, might just be my own biases speaking (I *really* prefer Western art than what I've seen of Eastern art). Also, I think East Asian societies will get more innovative as they catch up. If you're behind, imitation is necessary.
RKU, I wouldn't leap to the conclusion that Europe was so lousy 800-1400. Unless you're only interested in math science and tech, which is something I can't help with.
ReplyDeleteHow much do you really know about the High Middle Ages? The scholastic philosophers? Beowulf; the letters of Abelard and Eloise? I admit, I don't know much. It doesn't take much effort though to look at the High Middle cathedrals and judge them clearly equal to later ones.
I wouldn't necessarily hasten to argue that all that High Middle stuff is better than the contemporaneous zen cultures in NE Asia, or certain other European periods. But the cathedrals truly are great, at least. Probably the highwater of world architecture, along with the Renaissance ones.
Chaos. We're talking about chaos. The capacity to run against the grain, do something new, upset the old order. Euros have it in spades. East Asians do not.
ReplyDeleteThis is not to say that Euros will continue to dominate the world, but it does suggest that Euros have an inherent advantage in innovation, in pursuing disruptive technologies.
Maybe it has something to do with selection.
ReplyDeleteIn the old days, tons of kids were born and the strong survived. A woman might have ten or even twenty kids. From them nature selected. Nowadays, we only have a few, giving nature little to choose from.
This is only a thought, feel free to slice and dice.
There is the possibility that we are screwing up the process.
Perhaps a better comparison would be the Ionian Greeks? Awesome in the past, far from special today.
ReplyDelete"The total human knowledge base was relatively low back in the early days, meaning that most of the stuff accomplished was the low hanging fruit being picked. This doesn't detract from it's importance or enduring legacy, but what it suggests is that the problems that people tackle today are harder and require more brainpower."
This seems reasonable (although I think it's untrue) if you'll likewise credit the ancient civilization of China and its achievements to them merely picking up the "low hanging fruit". I doubt a Chinese nationalist would do so, however, not that such a one has anything to lose to do so and would gain consistency by doing so, but simply that not being insanely prideful of their "ancient civilization"1!!!1! ("we invented toilet paper!1!!") is not possible for Chinese. ;P
...
In reality, I think what's more likely than future Chinese of 2500AD looking back and wondering how Europeans managed what they did manage is super IQ engineered intellects, either mechanical or biological, human or inhuman, descended from Chinese civ or not, but assuredly having almost nothing in common with the Chinese or us, wondering how these stupid unoptimised people (Chinese and Euro) did anything whatsoever!
...
Meng: As to clocks la wik (in its clocks entry) says "The Greek and Roman civilizations are credited for initially advancing water clock design to include complex gearing,[6] which was connected to fanciful automata and also resulted in improved accuracy. These advances were passed on through Byzantium and Islamic times, eventually making their way to Europe. Independently, the Chinese developed their own advanced water clocks（钟）in 725 A.D., passing their ideas on to Korea and Japan." and "Outside of Europe, the escapement mechanism had been known and used in medieval China, as the Song Dynasty horologist and engineer Su Song (1020–1101) incorporated it into his astronomical clock-tower of Kaifeng in 1088.[10] However, his astronomical clock and rotating armillary sphere still relied on the use of flowing water (i.e. hydraulics), while European clockworks of the following centuries shed this old habit for a more efficient driving power of weights, in addition to the escapement mechanism." From this and the wikipedia page on escapement it sounds like Chinese improvements were more evolutionary than revolutionary and it isn't very clear where the Chinese innovated if at all (particularly in the escapement article), which sounds plausible to me at least (though as a layperson the only thing that I have heard of in the Greco-Roman period is the geared Antikythera assemblage)
"This is not to say that Euros will continue to dominate the world, but it does suggest that Euros have an inherent advantage in innovation, in pursuing disruptive technologies."
ReplyDeleteThat must be why East Asians, South Asians, and Jews(a shout-out to our good buddy RKU here ;) disproportionately dominate Silicon Valley right? A country with 200 million non-Hispanic whites needs to pay Chinese, Indians, and Jews cushy white collar salaries in some of the most innovative areas of tech/IT because?
The real question shouldn't even be whether or not China will surpass the US in the future. The actual question should be who the Americans ,who will be disproportionately running the elite STEM fields in this country a few decades from now ,be? Silicon Valley workers are already more than 50% foreign, from what I understand. A heavy concentration of that foreign cohort are Chinese and Indians. 50 years from now, what percentage will the foreign cohort be?
During much of history, China was indeed ahead of Europe in terms of living standards and economic power. The Chinese were way ahead of the West in the 14th century when they were building ocean going ships far larger than those used by Columbus nearly a century later. The decline of China began during the late Ming dynasty when, at the urging of the Mandarin bureaucrats, the Ming dynasty banned the construction of large ocean going ships and began to reign in the exploration and trading with the rest of the world. This occurred about the same time that Europe started into the Renaissance and Enlightenment and began its long climb out of the barbarism of the dark ages. What existed in Europe prior to the Renaissance and Enlightenment (the only true revolution is human history because it was the only intellectual revolution) was pure barbarism that does not qualify as civilization.
ReplyDeleteAnyways, the rise of Europe was due to two reasons. The first was the Black Death, which killed nearly 50% of Europe's population. By destroying the excess labor, this destroyed the guild system and resulted in upward mobility in Europe for the first time. It also forced the Europeans to innovate and create labor-saving devices.
The second reason was, unlike China, Europe was divided into competing political entities. China was a single monopoly. Situations with competing players always result in more innovation than those where everything is dominated by a single monopolistic entity.
This is the true explanation why Europe prospered over the past 500 years and China did not.
Western civilization is a product of the Renaissance and Enlightenment. It is roughly 500 years old. The Renaissance was started by the re-discovery of the knowledge of the Greeks and Romans, which then lead to discovery of new knowledge and abilities. There were a few things that occurred during the dark ages, like the Magna Carta. However, for the most part the dark ages really was a time of sub-human barbarism.
What did Europe accomplish scientifically in the 3rd century, the 4th, the 5th, the 6th, the 7th, the 8th, the 9th, the 10th, the 11th, or the 12th?
ReplyDeleteFrom their lack of scientific achievement in those centuries, would you say that Europeans are incompetent at science?
Would you look at the Japanese economy in 1830 and say that they are economically incompetent? Would you do the same to China in the 1970s after decades of communism?
It should be clear that scientific achievement is a product of both intelligence and culture. Chinese culture, for whatever reason, did not encourage innovation or science. That is now changing as your previous post about them trying to find high IQ genes showed. Pretending that the Chinese are not likely to catch up or even surpass us will not help. One only has to look at how well the Japanese have done to get a taste of what China will accomplish. Let's not kid ourselves; they have four times our population, are smarter (albeit less creative), and appear to like the idea of eugenics.
One possible way out of this dilemma is to use genetic engineering ourselves. They only have a slight IQ advantage; therefore, one generation of genetic manipulation would be sufficient to put us on the top again. It would also help us overcome the NAM problem.
