←back to thread

412 points tafda | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.273s | source
Show context
Animats ◴[] No.42249258[source]

> But others said the admissions exam and additional application requirements are inherently unfair to students of color who face socioeconomic disadvantages. Elaine Waldman, whose daughter is enrolled in Reed’s IHP, said the test is “elitist and exclusionary,” and hoped dropping it would improve the diversity of the program.

Recognizing gifted students is inherently discriminatory. Because these are the numbers:

Average IQ [1]

- Ashkenazi Jews - 107-115

- East Asians - 110

- White Americans - 102

- Black Americans - 90

There are other numbers from other sources, but they all rank in that order. There's a huge amount of denial about this. There are more articles trying to explain this away than ones that report the results.

(Average US Black IQ has been rising over the last few decades, but the US definition of "Black" includes mixed race. That may be a consequence of intermarriage producing more brown people, causing reversion to the mean. IQ vs 23 and Me data would be interesting. Does anyone collect that?)

Gladwell's new book, "The Revenge of The Tipping Point" goes into this at length. The Ivy League is struggling to avoid becoming majority-Asian. Caltech, which has no legacy admissions, is majority-Asian. So is UC Berkeley.[3]

Of course, this may become less significant once AI gets smarter and human intelligence becomes less necessary in bulk. Hiring criteria for railroads and manufacturing up to WWII favored physically robust men with moderate intelligence. Until technology really got rolling, the demand for smart people was lower than their prevalence in the population.

We may be headed back in that direction. Consider Uber, Doordash, Amazon, and fast food. Machines think and plan, most humans carry out the orders of the machines. A small number of humans direct.

[1] https://iqinternational.org/insights/understanding-average-i...

[2] https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-black-white-test-scor...

[3] https://opa.berkeley.edu/campus-data/uc-berkeley-quick-facts

replies(7): >>42249293 #>>42249338 #>>42249507 #>>42249557 #>>42249869 #>>42251791 #>>42252410 #
thrance ◴[] No.42249869[source]

I'd argue the parent's socioeconomic status is a much better predictor of IQ than "race".

replies(2): >>42250521 #>>42250635 #
tick_tock_tick ◴[] No.42250521[source]

But that never shows up in the data? Seriously, people always like to bring this idea up like it's not been studied to hell and back. Socioeconomic is not a stronger factor.

replies(2): >>42254090 #>>42254885 #
1. belkala ◴[] No.42254090[source]

Your data shows one of two things:

1. IQ scores differ between race because of inherent differences in intelligence.

2. IQ scores differ due to outside factors such as racism and socio-economic factors.

Point 1 is racist, you provide no proof for it, and all studies I can find indicate that this is not the case.

So that leaves us with point 2, which is precisely the point the article is making.

P.S: Literally the first result when searching for "socio economic factors iq": https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4641149/ It probably does not explain the full difference because there are more disadvantages such as racism, cultural factors.