The House of David

"dawnbreak in the west"

Friday, June 17, 2011

An African confronts HBD


Yesterday one of Ace's commenters, one "rdbrewer", pointed out the sins of the pseudoscientist Stephen Gould. This led to a mild discussion of sociobiology in his comments. Some black people showed up to offer their take. Their take will not surprise you.

I posted the bare bones of this last night. I always meant to devote a whole post to it. Yesterday offered too much material all at once, and this one was one which got stuffed into miscellany. Now we have a clearer field.

The primary commenter was one "Chique d'Afrique" from, I vaguely recall, Nigeria. From my observations, the Chick's IQ exceeds the national US average. Also, I probably need to repeat here, I am not in the HBD Fanclub. The whole point of The Bell Curve is statistical. I take it as given that there are black people smarter than I, in some cases much smarter than I.

With that out of the way, here is the Chick's view:

352 @329. Maybe I'm biased, but I am yet to be convinced that certain races are smarter than others, or rather, which races are smarter. (Poorly structured sentence but I'm too lazy to fix it.) Perhaps if there were an actual controlled experiment about this, folks would be surprised at the answers - or not.

E.g., in the middle ages (I think that's when it was), Timbuktu in modern-day Mali, West Africa was a world-renowned center of learning.

Also, if Africans are dumber (not saying you are asserting that), then why do we 100% Africans that come overseas to study so often do better than almost all our African-American classmates, most of whom have some white or other "blood" in there, and also our white classmates?

What about Indians (dot not feather)?

I think a huge part of this can be explained by culture, environment, and opportunity. There are ebbs and flows in history with great nations (e.g., Persia) fading away and others (e.g., European nations) taking their place.

I am not saying one group isn't inherently more intelligent on average than others, but I don't think it has been conclusively proved that that is the case nor has the superior group been identified. Until then, I refuse to think that my race is genetically inferior when it comes to intelligence.

And for the record, I don't believe in evolution. [ed: my bold, not hers] I don't feel so strongly about it. Not saying it's not true, but IMO, the study of the origin of man cannot follow the scientific method - make observation, form hypothesis, test hypothesis using experiment, form conclusion and/or repeat process as necessary. Which is why I think some emphasize that it's a theory. I work in the scientific field and was trained as an engineer and I don't see what my belief in evolution or lack thereof has to do with my effectiveness.

Don't mean to make this into an argument. Just putting it out there.


Those "controlled experiments" on racial differences do exist - in the hundreds, by now. In all of them the American black IQ clusters around 85. The Chick does accept that. She explains this as interbreeding between her West African race and the worst of my relatives, presumably border-Celtic rednecks and Irish. Pure West Africans, she points out, do well in the US when they come off the boat.

The Chick has failed to note that recent arrivals from Africa are generally the best of the lot. It is not easy to get across the Atlantic without a sponsor. American universities would kill for a set of IQ-120 black students; extracting the top of the Dark Continent is one easy shortcut. Europe, by contrast, is closer. All it takes is a boat from Libya or Tunisia. Europe will get the peasants. The average African has an IQ closer to the low 70s. (Rushton.) To illustrate what happens when Americans sponsor normal Africans to come here, I give you the Somali community in Minneapolis.

The same goes for Indians-with-a-dot, by the way. We get India's Brahmins, her Saint-Thomas Christians, and her Zoroastrians. Europe gets her Muslims.

I do have to add a side-note on Timbuktu. While this town was under indigenous African control: it was Malian from 1200s to 1400s, then Tuareg (a Berber group), and finally Songhay (before the Portuguese). According to Wiki, Mali founded Timbuktu as a trade emporium. The scholars showed up during the Tuareg period. These nerds came from Walata. Walata at the time was Massufi Berber. Ibn Battuta tells us about Walata but not about Timbuktu although Timbuktu did exist. That's because, while Timbuktu was black, it wasn't scholarly. When Timbuktu shifted from West African to North African, that's when the 'ulema found it worth their while. Wikipedia is not immune to Timbukturientalism: "Although the basis of Islamic law and its teaching were brought to Timbuktu from North Africa with the spread of Islam, Western African scholarship developed: Ahmad Baba al Massufi is regarded as the city's greatest scholar". Ahmad Baba was a Massufi and so, too, was of North African stock.

As to how the Chick explains her unique take on racial intelligence differences - she invokes God. No, srsly. "For the record", she does"n't believe in evolution".

The reason the Chick doesn't want this to become an argument is because she hasn't an argument. She offers assertions and expects that the community is too kind to rebut them.

Africans, once thrust into the non-African world and faced with HBD, retreat to asabiya and away from reality. Even the smart ones. Maybe especially the smart ones.


posted by Zimri on 17:37 | link | 0 comments

On this site




Sophia



Politics



Random crap

Powered By Blogger TM

Property of author; All Rights Reserved