As stated perhaps a better comparison would be the Ionian Greeks? Awesome in the past, far from special today. Though you can really pick any ancient West Asian to Southeast European civilization (to a lesser extent)...
ReplyDelete"The total human knowledge base was relatively low back in the early days, meaning that most of the stuff accomplished was the low hanging fruit being picked. This doesn't detract from it's importance or enduring legacy, but what it suggests is that the problems that people tackle today are harder and require more brainpower."
This seems reasonable (although I think it's untrue) if you'll likewise credit the ancient civilization of China and its achievements to them merely picking up the "low hanging fruit". I doubt a Chinese ethnic nationalist would do so, however, not that such a one has anything to lose to do so and would gain consistency by doing so, but simply because not being insanely prideful of their "ancient civilization"1!!!1! ("we invented toilet paper!1!!") is not possible for Chinese. ;P
...
In reality, I think what's more likely than future Chinese of 2500AD looking back and wondering how Europeans managed what they did manage is super IQ engineered intellects, either mechanical or biological, human or inhuman, descended from Chinese civ or not, but assuredly having almost nothing in common with the Chinese or us, wondering how these stupid unoptimised people (Chinese and Euro) did anything whatsoever!
Really? No one mentions Christianity and it's relationship to science. C'mon. The Chinese were alchemists not scientists because they had no concept of God's immutable laws.
ReplyDeleteMeng: As to clocks la Wik (in its clocks entry) says "The Greek and Roman civilizations are credited for initially advancing water clock design to include complex gearing, which was connected to fanciful automata and also resulted in improved accuracy. These advances were passed on through Byzantium and Islamic times, eventually making their way to Europe. Independently, the Chinese developed their own advanced water clocks（钟）in 725 A.D., passing their ideas on to Korea and Japan." and "Outside of Europe, the escapement mechanism had been known and used in medieval China, as the Song Dynasty horologist and engineer Su Song (1020–1101) incorporated it into his astronomical clock-tower of Kaifeng in 1088.[10] However, his astronomical clock and rotating armillary sphere still relied on the use of flowing water (i.e. hydraulics), while European clockworks of the following centuries shed this old habit for a more efficient driving power of weights, in addition to the escapement mechanism."
ReplyDeleteFrom this and the wikipedia page on escapement it sounds like Chinese improvements were more evolutionary than revolutionary and it isn't very clear where the Chinese innovated if at all (particularly in the escapement article), which sounds plausible to me at least (though as a layperson the only thing that I have heard of in the Greco-Roman period is the geared Antikythera assemblage). Perhaps this explains Murrays lack of a credit?
The reason that whites have accomplished so much more than Asians is explained in Murray's earlier book, "The Bell Curve". The average Asian IQ is indeed slightly higher than the average white IQ, but the Asian IQ distribution is much narrower than the white distribution. The Asians are mostly clustered around their mean, while the whites are more widely spread out on the whole spectrum from idiot to genius.
ReplyDeleteThus there have been many more truly brilliant whites than there have been truly brilliant asians. It takes the truly brilliant to make the great breakthroughs that whites are known for. Once the breakthrough has been made, the Asians with their nice tight distribution around a slightly higher mean can come in and use that breakthrough profitably. They can learn something that someone else discovered, but they're not much for discovering anything themselves.
That explanation fits with the notorious conformity of the Asian mindset. They are the most conformist people on earth. Little risk-taking, little originality. And holy cow, the worst music ever heard...tinny, plinky-plinky atonal whining...ugh.
RS: RKU, I wouldn't leap to the conclusion that Europe was so lousy 800-1400. Unless you're only interested in math science and tech, which is something I can't help with...How much do you really know about the High Middle Ages?
ReplyDeleteThat's a fair point---my knowledge of the Middle Ages is pretty vague and "old fashioned." But remember that this thread was centered on evaluating the greatness of different world civilizations by the Murray-metric of innovation, so if Murray doesn't list a lot of innovations by Europeans between 800-1400 (which someone who's actually read the book can say), that would tend to reinforce my point.
Also, even if Europeans were producing lots of good "cultural" products between 800-1400, you correctly point out they weren't making much progress in math, science, or technology, so it's pretty clear that the reason these then suddenly moved to the forefront in an explosion of advanced was more about various cultural, organizational, or political obstacles, rather than anything innate in the Europeans themselves.
I'm reading Gibbon's six-volume History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire now, and we're past 476 (fall of the Roman Empire) and in the period before 1453 (fall of Constantinople).
ReplyDeleteGibbon, as a Protestant, is pretty hostile to Catholics (not to mention Jews, but I digress) as well as the Byzantines. I'm reading his chapters on Islam right now by coincidence, and he's pretty hard on them after the death of Muhammad as well. But he does the party line about advances in European sciences and mathematics being largely Arab creations.
The one area where I'd be curious to see evidence is in algebra, as it is (almost) uniformly agreed that this was an Arab invention. Of course on can't have algebra w/o ZERO and that seems to have come from Hindus. The Mayans had a relatively advanced civilization at some point. They, like the Hindus, developed a mathematical system with a zero in it, but their modern descendants are very unimpressive.
According to Hans J Eysenck, genius requires creativity as well as high intelligence - see refs in http://medicalhypotheses.blogspot.com/2009/02/why-are-modern-scientists-so-dull.html - and creativity is pretty much reciprocal to conscientiousness.
ReplyDeleteEast Asians are the most conscientious of all people, therefore it would be expected that they are among the least creative.
Architects were able to construct those Cathedrals through what was probably a lot of trial and error, as well as a fair bit of happy accident in discovering things like the flying buttress.
ReplyDeleteThe difference between what was going on then, and what happened about six centuries ago was a more intense interest as to why and how those things worked specifically, and what else might be possible with that deeper understanding.
There are still plenty of people working in technological fields who are akin to the medieval architect, who can plug away at a specific task and come up with a rather impressive and even unique finished product, but not produced anything that you might call innovative or inspired.
Dennis, let me recapitulate my main points. What we're really focused on here is the future of human civilization. And in order to predict the future, one needs to focus on the present, not look back upon the past.
ReplyDeleteI stated this earlier. The children of today are the leaders and innovators of tomorrow. And it's quite apparent to me that East Asian, Jewish, and upper caste Indian children today are disproportionately outperforming their white European counterparts on basically every elite high IQ competition, whether its the IMO or the Intel Science Talent Search. Since past leading figures have been drawn from this highly elite talent pool of academically successful individuals, it would behoove us to look there first, if we were to want to predict who the future movers and shakers will be. Since you seem to have an emotional investment in the well-being of Western civilization, I'm puzzled as to why you focus not on the current state of human capital in the West, but rather exclusively on past accomplishments. The future of Western civilization depends on the children of today. The Newtons and Gausses of the world won't come back to life and once again contribute to Western society.
