Race-Related IQ

Chris Schadt gash at u.washington.edu
Mon Dec 5 22:40:58 EST 1994

On 4 Dec 1994, STAN MULAIK wrote:

> ......  On the other hand, H&M in The Bell Curve,
> say that simply assuming that the mean differences are environmental in
> origin does not pin down specifically what sorts of environmental differences
> produce the differences in mean I.Q..  Many of the easy candidates for
> explanation just don't hold up when examined empirically.  This does not
> mean that the results ultimately will be that heredity plays the causal
> role.  It means we haven't isolated for various groups why some are
> higher on the average and others lower on the average.  But keep in mind
> that unlike in experiments, means do not reflect something common to
> every member of a group.  Just because Asians have on average higher
> I.Q.'s than Caucasian Americans does not mean every Asian has some
> component that places him/her above every American.  Interpreting mean
> differences in natural populations is a very difficult thing to do
> properly.
This Paragraph represents the fundamental limitations (and dangers) of 
hastily, without a further and greater analysis of the problem, applying 
research such as I understand the book the Bell Curve to contain, to  
societal issues. It doesn't take to much of a statistical background to 
know that in the averaging of any two samples that the chance of obtaining 
the same statistical mean approaches zero, without adding in environmental 
differences or inherant flaws in the sample or metodology, such as the 
conventional I.Q. test may represent, as has been eluded to in many 
previous postings.  


More information about the Bioforum mailing list