But, as I've stated, the most immediate and pressing question shouldn't even be if/when China surpasses the West. The much more pressing issue should be whether or not white Americans will become disproportionately displaced from the most elite and productive sectors of American life. Jews have already disproportionately displaced white Europeans from many of these sectors, whether in business or sci/tech. What we're now seeing is East Asian Americans and upper caste Indian Americans doing the same. There's a huge over-representation of Chinese and Indians in Silicon Valley today, the hotbed of American innovation in IT/tech. RKU can certainly attest to the importance of high IQ immigrants in the Silicon Valley infrastructure with a much greater degree of authority than I. I asked rhetorically what percentage of Silicon Valley workers would be of foreign ethnicity, earlier. I believe it's more than 50% today. What if it becomes 70 or even 80% a few decades from now?
Kevin MacDonald predicted that given the current trend unfolding in the US, America was well on its way to being ruled by technocratic Asian elite and a business, law, political, etc Jewish elite. The Asian population is predicted to rise from its current 4.5% to somewhere around 9% by the year 2050. I don't know how much of that increase will be due to East Asians and upper caste Indians, but you can bet part of it will be.
WNs should realize that it's a bad idea to antagonize the people(Jews and East Asians and upper caste Indians) who disproportionately run the most productive sectors of the nation. It fosters ill-will and is simply counterproductive.
Just think about how tiny the East Asian/Jewish/Indian population in the US is and be glad that these people gave us the likes of Google(Sergie Brin, Larry Page, both Jews), Dell(Michael Dell, Jewish), Facebook(Mark Zuckerberg, Jewish), Nvidia(Jen Hsung Huang, Chinese), Yahoo(Jerry Yang, Chinese), Youtube(Steven Chen, Chinese and one of 3 co-founders), etc. White Europeans are getting pretty good bang for the buck here in terms of benefiting from a disproportionately productive minority.
Number of Nobel Prize Winners by country/descent in physiology, chemistry, and physics 2000-2010. (These numbers may be off because Wikipedia counts some people in more than one country; I tried to be mindful of that, but might have missed some)
ReplyDeleteAustralia - 3 (all white)
Austria - 1
Belarus - 1
Canada - 1 (white)
China - 2 (2009 & 2010)
France - 4 (white)
Germany - 6
Hong Kong - 1
India - 1 (2009)
Israel - 3
Italy - 2
Japan - 10
Netherlands - 1
New Zealand - 1 (white)
Russia - 5
South Africa - 1 (white)
Sweden - 1
Switzerland - 1
UK - 9 (one Chinese, not including 2 Russians and 1 South African)
USA - 52 (of whom 5 appear to be of Asian descent)
Just eyeballing these, it looks like 10% of recent Nobel winners in the hard sciences in the US were Asian, though Asians only make up 5% of the country. Japan (pop 120 mil) does respectably, outperforming Russia (pop 140 mil) and on par with UK (pop 60 mil). China and India underperform tremendously but may just be gearing up. Also, I was surprised there weren't any from South Korea, which has a high IQ and a significant population.
It'll be interesting what the next ten years or so will bring.
Svigor:
ReplyDeleteif the day ever comes that the east Asian elites do decide to race-replace their populations, kiss that race goodbye. I suspect they'll acquiesce much more readily than Euros
I don't know. The Euros are setting the bar pretty high.
Dennis, would you consider dealing with Yan Shen the way Roissy does his trolls (snipping comments included)? The goal's not to censor, but to drive the trolls crazy. Better them than us.
"500 years from now, we may look back up on the European age of modernization in the same way that we look back upon the Islamic Golden Age of Science today and ask ourselves how a lower IQ group ever managed to lead the world for a few hundred years."
ReplyDeleteThe Islamic Golden age is not comparable to the creation of the modern world by the Europeans. Modernity can only be compared with the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture, and the subsequent birth of urban civilization. Like agriculture and early civilizations, modernity revolutionized every sphere of life. In contrast, all the pre-modern civilizations -- Sumerian, Egyptian, Roman, Chinese, Indian, Islamic, etc. -- were the same, with low levels of technology, wealth, and freedom. It was the Europeans of the last five centuries or more who produced the first real qualitative change in human history in 6000 years. Perhaps the accomplishments of these men (and Madame Curie;) were low-hanging fruit, but they were so only for the Europeans. For the Chinese, Indians, or Arabs they were as far away as Andromeda. It is not even clear if non-Europeans could maintain the accomplishments of modernity were whites to vanish.
Anyone who thinks that Newton's creating, virtually ex nilio, the Calculus and applying it to, well, everything was *easier* than Einstein's brilliant but in truth barely more than incremental development with his Relativity -- that person needs their head examined. Newton set the whole paradigm, Einstein only operated within that paradigm.
ReplyDeleteThe Scots stop achieving big in 1850? The first English translation of The Communist Manifesto was produced the same year. Pure coincidence, I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteOr, maybe "class warfare" is a fig leaf used to cover interethnic strife, and the Scots, united with the English by king, flag, religion (broadly) language (mostly), longitude, currency, and a slew of customs, discovered with the aid of a couple of Germans that they had been colonized by the English at some unspecified point in history, and that they needed a political party (which, per Marx, would not be explicitly ethnic) and a set of myths to sustain them in the wake of their most shameful defeat, and that they weren't going to try to succeed any more by the blasted white man's rules, I mean ... blasted Englishman's rules, and to hell with it all. Noting of course that the English would never consider giving up on trying to succeed by the Scotsman's rules; wouldn't compute.
Steve Sailer notes how Finland's Swedish-speaking minority has fallen behind in PISA scores; in another article he notes how, long before "civil rights", 3% of US chemists were black.
Failure is a strategy.
Or maybe 1850 is just a coincidence.
It's too bad Dennis looked at Murray and not at Joseph Needham's much more carefully researched work.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Needham
Needham was admittedly a bit of a China promoter, but a casual glance at any of the volumes of his Science and Technology in China would show that Murray missed huge numbers of innovators. The fact that he only lists Zhang Heng among Chinese astronomers is ridiculous. Just look at the history of algoritms for computing pi and you'll find a number of Chinese contributors who were contemporaries of Greek mathematicians.
Any serious student of history has to admit that China was way ahead of the West for most of the past 2000+ years. (See Marco Polo, Zheng He, etc.) It is the past 500 years that may turn out to be an anomaly.
Hint: among historians of science it is considered a puzzle ("The Needham Question") why China didn't beat the West to the scientific and industrial revolutions. That is, it is considered strange and unlikely, given what had happened in the previous thousands of years, that the West would get there first. Does this square with Dennis' main assumption in his post?
"A country with 200 million non-Hispanic whites needs to pay Chinese, Indians, and Jews cushy white collar salaries in some of the most innovative areas of tech/IT because?"
ReplyDeleteBecause we're suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.
"50 years from now, what percentage will the foreign cohort be?"
ReplyDeleteWell, if you get what you want, 100% Chinese.
ReplyDeleteIt's too bad Dennis looked at Murray and not at Joseph Needham's much more carefully researched work.
This can only have been written by someone lacking in any technical knowledge at all.
Needham looked at Chinese records about mixtures of saltpeter, charcoal and sulfur and other stuff and decided that they had invented gunpowder ... but I see he was a biochemist ... so I guess he should not be expected to really understand technical things.
Needham was very able to suspend disbelief with respect to claims in Chinese sources and seemed unaware of the backdating of documents by their authors to gain more prestige for them.
ReplyDeleteHint: among historians of science it is considered a puzzle ("The Needham Question") why China didn't beat the West to the scientific and industrial revolutions.
That's largely because historians of science are wankers who are very lacking in technical abilities.
" The Asian population is predicted to rise from its current 4.5% to somewhere around 9% by the year 2050."
ReplyDeleteI predict the Asian population will start to fall long before that. China will have risen by that time, and like much of the Japanese before them, many will return to China.
"The children of today are the leaders and innovators of tomorrow."
ReplyDeleteIf Yannie *really* wanted to see White American kids "step up to the plate," he'd have agreed with me during a prior thread that East Asian kids ought to be BARRED from competiting in elite competitions in America. Let them compete in China against other Chinese.
He did NOT embrace this idea, you'll note. No. He just crows that the EA kids are winning all the American competitions.
And just like the Ivy Leagues, for every Chinese kid that wins MATHcounts / other American academic competitions, there's a White kid who, therefore, did not, and is discouraged as a result.
Needham was admittedly a bit of a China promoter
ReplyDeleteThat's a rather polite way of describing a Communist hack.
why China didn't beat the West to the scientific and industrial revolutions. That is, it is considered strange and unlikely, given what had happened in the previous thousands of years
Why don't you enlighten us as to what you think "happened in the previous thousands of years"? Bonus points for the Chinese invention of the transistor in 1012 AD.
What contrasts is that the ancient Hebrew poetry of Job, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes, seems to be the most superior literature in the world.
ReplyDeleteYou read them in the original?
WNs should realize that it's a bad idea to antagonize the people(Jews and East Asians and upper caste Indians) who disproportionately run the most productive sectors of the nation. It fosters ill-will and is simply counterproductive.
ReplyDeleteYou heat that, you dumb white trash? You'd better shut up and get in line or risk incurring the ill-will of your Jewish, East Asian, and upper-caste Indian masters from whom all good things flow!
This is Yan Chen's idea of America as a "proposition nation".
I've never been one who believes that all the furreners should be kicked out of the country at gunpoint, but I can see where prolonged exposure to rancid bigots like Yanny might change my mind.
Architects were able to construct those Cathedrals through what was probably a lot of trial and error, as well as a fair bit of happy accident in discovering things like the flying buttress.
ReplyDeleteThere must not have been much trial-and-error or happy accidenting going on anywhere outside of Europe then. I wonder why ...
WNs should realize that it's a bad idea to antagonize the people(Jews and East Asians and upper caste Indians) who disproportionately run the most productive sectors of the nation. It fosters ill-will and is simply counterproductive.
ReplyDeleteWhy? Say they live in Singapore or Taiwan or what have you, don't have any influence in the US media rather than live among Americans. In this globalised world where the rich pay no tax and tariffs are verboten, how much will that really have any trickle down effects on the average White American's wealth?
Please show your evidence for this strong thesis that there is any utility to White Americans from having these people in America rather than simply trading with them whilst they live elsewhere, under our current regime? Seriously, what gains to White Americans get in terms of growth that, say, the Finnish or the Danes don't get without these marvellous specimens interfering in their politics and dominating their institutions as they do? The best you can say is that the US government can take their taxes and redistribute to White Americans, but given how poorly the government uses taxes and the fact that spending frequently essentially decreases in efficiency to cover the available budget, this seems like a weak argument (plus the fact that paleocons, correctly, frown at this kind of redistribution).
Or are you saying that there is no utility to White Americans, but they should simply not fuck with ethnic groups who are powerful and will take reprisals against them?
What did Europe accomplish scientifically in the 3rd century, the 4th, the 5th, the 6th, the 7th, the 8th, the 9th, the 10th, the 11th, or the 12th?
ReplyDeleteIt depends on your definition of scientific accomplishment. Europe accomplished as much or more in this period as the Chinese. The science of metallurgy, architecture, and art all equaled or exceeded what was going on in China at the time.
Yan Shen: I'm a little confused by your terminology. You continually refer to Jews displacing Whites. Bearing in mind that the Jews to which you refer are largely Ashkenazi (read:European),what racial group do you think that Ashkenazi Jews belong to?
ReplyDelete"It is the past 500 years that may turn out to be an anomaly."
ReplyDeleteHey, why stop there? Africans were building colossal pyramids nearly 5000 years ago! Maybe they're the sleeping giants! Let's import a couple hundred million of them, just in case...
Yan Shen is right. The white race's time has passed. And really, why does it deserve to survive? They had the most successful country in the history of the world and told their entire story in the terms of improving the self-esteem of black people. America/whites/Jews gave the world feminism, critical race theory and negro worship.
ReplyDeleteTalk to white youth today. Tell them they'll be a minority in 50 years and they'll shrug their shoulders. Tell them about racism or sexism and they'll start foaming at the mouth.
And don't pretend that this is a struggle between the elites and the masses. Smart white people from the lower classes have been testing into the elite for fifty years and what happens when they get into a position of power? They adopt the same rabid egalitarianism that smart white people have preached for the last sixty years.
A billion Chinese are coming and they'll pick up where the white race left off. Just be thankful that nature created two intelligent races, so that if one self-destructed the other would continue civilization.
The cause of the vastly superior performance of White civilisation, to that of any other, is not simply IQ we can conclude, given the superiority of Chinese IQ alone.
ReplyDeleteTherefore something else must be at play. I would suggest that White Western culture provides the reasons. Further, culture is rooted in race.
One example of cultural difference is in how different societies go about queuing, i.e. waiting in a line for a movie, or train tickets, or the like.
If you go to India or an Asian country you will find that they simply cannot conceptualise even the need to form an orderly line and wait your turn without a coercive force, like the police etc to ensure order.
Indians and Asians simply rush the counter. If you have waited then bad luck for you, you'll be swarmed. Pretty soon you too will learn that waiting is for fools and you must start pushing in as well.
In Oz the culture of the queue is rapidly changing due to the massive influx of Indians and Asians. The simple matter of entering and exiting an elevator has become a push and shove affair.
In the past White Ozzies instinctively wait for elevator passengers to exit and once they have, you then enter. No more with Asians. The door opens and they'll swarm in and you now must barge through to get out.
The same as waiting to withdraw money from an ATM. Indians and Asians will mill around the machine negating any queue formed, causing anxiety and mob panic.
On train platforms in Sydney we now have Japanese style ushers to push patrons onto the train, platform markings to designate a waiting zone as passengers exit, with loudspeaker broadcasts to remind the multiculti hordes to "Please wait, stand back from the train till all passengers have exited." Of course none of this was necessary when we were a homogeneous White society only 10 or so years ago.
White people have patience and the ability to queue. Indians and Asians don't have the same cultural ability without enforcement.
So, our culture and not IQ alone has caused our success. Culture is rooted in race. As more Indians and Asians swarm our shores, even though they have on average higher IQs, the culture that utilises high IQ will be diminished and eventually destroyed.
At that point we become just like India and Asia have been for thousands of years. Producing very little, yet on the surface, seemingly offering so much.
*I see that he's credited the Chinese for inventing movable type and paper, though he's given no credit for gunpowder
ReplyDeleteGunpowder is a perfect example of the derivative nature of Chinese civilization. The Chinese (serendipitously) discovered the stuff, had a monopoly on it for several centuries, and did nothing particularly creative with it. The West went on to develop workable firearms and smokeless powder.
or mechanical clocks.
From Wikipedia:
Outside of Europe, the escapement mechanism had been known and used in medieval China, as the Song Dynasty horologist and engineer Su Song (1020–1101) incorporated it into his astronomical clock-tower of Kaifeng in 1088.[10] However, his astronomical clock and rotating armillary sphere still relied on the use of flowing water (i.e. hydraulics), while European clockworks of the following centuries shed this old habit for a more efficient driving power of weights, in addition to the escapement mechanism.
Thanks for yet another shining example of the derivative nature of Chinese civ.
"Yan Shen said...
ReplyDeleteThere's one glaring counterexample. The rise of the Jews in the late 1800s and early 1900s. For centuries Jews accomplished virtually nothing of note. Then suddenly out of nowhere, they began to disproportionately dominate science/technology."
You err in saying that jews disproportionately dominated science and technology. They disproportionately contributed to the sciences, however they did not dominate them. And while thier accomplishments in physics and medicine over the last hundred years have been striking, they have not been so prominent in engineering fields.
"Yan Shen said...
ReplyDeleteDennis, let me recapitulate my main points."
That is all you ever do. Over and over and over. We don't misunderstand you. We disagree with you.
Yan Shen: There's a huge over-representation of Chinese and Indians in Silicon Valley today, the hotbed of American innovation in IT/tech. RKU can certainly attest to the importance of high IQ immigrants in the Silicon Valley infrastructure with a much greater degree of authority than I. I asked rhetorically what percentage of Silicon Valley workers would be of foreign ethnicity, earlier. I believe it's more than 50% today. What if it becomes 70 or even 80% a few decades from now?
ReplyDeleteWell, I certainly don't claim to have done any exhaustive study of Silicon Valley ethnicity distributions, but it really seems to me that a very substantial fraction of the best people are actually white gentiles, though admittedly a fair number of these are (European) immigrants. For example, I think the three most highly-regarded CEOs are Steve Jobs, Eric Schmidt, and Reed Hastings, all of whom fall into this category (though I think Sailer once claimed that Jobs was half-Arab).
Basically, there are lots of very successful Asians, Jews, and Indians, but also lots of very successful white gentiles. Certainly, the former are heavily over-represented relative to their tiny share of the general American population, but the over-representation and the trend-lines seem nowhere near as extreme as what you might see on Wall Street or in the Ivies, let alone Hollywood. And obviously almost all the founders of the entire industry were members of what the Nordicists would consider the "fully white" category...
> You read them in the original?
ReplyDeleteThe relative quality of the original, I admit, is a question I can't totally dismiss. But I have sampled what is billed as a literal English translation, curious to see how good it was. I'm sure this version post-dates the KJV, though, so there's a problem in that it might be somewhat 'contaminated' by the towering genius of the KJV.
Many of the 'modern' non-KJV versions are pretty darn bad, but inadequate translation can ruin things pretty easily.
Science, science science.
ReplyDeleteNever mind the science; civilizations are built by engineering. There's a pretty substantial difference.
Western engineering was better than China's during the Roman Empire, and it stayed better during the Middle Ages. If you want to understand why - well read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watermill
You'll see that while the West was busily inventing more and more applications for these mills, so that by the end of those "dark ages" the mill had gone from something that just grinds grain to something like a pre-electric power plant - the Chinese government was busily inventing arcane regulations as to when and where you could use one of these things.
One of these civilizations was encouraging invention. Can you guess which one?
Now that Westerners have given up on Western civilization, with silly ideas about freedom, self-reliance, leisure, the liberal education, and generally the cultivation of the individual rather than society, and instead adopted the crabbed technocratic Chinese model, where the stupid work like dogs until they drop (for the greater good) and the clever push paper for a living (but that paper is oh so important) - we won't have to worry about inexplicably outpacing them any longer.
Dennis,
ReplyDeleteCan you ban the shithead Yan Shen? He is making the comments to this blog unreadable. I can stand people like RKU, but Shen is obviously a troll.
Yan Shen says: ...in order to predict the future, one needs to focus on the present, not look back upon the past.
ReplyDeleteIn that one sentence is everything wrong with Yan Shen's thinking.
The present is the result of the past. By eliminating the past therefore you have no predictive power for the future.
That Yan Shen has a High IQ yet fails to see the illogic in this repeated statement of his demonstrates that IQ alone does not create a mighty civilisation.
Yan Shen needs to eliminate the past in order to promote his version of how the future will be.
It is a cultural trait. By repeatedly refusing the obvious truth and reality, one wears down the fact based opponent till they submit and depart the scene. Unfortunately the Yan Shens keep following you around, unable to live in the present the created by destroying the past.
Anyone who thinks that Newton's creating, virtually ex nilio, the Calculus and applying it to, well, everything was *easier* than Einstein's brilliant but in truth barely more than incremental development with his Relativity -- that person needs their head examined. Newton set the whole paradigm, Einstein only operated within that paradigm.
ReplyDeleteYes, the over-the-top worship of Einstein is largely the result of our modern philosemitic culture. Newton, along with Leibniz, invented calculus and Newton founded all the basic branches of physics from mechanics to optics to acoustics. It was truly Einstein who stood on the shoulders of giants.
I've often heard the Jewish ignoramus play up Einstein while deriding Newton as though the results of 19th century physics were within Newton's grasp and as if Newton's results had been consigned to dustbin of history. ("Newton was wrong! Einstein was right!") It's as though they were unaware that Newtonian physics remains vastly more significant to our daily lives than Relativity.
If Einstein had lived in Newton's day, he would have gotten nowhere. Einstein wasn't much of an experimenter, his mathematical skills weren't particularly sharp as an adult and, even if he had been a great mathematician and experimenter, he would be stuck in some shtetl writing dreary Talmudic commentaries.
RKU, there is no such thing as a "white gentile". There are Whites, or white people, and there are Jews.
ReplyDeleteGet it right.
What existed in Europe prior to the Renaissance and Enlightenment (the only true revolution is human history because it was the only intellectual revolution) was pure barbarism that does not qualify as civilization-
ReplyDeleteKurt, don't fall for that bullshit Dark Ages garbage. Medieval Europe was an amazing place of invention, action, and yes, civilization.
- Hit the Books
" The total human knowledge base was relatively low back in the early days, meaning that most of the stuff accomplished was the low hanging fruit being picked. This doesn't detract from it's importance or enduring legacy, but what it suggests is that the problems that people tackle today are harder and require more brainpower."
ReplyDeleteI hate when people make this idiotic statement. The opposite is actually the case. Knowledge has been increasing exponentially over time, which implies the more acquired knowledge we have the easier it is to acquire further knowledge. Accomplishments such as Newton's could only be done by a rare genius that comes around once a millennia.
I've spent a number of years now around high IQ East-Asians and I would be surprised if there is a chinese renaissance in the near future. Most of the males haven't mastered basic hygeine yet. They may become the leaders in science and technology by default if the West collapses. From my observations the knock against Asian creativity seems to ring true, but Westerners shouldn't get complacent and assume that this will always be the case. A friend of mine from Taiwan was one of the most creative people I have ever met.
I think Pat's cultural observations are spot on. The freedom and liberty enjoyed by the U.S. has undoubtedly contributed to our success. Asians seem to thrive in Western societies, however when left alone in their own homogeneous societies their worst tendencies seem to be magnified and their development stunted.
Where would Yan Shen be without White people? Nobody can be bothered to read his own blog, so in order to be noticed he must post his repetitive comments here at Dennis Mangan’s site. His distinctly unoriginal and non-creative efforts at this very popular and successful blog neatly sum up the relationship between Whites and Asians: Whites without Asians can do amazing things that change the world, but the reverse just doesn't seem to be the case.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to echo the earlier requests: Dennis, can you please ban Yan Shen from posting here!??
ReplyDeleteEvery post he makes, no matter what the subject at hand, is about Asian superiority. You could write a blog about going grocery shopping, and Yan Shen would find a way to twist it into an "Asians are smarter" debate.
It's annoying enough to have every discussion dragged down into the same tedious subject, but it's especially irritating to have the debate hijacked by someone with transparent ulterior motives. It lowers the tone of your otherwise excellent blog, and regrettably many commenters can't resist feeding the troll.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Leakey
ReplyDeleteThat Louis Leaky?
One point is worth considering, and has in fact been alluded to: whites are more likely to be rebels than Asians.
ReplyDeleteIf you study the history of science,and even culture more broadly, and which is largely a white history, one is struck by the conflict and struggle which characterized the lives of the great inventors, artists and writers. It's not that Europe didn't have a domineering and oppressive culture (the Church), but that individuals like Galileo just couldn't prevent themselves from telling the truth whatever the consequences.
I think high intelligence is just a part of the requirements for great advances; personal courage, even recklessness, coupled with unquenchable curiosity, are also a sine qua non and I am sad to say that these characteristics are not in the Asian make-up.
I also think that very high-end IQ is not as common in Asia as it is in Europe, especially but not only in Jews; but that is not to say the Asians won't find a way to breed it in while we carry on welcoming low IQ immigrants into Europe and the US, and generally carrying on the Suicide Project which is the great obsession of our malignant Neo-Com political class.
Anon.
The average IQ of India is 81.
ReplyDeleteRevilo Oliver on India:
"[India probably was] a territory that was...conquered by the Aryan invaders and ruled by them.... The inevitable result was miscegenation, both biological and cultural. The consequence of the long and intimate association of the dominant Aryans with their subjects of a different race...was that "a spirit alien in nature," corresponding to the dilution and hybridization of the racial stock.... What happened, in other words, was a kind of spiritual mongrelization that, in all probability, largely preceded and certainly facilitated the biological mongrelization."
~ Revilo P. Oliver, "Ritual and Aryan Worship"
Recent genetic research on Indians.
ReplyDeleteConclusion: India = Miscegenation Central
"The latest evidence of modern genetic research indicates that the peoples of both north and south India are of mixed Mongoloid/Australoid/Caucasoid racial ancestry, consisting of an autochthonous sub-Gangetic base which has been gradually combined, through a series of population expansions and the historical migrations of various immigrants, with west Eurasian and East Asian elements."
Most of the major Indian populations are so racially admixed that they exhibit membership in multiple gene clusters and are therefore homogeneous genetically on a subcontinental level
Bhasin (2006), in the study Genetics of Castes and Tribes of India: Indian Population Milieu:
India has been peopled by human groups carrying a diversity of genes and cultural traits. We have almost all the primary ethnic strains Proto-Australoid, Mediterranean, Mongoloid, Negrito and a number of composite strains. It is homeland of over 4000 Mendelian populations, of which 3700 endogamous groups are structured in the Hindu caste system as ‘jatis’.
In short, the older view that north Indians are mainly Caucasoid whereas southern Indians are mainly Australoid is incorrect. Indians, both from the north and the south, seem to be a racially admixed population with each individual genotype exhibiting membership in multiple gene clusters, albeit in varying degrees in terms of Caucasoid/Mongoloid/Australoid admixture ratios. South Asian populations consist of an indigenous Australoid base combined with both Caucasoid and Mongoloid racial elements; Indo-Caucasoid (Indo-Aryan speakers and Coon’s hybrid Mediterranean strain) peoples tend to be concentrated in the east and west of India, Indo-Mongoloid (Tibeto-Burman speakers) seem to be concentrated in the north eastern region of the country, and Proto-Australoid/Indo-Dravidian peoples (Austro-Asiatic and Dravidian language speakers) are mostly found in the south, with peoples of full Australoid or “Negrito” origin located on the archipelagos (e.g. the Great Andamanese and Jarawa) surrounding the southern tip of the subcontinent.
To repeat, most of the major Indian populations are so racially admixed that they exhibit membership in multiple gene clusters and are therefore homogeneous genetically on a subcontinental level."
Some here can probably answer this question...
ReplyDeleteAlthough NE Asians may have a slightly higher average IQ than Europeans or European Americans, isn't the NE Asian average more clustered toward the mean and don't whites have more high-IQ geniuses?
Yan Shen seems obsessed with his belief that Asians will dominate America's scientific/technological elite in the near future and such an outcome will reduce whites to subserviance. Driven by what appears to be pure chauvenism, he is either deeply worried about whites(unlikely) or is warning us about the loss of our European heritage.
ReplyDeleteThere are various problems with his diagnosis: (1) as RKU mentions whites are far more abundant in science/tech research across this nation than Shen realizes. Whites are still a majority in these domains and America would be absolutely near the top among the world's nations on international tests if you remove the data from our bottom-dwelling NAMS.(2) Shen treats Ashkenazi Jews as if they were not Americans. One of my friends in high school was Carl Sagan, the renowned astronomer. His career was dazzling and hundreds of other Jews of Ashkenazi descent contributed enormously to America's great prestige as Americans. Sagan was as American as I was and Shen seems not to recognize that reality. Jewish Americans are white Americans and despite the controversy they often cook up, their lives are inextricably woven into our national fabric. Thus, Shen has a strong bias against American whites and prefers to keep Jews on his side against "the West."
I taught hundreds of Asians at UCLA. They were uniformly competent and mechanically flawless in written form. I was always impressed at the mastery of basic verbal expression and the conscientious completion of various assignments. That said, I never heard an interesting question from Asian-American students. They were quiet and obedient. Fortunately, my Jewish students would fire very good questions at me so classes could be exciting at times.
As a lifelong science educator I contend that Shen is only correct so long as the USA imports high IQ talent from abroad on an increasing scale while deprecating its brainpower here via devices like Obama's Race to the Top, which is a boondoggle aimed at putting lowly NAMS (square pegs) into round holes.
While we have plenty of white Americans of high IQ who will carry on our great tradition of science/tech research, we are inevitably wrapped up in global competitions. Some importation of Indian and Asian high IQ types will surely benefit this nation as it faces the Chinese craze for power. I would not expect Chinese scientists in America to become as Americanized as Bobby Jindal, but some diversity immigration may well serve our cause well. Indians seem to adapt especially well.
Shen worries too much over the wrong questions. American science and technology depend upon economic growth. We need to unlease capitalism and reduce the size of government. The socialist Obama's cruel hoax called Race to the Top is designed to "service" low IQ NAMS rather than the very brightest kids.It is a full scale scam.
Mr. Shen wants badly to view white Americans as global losers but his Eastern prejudice gives him away. The West has recently made terrible mistakes in the name of liberalism, but the historic superiority of the West(and America) over the cultures of the East, as embodied in the book by Murray, stand as a monument to cultural structures that permit the expression of individualism and creativity rather than collectivist conformity.There was no Chinese Newton because culture made that event impossible. Chinese culture would have suppressed Da Vinci and Rembrandt.All of this is a matter of historical fact.
there is no such thing as a "white gentile". There are Whites, or white people, and there are Jews
ReplyDeleteI have to say I disagree, although this is not the place to get into why.
bgc wrote:
ReplyDelete"According to Hans J Eysenck, genius requires creativity as well as high intelligence... and creativity is pretty much reciprocal to conscientiousness. East Asians are the most conscientious of all people, therefore it would be expected that they are among the least creative."
This sets up an interesting contradiction: Creativity is difficult to measure, so science and math students have to be selected by more objective but arguably less useful measures of talent. Asians score better on these measures, but once they have elite STEM positions, they're less capable of producing new innovations.
The upshot is that whites may lose from Asian immigration twice: first by being displaced from high-tech jobs, and second from an overall retardation in scientific advancement.
There must not have been much trial-and-error or happy accidenting going on anywhere outside of Europe then. I wonder why ...
ReplyDeleteWell, the Near and Far East obviously had impressive architecture, which probably resulted from similar methodology in its' original design.
The disconnect between the two strains of thought even before the rise of scientific inquiry in Europe was that at no point would the Asian architects looked at a magnificent Romanesque structure and deemed it worthy of improvement or extrapolation.
At some point various Asian cultures determined that what their ancestors had built was good enough for the present and forseeable future. Europe had its' stagnation where certain art and architecture was dominant for generations, but never to the extent that was experienced in Asia.
I'd also hazard to guess that there isn't much demand among many Asian cultures for innovation in this realm. Some rich Arabs seem to like their megastructures and monuments, but probably employ lots of East Asians in their construction that couldn't find work in East Asia where mostly uninspired, utilitarian buildings are being built.
Still, even among the Arabs and their penchant for aesthetics, they mostly seem to prefer architectural styles pioneered six centuries ago or so.
Jim Bowery has an interesting theory of scientific development:
ReplyDelete"Yeomen As Foundation of Scientific Revolution"
http://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2007/01/yeomen-as-foundation-of-scientific.html
He argues that an independent yeomanry or middle class is or at least has been hitherto the foundation of scientific revolution.
If his theory is correct then it would seem that highly centralized, bureaucratic technocracy or "technosocialism" hinders scientific revolution and innovation.
@Cornelius Troost
ReplyDeleteYou exaggerate my position greatly.
I stated that whites were disproportionately displaced from the elite productive sectors, not that they were a minority in absolute terms(though from what I understand in Silicon Valley today they are in fact slightly under 50% of the workers, though still a plurality). Given the huge population of 200 million non-Hispanic whites in the US and the relatively high white average IQ, there's going to be high end talent. That being said, there's no way to get around the fact that white Americans are being disproportionately displaced from pretty much every elite sector of American life. Just look at the IMO, the IPho, the Intel Science Talent Search, the recent Spelling Bee winners, Silicon Valley, the student body at the Ivy League and other elite schools, etc. If you want to predict who the future movers and shakers will be, I'm not sure where else you would bother to look. Surely you agree that the children of today are the leaders and innovators of tomorrow, no?
One other issue...
I count Jews separately because 1) they're a distinct biological cluster separate from gentile Europeans and 2) most WNs don't consider Jews to be white anyway, just ask our good friend Svigor here.
"Mr. Shen wants badly to view white Americans as global losers but his Eastern prejudice gives him away."
I'm just reporting the facts. One of the themes which pops up on Vdare every so often is the displacement of white Americans from the Silicon Valley infrastructure. I'd say that quite a few white Americans already feel squeezed out by the increasing global competition. Something like 1/2 of the graduate students today in the hard sciences are foreigners. See this Steve Hsu post.
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2005/02/tale-of-two-geeks.html
Ask a graduate student in the sciences today who's trying to get himself on the track for tenure whether or not he feels significant pressure from foreign competition.
The perspective of time and change is missing in this discussion. A people's IQ can rise (as apparently did English IQ in the Middle Ages) and decline (like Athen's and Rome's IQ surely did). Ashkenazi Jews appeared only in the last 500 years. People is malleable. If he Chinese embark on a serious eugenic effort for IQ and other traits, and we dont, well, our fate will be the same as the Mayans. Like the wretched peasant of Guatemala living among mysterious monuments of a forgotten civilization.
ReplyDeleteSevern, Jews define themselves as "a race, religion and culture." So you might have white Jews, or brown Jews etc but a Jew is a Jew no matter the skin colour.
ReplyDeleteAnd just so, to use the term "white gentile" simply means a white person who isn't Jewish. But that's not necessary since a Jew is a combination of race, religion and culture. Therefore there are White people and Jews. Some Jews may be white but they are still Jews. The Jewishness is predominant to their skin colour.
So we have Whites and we have Jews. Adding the "gentile" suffix to "white" merely indicates that the person using that term is a Jew.
There can be no such thing as a "white gentile" since by being White one is not Jewish. Gentile is redundant for us and we should not accept Jews determining how we should define ourselves.
J wrote:
ReplyDeleteAshkenazi Jews appeared only in the last 500 years.
That's not really accurate. Jews were vastly overrepresented in trade and commerce during the late Roman era and the early middle ages, much like they were later on. Anti-semitism also predates the past 500 years. The historical record suggests they've been a cohesive group for longer than that.
Aw, Pat, you always state everything so clearly and forthrightly, your rules sound like rules. Bravo.
ReplyDeleteBut if I do as you suggest, I'll have to argue with everybody else!
(I personally like the term "gentile". I like thinking of nationality as being fundamental to who I am.)
Charlie said:
ReplyDeleteYou'll see that while the West was busily inventing more and more applications for these mills, so that by the end of those "dark ages" the mill had gone from something that just grinds grain to something like a pre-electric power plant - the Chinese government was busily inventing arcane regulations as to when and where you could use one of these things.
Does that remind you of anything today?
I think that comedy is a good measure for creativity. Comedic devices such as puns, witticisms, sarcasm, and especially irony are lost on most Asians not born in the West. They can't comprehend the humor behind these devices because of their literal mindedness. This rigidness is symptomatic of their lack of creativity.
ReplyDeleteOn a group basis, comedic creativity would seem to correlate well with accomplishment. The Brittish are well known for their sense of humor and have contributed disproportionally to human accomplishment. Jews, in addition to their many intellectual achievements, are vastly overrepesented in the field of comedy. Asian accomplishments in the comedic field are somewhat lacking (Jerry Lewis doesn't count).
Western progress and innovation have depended on continual Nordic replenishment. The problem now is that this source has been and is being depleted.
ReplyDeleteW.D. Hamilton wrote about this in his paper "Innate Social Aptitudes of Man: An Approach from Evolutionary Genetics" calling it the "ingredient of progress":
http://lis.epfl.ch/~markus/References/Hamilton75.pdf
"The incursions of barbaric pastoralists seem to do civilizations less harm in the long run than one might expect. Indeed, two dark ages and renaissances in Europe suggest a recurring pattern in which a renaissance follows an incursion by about 800 years. It may even be suggested that certain genes or traditions of pastoralists revitalize the conquered people with an ingredient of progress which tends to die out in a large panmictic population for the reasons already discussed. I have in mind altruism itself, or the part of the altruism which is perhaps better described as self-sacrificial daring. By the time of the renaissance it may be that the mixing of genes and cultures (or of cultures alone if these are the only vehicles, which I doubt) has continued long enough to bring the old mercantile thoughtfulness and the infused daring into conjunction in a few individuals who then find courage for all kinds of inventive innovation against the resistance of established thought and practice. Often, however, the cost in fitness of such altruism and sublimated pugnacity to the individuals concerned is by no means metaphorical, and the benefits to fitness, such as they are, go to a mass of individuals whose genetic correlation with the innovator must be slight indeed. Thus civilization probably slowly reduces its altruism of all kinds, including the kinds needed for cultural creativity (see also Eshel 1972)."
I think that comedy is a good measure for creativity.
ReplyDeletePerhaps. Though Germans are infamous for their poor sense of humor and they've achieved a lot of creative accomplishment and more so than the Jews.
"One example of cultural difference is in how different societies go about queuing, i.e. waiting in a line for a movie, or train tickets, or the like.
ReplyDeleteIf you go to India or an Asian country you will find that they simply cannot conceptualise even the need to form an orderly line and wait your turn without a coercive force, like the police etc to ensure order.
Indians and Asians simply rush the counter. If you have waited then bad luck for you, you'll be swarmed. Pretty soon you too will learn that waiting is for fools and you must start pushing in as well."
On the other hand, Americans are good at dutifully waiting in line.
"And just so, to use the term "white gentile" simply means a white person who isn't Jewish. But that's not necessary since a Jew is a combination of race, religion and culture."
Wouldn't the phrase "white gentile" at least be necessary to differentiate white gentiles from non-white gentiles?
Gunpowder is a perfect example of the derivative nature of Chinese civilization. The Chinese (serendipitously) discovered the stuff, had a monopoly on it for several centuries, and did nothing particularly creative with it. The West went on to develop workable firearms and smokeless powder.
ReplyDeleteWhile I'm not sure that you understand the meaning of the word "derivative", given its use in your post, I will freely admit that the Chinese did not make the most of what they discovered. I think the next few decades will show whether their culture has adapted to the modern era in way that will be conducive to home-grown innovation and proper building off the discoveries made outside their borders.
"personal courage, even recklessness, coupled with unquenchable curiosity, are also a sine qua non"
ReplyDeleteAn important point. In my experience, Asians enter sci/tech fields because they are high-paying, secure fields, not because they are enchanted with the subject matter. Pressure from mom & dad (or the Communist Party or some other authority figure) is the main factor in career choices.
I find it hard to imagine an Asian doggedly pursuing an intellectual field, willing to risk poverty and rejection because of it, just because he's obsessed with it. Someone like Spinoza, who was willing to support himself in isolation as a humble lens grinder to preserve his intellectual integrity, appears to be a purely Western thing.
I'm just reporting the facts.
ReplyDeleteIn Arizona, a Stream of Illegal Immigrants From China
Just part of the wider problem.
Let us know when those 'facts' reverse.
@Yan Shen: "The rise of the Jews in the late 1800s and early 1900s. For centuries Jews accomplished virtually nothing of note. Then suddenly out of nowhere, they began to disproportionately dominate science/technology."
ReplyDeleteYan may have overlooked the huge beam in his eye, namely that until the French Revolution and Napoleon's political distribution of Enlightenment Ideals by military force, centuries of hidebound prejudice had kept Jews in ghettos [Venice] and persecuted by Papal Bulls and Russian pogroms any time the Ashkenazi Jews stepped out of line. Even Henry II threw them out of England in 1182.
Then a funny thing happened, Yan, and that was the onset of genuine democracy in the European western coastal states and MittelEuropa social democracy under Bismarck.
It seems that democracy and genuine intellectual freedom march hand in hand, at least as far as the Jewish renaissance was concerned.
When, pray tell, is democracy going to arrive in The Persecuted Republic of China, or will you keep on poaching from other countries' research, the countries that allow intellectual freedom and a marketplace of ideas to flourish without clumsy governmental interference and political monitoring on a 24/7/365 basis.
Until the PRC can escape from its internal demons, it will continue to be a praetorian state run by a huge military with little input from civilians or non-communist party members.
Nice try on the tea-leaf style projection of a momentary economic rebound into a steady-state growth model.
It’s not that difficult. Essentially there are roughly two reasons why someone or even a group cannot accomplish something: (1) they don’t want to (i.e., motivation is lacking), and/or (2) they physically and/or mentally cannot do it. Rhetoric and history seem to show that its number two holding the Chinese back.
In terms of Asia, the Japanese have been and continue to be the top dogs. Regarding post-European industrialization, they copied whitey first and on a population adjusted basis are the only ones to show much inventiveness (i.e., outside of European countries). Clearly, the Chinese do not lack the motivation, what they lack is the ability. One can game most/many tests, but it’s rather hard to game true knowledge and inventiveness. When you have over one billion people clearly desperate to show whitey what for, quantity is a given. That is, it’s easy to throw a bunch of bodies at some definable projects and copy whitey and then claim some great dead; but where it breaks down is when Mr. History steps up to plate and shows that if the Chinese were wiped off the planet nobody would much notice (i.e., outside of the Chinese), but if whitey were gone I su